More Dark SUn tidbits by Rich Baker

[Mark Hope]

I thought that most people objected to what happened to Tyr not because of what happened to Tyr, but because of the way TSR depicted it in the adventures (that the NPCs from the novels did it "off-screen"). Am I misremembering?

No, you're right. It happened entirely off-screen. The PCs were tangential at best. In Freedom they got to take part in the gladiator games and help folks escape the arena. Then at the end, the NPC heroes appear and have apparently saved the day. Unless you read the novel (which I didn't until some time later) it's pretty confusing as to what actually happens to Kalak. So yeah, that's the main problem with the adventure. Whenever I've run it in recent years, I've had the PCs do all the cool stuff and consigned Rikus, Sadita et al to the sidelines where they belong. Hopefully the 4e designers have learned from the 2e design errors.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Going by the original DS material, Kalak's Tyr most emphatically did not work. The treasury was bankrupt, the iron mines were floundering and then closed down. The templarate and nobles were plotting against Kalak himself, and Kalak had all but abandoned rulership in favour of building his ziggurat in preparation for killing all of his citizens. Revolution in Tyr was written into the setting from the get-go.

And when it happened, things got worse. Not better. Riots. Starvation. Lynch mobs. Corruption. War. Factions turning on each other. That's the way to portray post-Kalak Tyr. Not as some hippy-dippy "Age of Heroes" utopia with Preservers out in the open. But as a fractured, decaying wreck, turning on itself in the absence of a strong overlord.

Clarity, ftw.

Post-Kalak Tyr became a worse place. The plot opportunities expanded exponentially by the development. I'm okay with having a rebooted Dark Sun have Kalak dead/deposed.

I'm hoping that we don't have more sorcerer-kings dead though! Let it just be Kalak . . .

 

[Obryn]

I've said before, as a Dark Sun fan, I'm perfectly happy having one free city. In fact, I think it's nearly essential for the setting to work.

It was killing off all the other sorcerer kings that hurt the setting. Having Kalak dead is consistent with the original box set, and IMO improves the setting. (And if you want the PCs to be involved in deposing a Sorcerer-King, there are plenty of others for them to fight!)

I agree with the above that the lack of a Player's Guide just means that there's not enough player stuff to fill a book. I'm not sure - I'll keep an eye on it. I really like the Players' Guide / Campaign Setting divisions, so this is kinda disappointing.

-O

 

[SSquirrel]

I like the division of PG/CS, but I would have bought both books anyway. I think Silverblade went a bit far on things. There was democracy in the past on Dark Sun, even if it is now in legend only. The concept isn't developed out of nothing. Tyr being a "free city" just says to me it is free of the sorceror king's rule. What replaced it? A wise council of heroes? His templars continuing his work? Merchant houses?

 

[Wik]

Not to mention Andropinis runs his city like a democracy, even if it's only on the surface. Plus, many slave tribes are democratic.

AS for New Tyr.... I mostly used a pre-revolution Tyr, each time with the intent that PCs would play a part in freeing Tyr. And every time, they'd find themselves in Tyr, see what was going on, see the time was ripe for revolution, and then they'd inevitably say "Hey, guys, let's go back to Raam!"



I'll be using a free Tyr this time around. It being different opens up so many play possibilities.

 

[Henry]

Count me as another "dislikes Kalak dead" fan. However, as long as there's plenty of adventure opportunities in Tyr, then I'd be OK with it. I'm just waiting to see if any other dropped tidbits point to an annoying blend of 1st and 2nd boxed sets. I want Dark Sun, not "slightly less than Happy" Sun.

 

[Wik]

But, it's been pointed out earlier, the original boxed set KNEW Tyr would fall. So, rather than starting with Tyr free, it simply implemented that change very early on (as in, the first adventure, and the first novel, which were a tie-in).

A free Tyr is still part of the original setting. 4E can't do it because they know they have a limited product run, so they have to make Tyr free.

 

[Hawke]

I thought that most people objected to what happened to Tyr not because of what happened to Tyr, but because of the way TSR depicted it in the adventures (that the NPCs from the novels did it "off-screen"). Am I misremembering?

This was my criticism. When I ran it, the NPCs were vital and used a ritual that actually split Kalak into several lower-level mirrors of himself and I had the PCs involved in the crucial fight. If players aren't directly involved in Kalak's fall as part of an adventure, I don't mind seeing Tyr as free.

I always saw, like others above, Tyr with kalak as bad, and Tyr free worse. I think the ideals of freedom and democracy we hold now but seeing them perverted in the Dark Sun world holds some terror. Tyr's freedom was anarchy and its democracy was two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. Also enjoyed running plots of the other sorcerer-kings plotting to take over Tyr in my own games.

I'd love to hear from the team whether or not it's free by default or if they included a "running Tyr under Kalak" blurb. Or heck, maybe a re-written Freedom as DDI would solve it all. ::licks chops::

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

I know Kalak was runnng the city into the ground financially to build the ziggurat...but...maybe he wasn't, eh? why not just leave it to the DM and players, as ot what this major city/event may all be about and turn into, or not be happening at all, you know?

In my campaigns Kalak's been building the ziggurat for...well, a LONG time. You think slaves count decades or centuries?

As for "democracy", look, it's hard to grasp this, but our Western idea of Democracy is not somehting that can "spring" into a culture's collective mind: it's impossible (short of magic hehe).
I forget the exact wonderful quote, but one of the USA's founders put it perfeclty well, that Democracy relies on the support and action of concerned citizens who support it.
"Democracy by the mob" is, well, as folk note, that's even worse than a tyrant!!

Cultures are peculiar things, many people, whether we Westerners like it or not, DO indeed like tyranny..when done well. And why not? if you aren't one of the poor/outcasts, you're probably fine. Compared to the anarchy, mayhem etc you may have of failed states, it's a damn sight better.
And simple, ordinry ignorant folk can graps and support the concept.
Plus what's hard ot grasp is the cultural "acceptance" the inertia, the comfort of a known, working system...it's like cement and very hard to change, at least, in pre-Industrial Age type settings.

This is why many folk rabidly support dictators, even when we think it's dumb to do so.
So, in my games in Athas, the sorceror kings often are supported by gangs/groups etc of citizens who support them..or use uspport of the sorceror kings for excuse ot be hoodlums etc. Sort of liek the Nazi "Brown Shirts" and so on.
Hey, you support the sorceror king openly, stomp "oucasts" and harass nay-sayers, there's power in that...power is very very desirable.

It's naive ot think there wouldn't be many folk, not just templars, who wouldn't desperately support their Sorceror King, even if he is a monstorus SOB...hey, he keeps them safe, they don't know he's a "Whatever the DM wnats the sorceror kings ot be, illithid, dragon-king, demon lord" or whatever.
Infromers and bully boys would be common.

Kalak keeps the Dragon and wasteland riaders at bay...which would you rather have?
If you are an illiterate slave with almost no sense of REAL history (see the chattel slavery of the 16th to 19th centuries), do you think it's likely you could grasp what a Democracy really means to make it stable, or that many slaves in "Better" positions would rather BE slaves in "better psoitions", than...something they don't understand, fear...change..chaos...
Better to be a slave with food in your belly than a starving "free" man!

So have a good think about how you run "revolutions" in Athas, or similar settings.

Also, please note, Kalak does not HAVE ot be making the ziggurat for a huge life-drain to make him a dragon! It can be for whatever reason a DM wants.I do not want ot be rail roaded again with Dark Sun, grrr.

So, if he isn't gonna life drain the city, that is no longer a reason for Tithian to kill him.
What if Kalak knows Athas is doomed, and is preparing a planar gate way, or a tomb ot live in undeath for eternity...what of the sorceror kings are the progenitors of the illithids?

 

[SSquirrel]

What if Kalak really likes SHOES and just needs a bigger closet, so he builds this huge tower. The PCs kill him, thinking he is planning to kill everyone, and discover he has 8 million pairs of sandals, short boots, calf high, knee high, darn-near-crotch-high, etc. How sheepish would they feel?

Oh yeah, and they discover Kalak wears 6" lifts in his shoes and is actually 5'3