So, Dark Sun: It's officially out. What do you think of it?

[Dannyalcatraz]

I think they didn't think/realize/fathom that anyone would make an issue out of a non issue.

Non-issue or issue is entirely in the eye of the beholder.

By itself, that wouldn't have done anything to my appreciation of the game. However, enough of the changes & design decisions in the initial release, Eberron, Forgotten Realms, PHB2 & 3, MP 1 & 2, DP, AP, PP and now Dark Sun has not been to my liking that the Thri-Kreen stuff was an issue to me. The final one, as I stated.

 

[Gradine]

As such, Thri-kreen who could wield weapons in both sets of hands would potentially be quiet doable in 4E. It would mainly just mean that they could have more of a choice of which weapons to attack with at any given time.

This is how I would've loved it to be done.

The fact that it's not just inspires me to write an article for Dragon this weekend.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this how it essentially is now? The only difference being that you're spending a free action (which is, by definition, free) to swap the weapons around? Which any player can simply re-flavor as expending that little extra effort to swing a weapon in their lower, less dominate arms?

WotC's ninjas aren't going to burn your books if you say "this is how they are in my game."


"...And part of it being perfect is there being one *tiny* flaw for me to fix."

 

[Perun]

I like the new version of Dark Sun. I've never played the earlier versions, but I've read through the rule books, so I'm familiar with the setting.

My gripes with the 4e version would be:

• Thri-kreen art: I don't mind the lack of abdomens, but the 4e kreen look like a human in a bug costume. The 3e thri-kreen were without abdomens, but they managed to pull the whole bug and alien thing much better.
  
  Compare these with their 4e counterparts (especially the one in the DS4e thri-kreen racial write-up)
  [sblock]
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  [/sblock]
  
• Creature Catalog: for the life of me I can't understand why WotC does not include a description of the monsters in their write-ups. Yes, most of the pics are nice, but I'd love a couple of lines of monster description in each entry. This isn't limited to the DS, obviously, but since Creature Catalog is the latest WotC monster book, I'm complaining about it. I just hope there will be descriptions in future mosnter books.

Regards.

 

[Failed Saving Throw]

I got the campaign book yesterday and, as a long-time Dark Sun fanatic, I'm pleased with it. I agree with the criticisms about the art, but my imagination with Dark Sun was fired many years ago with 2E and Brom, so I can always break that stuff out if I'm feeling nostalgic or whatever.

Now here's some racial questions for y'all:

1. What about Wildens? They're not mentioned at all. I think it would be pretty cool to include them, but also make them cactus-y, like the cactacae race in China Mieville's Bas Lag setting. I don't see them being a major race, but something interesting on the periphery.

2. An earlier poster mentioned that he's banned Shardminds because they don't need to eat/drink. I agree that poses a problem with the setting, but otherwise I actually really like the Shardmind race in Athas and was thinking of a way to "Dark Sun-initize" them.

3. No pterrans or aarakocra? Would it really have been so impossible to include them?

 

[Belphanior]

3. No pterrans or aarakocra? Would it really have been so impossible to include them?

Aarakocra are in the creature catalogue. They have a fly speed, and are thus very unsuitable for PC material.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this how it essentially is now?

Please correct me if I'm wrong (seriously, I'm not kidding): as I quoted before, p22 states they cannot even hold weapons in their secondary arms. I also said that WotC has been sloppy with their use of "wield" and "hold", meaning its entirely possible that p22 was one of those instances, and they meant "cannot wield" instead.

But I haven't seen anyone so far show me a passage from the book that says they can actually hold weapons in their secondary arms.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

1. What about Wildens? They're not mentioned at all. I think it would be pretty cool to include them, but also make them cactus-y, like the cactacae race in China Mieville's Bas Lag setting. I don't see them being a major race, but something interesting on the periphery.

That would have been a good call. While not present in the original setting, they'd certainly fit with that tweek.

 

[Gradine]

Please correct me if I'm wrong (seriously, I'm not kidding): as I quoted before, p22 states they cannot even hold weapons in their secondary arms. I also said that WotC has been sloppy with their use of "wield" and "hold", meaning its entirely possible that p22 was one of those instances, and they meant "cannot wield" instead.

But I haven't seen anyone so far show me a passage from the book that says they can actually hold weapons in their secondary arms.

I'm not reading anything that says you can't hold weapons in their lower hands. It says they don't use their lower arms for combat because they're generally too small and quad-wielding too awkward for that purpose, but their hands are explicitly listed having opposable thumbs.

Also I'm fairly certain (I'm not entirely boned up on because I don't usually play dual-wielders) that WotC has done quite a bit of clearing up about what it means to hold an item as opposed to wielding it. Again, I could be wrong, but I assumed most of that cleared up with the whole dual-implement shenanigans.

Interestingly, the book only really implicitly tells you can't wield weapons in your lower arms. It doesn't even really imply that you can't hold things in them. In fact, the implication is quite the opposite: the idea is that they use their lower arms to quickly pass items and weapons from storage to upper arms and vice-versa, which means obviously those arms can hold said weapons. Ironically, the most definitive thing in the book on the subject is the artwork, which, as you've pointed out, clearly shows thri-kreen holding (not just passing, but holding) weapons in their lower arms.

One could quibble about RAI until the end of time, but at that point really the only intention that a DM should worry about is their own. There's nothing stopping anyone from reflavoring the "free action item swap" to the "free action dominant set of arms swap" I mentioned above.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm not reading anything that says you can't hold weapons in their lower hands. It says they don't use their lower arms for combat because they're generally too small and quad-wielding too awkward for that purpose, but their hands are explicitly listed having opposable thumbs.

Well:

Dark Sun p22
In combat, thri-kreen hold weapons or shields in their upper limbs, since the middle pair lacks the strength for this purpose and using both sets of limbs would be awkward and unwieldy.

Read literally, they cannot "hold" weapons in their secondary arms (at least in combat), not that they "don't," and its because of a lack of strength, not a lack of dexterity or opposable digits.

As a RAI guy, I honestly hope they meant "wield"- better something than nothing, IMHO- but you know as well as I that the RAW crowd is out there...and that if the designers actually meant what they wrote, some people could be in for a serious surprise down the road.

 

[Gradine]

Well:



Read literally, they cannot "hold" weapons in their secondary arms (at least in combat), not that they "don't," and its because of a lack of strength, not a lack of dexterity or opposable digits.

As a RAI guy, I honestly hope they meant "wield"- better something than nothing, IMHO- but you know as well as I that the RAW crowd is out there...and that if the designers actually meant what they wrote, some people could be in for a serious surprise down the road.

Ah, here's the difference. You read:
"In combat, thri-kreen must hold weapons and shields in their upper limbs..."
Whereas I read:
"In combat, thri-kreen typically hold weapons and shields in their upper limbs..."

It's the second part of that sentence that feeds into both interpretations, but ultimately, I feel (along other evidence) vindicates my own. If they just stopped at "...since the middle pair lacks the strength for this purpose..." I might be more inclined to read it your way, but the last part of that is telling, in that it was even necessary to mention that "...using both sets of limbs would be awkward and unwieldy."

The implication isn't that they have this nearly-useless vestigial weak flabby arms hanging around that's only good for juggling weapons around. The implication is that it's just be too awkward to be swinging all four arms around like that given both sets' placement on the torso. Since the upper arms are bigger and stronger, it simply makes more sense for thri-kreen to rely on the upper set in combat and not let the lower set get in the way.

And again, since both the artwork and the Multiple Arms feature both seem justify the fact that thri-kreen are fully capable of holding weapons in their lower arms, they just generally don't use those arms in combat (note: the first two words of your quoted sentence.) Had the designers had the foresight to use the word "wield" in that sentence this wouldn't even be an argument, but I'm fully convinced that the designers don't realize that simply can't use established terminology in a conversational manner or in fluff text without players latching on to the very narrowly-defined literal meanings they've established for those words; for an example see the "what's an attack versus an attack power?" debacle stirred up over the recent magic missile "errata". I've learned from that event not to attach any particular meaning when a term like "attack" or "wield" or "hold" gets thrown around in any section that isn't specifically related to game mechanics.

Of course, even if the evidence doesn't strongly support my interpretation over your own (which I believe it does), there's still clearly enough there on both sides to support either interpretation. At that point, why not just stick with the one you like?