D&D 5E WotC: Why Dark Sun Hasn't Been Revived

In an interview with YouTuber 'Bob the Worldbuilder', WotC's Kyle Brink explained why the classic Dark Sun setting has not yet seen light of day in the D&D 5E era.

I’ll be frank here, the Dark Sun setting is problematic in a lot of ways. And that’s the main reason we haven’t come back to it. We know it’s got a huge fan following and we have standards today that make it extraordinarily hard to be true to the source material and also meet our ethical and inclusion standards... We know there’s love out there for it and god we would love to make those people happy, and also we gotta be responsible.

You can listen to the clip here.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Am I the only person who has links to DriveThru RPG where I can buy Dark Sun content?

That's the only way I can make sense of this "censorship" argument!

I never said censored, but I think a lot of folks here wouldn't be sorry if it was.

 

[Scribe]

“I don’t think you should drive without a seatbelt”

“I don’t think you should be allowed to drive without a seatbelt.”

"You shouldn't drive without a seatbelt."

The difference there, is the actual problem. Its the removal of the "I dont think..."

If folks want to convey how they personally feel in the moment as their opinion? Great, sure, lets discuss.

If people instead (which they do) frame it as a definitive statement that they present as a fact, while simultaneously and often pre-emptively painting disagreement as an *-ism, that is far closer to how the discourse actually goes.

By all means, people can and should feel free to express their opinions, but lets communicate it that way, instead of how we see it most of the time.

And fully aware of the irony I will pre-emptively say, if anyone cares to refute that what I've stated happens, go look at your likes, because you know it does.

 

[Irlo]

How about this.

"Wizards should not print this content."

Can we come to the middle?

I appreciate the opportunity to come to some mutual understanding. I'm not trying to be pedantic.

"Wizards should not print this content" =/= "Wizards should not be allowed to print this content." The difference (as I see it) is stark, and it's important. The first is an opinion. The second is advocating censorship -- saying that my opinion should trump the rights of the publisher.

"Nobody should vote for Politician X becasue their policies are harmful to the economy." Would you interpret that to mean, "You shouldn't be allowed to vote for Politician X?" Is that an attempt to disenfranchise the electorate? If you framed it as disenfranchisement, would that be a positive contribution to the conversation?

To move forward with this, I think it's important not only that I explain that it is a mischaracterization to frame discussion of these issues as involving censorship but alsoto explain what adverse affect that mischaracterization has on the level of discourse on this forum.

I regret that I have to leave that for another day (or another week, if this thread is still open when I get back to it).

 

[Scribe]

"Wizards should not print this content" =/= "Wizards should not be allowed to print this content." The difference (as I see it) is stark, and it's important. The first is an opinion. The second is advocating censorship -- saying that my opinion should trump the rights of the publisher.

It is not presented as an opinion however. It is presented as a statement of fact, a given. "Progress". You need only go back to the more recently locked thread to see the hypocrisy of how it is presented.

We agree, the difference between the 2 exists, but its not being presented as an opinion at all, if it was, there would be discussion, and an honest effort to understand and see what others are saying.

In the present age, you simply need enough of a vocal segment of your player base or community, to rock the boat to a degree that companies wish to avoid to have an impact. Wizards wont be doing Dark Sun why?

1. There are things in it that Wizards would get questioned on.
2. The removal of the things one group would question Wizards on, would get them questioned by ANOTHER group.

It has nothing to do with any more beyond that, they dont want the smoke.

Framing your position as the definitive fact, is how you get more of that noise generated, and is how 'modern discourse' happens, and is why we wont get Dark Sun.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It is not presented as an opinion however. It is presented as a statement of fact, a given. "Progress". You need only go back to the more recently locked thread to see the hypocrisy of how it is presented.

We agree, the difference between the 2 exists, but its not being presented as an opinion at all, if it was, there would be discussion, and an honest effort to understand and see what others are saying.

In the present age, you simply need enough of a vocal segment of your player base or community, to rock the boat to a degree that companies wish to avoid to have an impact. Wizards wont be doing Dark Sun why?

1. There are things in it that Wizards would get questioned on.
2. The removal of the things one group would question Wizards on, would get them questioned by ANOTHER group.

It has nothing to do with any more beyond that, they dont want the smoke.

Framing your position as the definitive fact, is how you get more of that noise generated, and is how 'modern discourse' happens, and is why we wont get Dark Sun.

Exactly. The above is why this is (not) happening. Modern discourse.

 

[pemerton]

I never said censored, but I think a lot of folks here wouldn't be sorry if it was.

Has anyone here called for censorship?

The argument I'm seeing - eg from @Vaalingrade - is that the world will be a better place without WotC re-releasing this material. As @Irlo has eloquently explained, that is very different from a call for censorship.

 

[Scribe]

Has anyone here called for censorship?

We have word of god on why its not being done. Why is this even the line of questioning?

 

[Irlo]

It is not presented as an opinion however. It is presented as a statement of fact, a given. "Progress". You need only go back to the more recently locked thread to see the hypocrisy of how it is presented.

We agree, the difference between the 2 exists, but its not being presented as an opinion at all, if it was, there would be discussion, and an honest effort to understand and see what others are saying.

I guess we're won't get any further here. I was participating in the locked thread. What you see as statements of fact, I see as statements of opinion (even without an IMO attached to every post). It's very clear to me, and the opposite is very clear to you. I think that it's the unnecessary inference that people are making factual statements rather than opinionated ones that's getting in the way of any efforts to understand one another.

And I think that those who continue to characterize these arguments as attempts to censor and to prohibit and to stifle freedom of expression are wrong, and they're detracting from the conversation.

 

[Irlo]

Framing your position as the definitive fact, is how you get more of that noise generated, and is how 'modern discourse' happens, and is why we wont get Dark Sun.

That sounds pretty darn definitive.

 

[Hussar]

We have word of god on why its not being done. Why is this even the line of questioning?

Yup. It’s not being done because it makes people uncomfortable and feel unwelcome in the hobby.

That you insist on claiming that it’s about censorship or being offended is simply proof that you are not listening. It’s been repeated stated. And it was stated from WotC.

You just refuse to accept that.

 

[Scribe]

Yup. It’s not being done because it makes people uncomfortable and feel unwelcome in the hobby.

No, that isnt why. The words are right there on the first page. Here they are again.

I’ll be frank here, the Dark Sun setting is problematic in a lot of ways. And that’s the main reason we haven’t come back to it. We know it’s got a huge fan following and we have standards today that make it extraordinarily hard to be true to the source material and also meet our ethical and inclusion standards... We know there’s love out there for it and god we would love to make those people happy, and also we gotta be responsible.

1. "Problematic"
2. Huge fan following.
3. Hard to true to the source material while meeting their ethical and inclusion standards.
4. They know its loved, and they want to make the people who love it happy.
5. But, seemingly they cannot because they need to be responsible.

Now, I would love to see Wizards definition of "problematic" as well as their ethical and inclusion standards, but I can make a pretty reasonable guess what those things would look like.

Note: I'm not claiming its about censorship. Censorship isnt even needed anymore which is the irony here.

I was participating in the locked thread.

Yep, and you liked posts that 100% reflect what I've said in the last few posts.

That sounds pretty darn definitive.

I would love, LOVE, to be convinced otherwise. The last several years online have done little but reinforce my opinion on the state of discussion.

Edit: I mean naughty word I dont even care about Dark Sun. I just want a proper Sword and Sorcery/Dark Fantasy book that looks and acts the part, provided by the company that sucks all the air out of the room, to prove me wrong about the direction RPGs are inevitably being pulled in due to its black hole mass.

 

[Irlo]

Yep, and you liked posts that 100% reflect what I've said in the last few posts.

It’s obviously very clear to you that those posts 100% reflect what you’ve said. It’s very clear to me that they don’t.

 

[Scribe]

It’s obviously very clear to you that those posts 100% reflect what you’ve said. It’s very clear to me that they don’t.

shrug

Now that we are into the discussion, I'm thinking discussing locked content is probably not advisable.

We do certainly agree on our inability to agree on the intent, and honestly I dont know that there is much else to glean here. Differences of opinion? Great, lets discuss.

I believe how folks frame their statements matters and thats probably about as far as we can go on those past comments.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

For my point of view to pressure against a product because this does not conform to certain standards equals censorship. I don't mind if it is oficiall or it isn't, I believe it could be a potential menace against the speech freedom. We could need some limits, but these have to be clear and coherent, and these can't be only "we can't say it because other could be offended". This makes me to remember a quote by Fyodor Dostoevsky: "Tolerance will reach such a level that intelligent people will be banned from thinking so as not to offend the imbeciles."

The climate change is real. You can search and read in the wikipedia about the little ice age (centuries XIV-XIX) what happened after the medieval warm period. Also you can find in wikipedia about climate engineering.

Now I dare to say slavery should be showed in the fiction, not only to remember the suffering by the real victims, but also that quote by Ronald Reagan: "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. It has to be fought for and defended by each generation."

Here we can agree about we have to be responsible with the care environment, and this was one of the morales of Dark Sun, about we have to save the ecosystem. But take care with the false prophets, the wolves with sheep's clothing of the ecologism, saying we have to do a lot of sacrifices, but others are allowed to pollute with total impunity, industries in other countries, or my president flying by Falcon airplane to go to a musical concert, paid with the money of our taxes. I would bet in the Athasian Tablelands the propaganda would tell the sorcerer-kings saved the current remains of the ecosystem and these avoided a worse ecological disaster. And the defilers would be controlled dissidence, the enemy whose menace is the reason because sorcerer-kings are neccesary as our protectors

If there is a potential controversy soon, this could be about the conspirancy theories about a global ecocidal ecofascism. This would want "to start the fire to sell you extinguishers", or "Umbreall corp cause a zombie outbreak and after they sell you anti-zombie weapons". They would cause itentional damage against the ecosystem, and after proclaim we need a global goverment to save the planet. Groucho Marx said: "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies".

* In my game slavery wouldn't be showed too opernly, or with a too hard image, but more subtle, because sorcerer-kings are enough smart to understand the right deception is more useful than the rude intimidation. It would be by means of debt bondages, mainly conscription (not only militar training, but mainly farming works) and "wave slavery" (because you have too pay too many taxes).

 

[Micah Sweet]

Has anyone here called for censorship?

The argument I'm seeing - eg from @Vaalingrade - is that the world will be a better place without WotC re-releasing this material. As @Irlo has eloquently explained, that is very different from a call for censorship.

Well, @Vaalingrade sounds like they're proving @Scribe 's point. I haven't heard their argument, since they blocked me a while back, but that sure sounds like opinion dressed as "truth".

 

[Vaalingrade]

For my point of view to pressure against a product because this does not conform to certain standards equals censorship.

Then what is pressure to produce a product one already said they don't want to do, like in this case?

Freedom of speech is also freedom to read the room and be silent if you so choose. It's also not freedom of consequences. If you put out products that want people to not associate with you, it's their right to not associate with you or give you money AND to say so.

 

[Hussar]

.
3. Hard to true to the source material while meeting their ethical and inclusion standards.

Yup that word inclusion is right there.

They are not pursuing Dark Sun because it excludes people from the hobby. Same way that female strength limits, pin up art, and language surrounding half orcs all exclude people.

Again, people are telling you quite clearly that they feel excluded from the hobby. They aren’t being coy. They aren’t beating around the bush. They are very explicitly, directly telling you why.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

When I open the oven and I touch my jacket potato (baked potato, if you're American), if it is too hot, I will keep the door open and let it cool down. I've already coated my potato with olive oil and rock salt, and it has the potential of providing a satisfying meal.

After it has cooled somewhat, I like to take the time - thoughtfully, so as not to break the skin - to scoop out the flesh, combine it with grated Cheddar, sour cream, black pepper, Parmesan, chopped parsley, and more salt - I am rather partial to salt. I then stuff this mixture back into the skin, and run my fork over the top to create ridges - increasing the surface area promotes a more pronounced Maillard reaction.

When I am ready to eat my potato, I place it under the grill (broiler, if you're American), until it is hot again, and well-browned. There are few things as satisfying as a well-executed Maillard reaction upon the combination of cheese and starches.

I have been patient. My twice-baked potato is now perfect, and ready to eat.

Dark Sun is currently shelved. Hopefully, when the time comes to revive it thoughtfully - without breaking the skin, or scraping off the rock salt - it will be delicious.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

I dare to say they could be losing money if the self-censorship is not properly justified.

If Dragonlance tells about the horror of the war.... would we talking about a "theme park experience"?

I want to know if there is coherence here. If in the pictures of a Spelljammer adventure the antagonists are the scros astral orcs, and these wear turbants and Otoman corsair clothing... would be offensive? but what if they wear morrions and Spanish conqueror armors, then would be allowed? or is there a double standards, to different yardsticks are used to measure?

* Forced breeding in Dark Sun? That can be easily rectonnected, and nobody will complain about that.

Racism? Maybe, but players aren't allowed to be racist in any TTRPG, in D&D or by other publisher. There are racist nPCs because they are the bad guys the PCs are going to kick-ass.

Slavery? OK, everybody knows it is totally wrong, but we should try to find a way this to be showed in the fiction with the right and necessary respect for the victims from the real life. When I was a little child I could watch old "swords&sandal" or petlum movies that showed slaves.

 

[Hussar]

I dare to say they could be losing money if the self-censorship is not properly justified.

If Dragonlance tells about the horror of the war.... would we talking about a "theme park experience"?

Again, subject vs object.

The subject of Dragonlance, at least one of them, is the horror of war

The subject of Dark Sun isn’t slavery or forced eugenics.