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]

Okay? Now you're "experienced" me telling you that actually, there are some people that want them added back in. And, as @Imaro was showing you, your position is flawed, because "removing things bad, adding things good" is not nuanced enough to incorporate situations where it would be morally problematic to include things.

No. It's not. It's fairly pointing out a flaw in an absolutist position. And trying to hint that maybe you should amend your position to incorporate the flaws they pointed out with it.

If your position is so flawed that a single question can prove its flaws, it deserves to be "shot down".

I honestly can't think of a rule I've encountered in an RPG other than the gender-based stat bonuses that would be morally problematic enough to just cut out. There might be other reasons, mechanical reasons, to do so. And there may be game elements I'm not thinking of that could be a problem; I'm not ruling it out. A single exception to a belief doesn't make it a bad belief.

And @Imaro wasn't supporting their position, they were attacking mine. It feels disrespectful to a good faith argument you don't happen to agree with.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I honestly can't think of a rule I've encountered in an RPG other than the gender-based stat bonuses that would be morally problematic enough to just cut out. There might be other reasons, mechanical reasons, to do so. And there may be game elements I'm not thinking of that could be a problem; I'm not ruling it out. A single exception to a belief doesn't make it a bad belief.

What about a morally problematic race (or specific representation of one)? D&D has plenty of those. The Caliban, the Vistani, certain versions of Orcs (Mystara's Red and Yellow Orcs), Gully Dwarves, etc. Or problematic piece of lore, like making dark skinned races more commonly evil than light-skinned races? Or problematic mechanical representation (like including gods/divine beings from still-practiced religions and giving them evil alignments)?

And, if an absolutist position can be disproven by a single point, the absolutist position is wrong and should be amended. "Adding things is good, removing things is bad" is not an intelligent or nuanced position. That means it's easy to challenge and disprove.

And @Imaro wasn't supporting their position, they were attacking mine. It feels disrespectful to a good faith argument you don't happen to agree with.

. . . That's how debates work. "Your position doesn't work, because it can't reconcile this single point" is the simplest and easiest way to disprove positions. Sorry if you're offended by that, but that's the purpose of debating.

 

[Alzrius]

My God! I'd kill to have a magic-user that stupid. In a world as deadly as Dark Sun having a armorless, soft and juicy low hit point character separated from the pack is serving dinner up to the predators. By the time he and the party are aware of many of the threats, they'd need a cleric to raise the poor sap.

Not so much, no. Having the melee characters move in to engage foes (i.e. placing themselves between the monsters and the more vulnerable members of the party) while the spellcasters and other ranged attackers stay back is pretty standard D&D fare. For a defiler to be able to hit a creature that tries to close in with an initiative penalty is actually pretty tactically sound, since it means that enemy will react later, giving the rest of the party time to make up the distance and engage the creature before it kills the mage. It's a rather smart way of further incentivizing playing a defiler.

 

[dave2008]

If Mul is one of the few races allowed, you are shoving slavery, forced breeding, and slurs in the fan's face.

As other's have pointed it out, the Mul would be one of 16, so if isn't that much in your face.

However, my suggestion for a reboot would be to make Mul not a race, but a term for a certain type of slavery / indentured servitude. So A "Mul" can be any race.

 

[Minigiant]

You literally can't have a focus by omission. A focus is something central to the setting. It's simply not a focus of the setting in any way.

It exists as one of several races, not few.

In 2e we have human, dwarf, elf, half-giant, halfling, mul and thri-kreen. However, if we look at the Dark Sun language list we see aarakocra, genie(so genasi), gith(githyanki and githzerai), kenku and yuan-ti which 5e could place into Dark Sun without changing anything.

That's 16 choices for what race to play and only 1 of them is mul. It's not in your face at all and is very easily ignored, and very easily gotten rid of without changing what the mul is.

As other's have pointed it out, the Mul would be one of 16, so if isn't that much in your face.

However, my suggestion for a reboot would be to make Mul not a race, but a term for a certain type of slavery / indentured servitude. So A "Mul" can be any race.

Dark Sun goes between 7-10 races that get attention. The rest are "other races" that gets spoken on in a paragraph or text block.

The part you guys are missing is Mul will be the only entirely new race. So in a 5e Dark Sun setting book, it will get

1. a full page art commission for the book
2. 1-3 pages on Mul history, description, and culture
3. A highlight in DND beyond article
4. Its own stats in the books
5. Multiple articles on it by D&D fan sites
6. Multiple videos on it by Youtubers

Mul will be focused on like Dragonlance's Kender.
That's what I mean by focus. To promote sales, you have to throw the features and new stuff in the customers' face.

 

[dave2008]

Dark Sun goes between 7-10 races that get attention. The rest are "other races" that gets spoken on in a paragraph or text block.

The part you guys are missing is Mul will be the only entirely new race. So in a 5e Dark Sun setting book, it will get

1. a full page art commission for the book
2. 1-3 pages on Mul history, description, and culture
3. A highlight in DND beyond article
4. Its own stats in the books
5. Multiple articles on it by D&D fan sites
6. Multiple videos on it by Youtubers

Mul will be focused on like Dragonlance's Kender.
That's what I mean by focus. To promote sales, you have to throw the features and new stuff in the customers' face.

OK, I get your point and agree with you if that is how a new DS book presents them. However, my suggestion still stands as a way to sidestep the issue a bit. Mul is not a race, but a term to describe a slave. At most it is a background. Then it becomes a small sidebar and not a focus of promotion and marketing.

 

[Maxperson]

Dark Sun goes between 7-10 races that get attention. The rest are "other races" that gets spoken on in a paragraph or text block.

The part you guys are missing is Mul will be the only entirely new race. So in a 5e Dark Sun setting book, it will get

1. a full page art commission for the book
2. 1-3 pages on Mul history, description, and culture
3. A highlight in DND beyond article
4. Its own stats in the books
5. Multiple articles on it by D&D fan sites
6. Multiple videos on it by Youtubers

Mul will be focused on like Dragonlance's Kender.
That's what I mean by focus. To promote sales, you have to throw the features and new stuff in the customers' face.

None of which make it a focus of the setting. You can literally take out Mul's completely and Dark Sun will still feel the same.

 

[Maxperson]

Not so much, no. Having the melee characters move in to engage foes

So the magic-uses IS with the group and will therefore be an issue. You can't always move up and there will often not be a way to move back and still see the enemy.

(i.e. placing themselves between the monsters and the more vulnerable members of the party) while the spellcasters and other ranged attackers stay back is pretty standard D&D fare.

There's a reason magic-users died a LOT in 1e/2e. Those tactics don't keep them alive. The safest place for the magic-user was in the middle of the group so that creatures couldn't get to the magic-user easily, and they still died pretty often. squishy and easy to hit while having low hit points makes it hard to stay alive.

For a defiler to be able to hit a creature that tries to close in with an initiative penalty is actually pretty tactically sound

It doesn't have a penalty. The group moved up to engage, right? If the enemy has a penalty, so does the party. Then the enemy moves up and kills the magic-user. Not to mention after the enemy moves up into his face, the magic-user has to actually win initiative in the first place in order to give the enemy a penalty and if he loses with creatures right up on him..........................dead magic-user. And on top of that, the enemy could still roll well and the magic-user poorly, also resulting in dead magic-user.

Relying on that penalty to stay alive isn't smart.

 

[Charlaquin]

That's my point.

4e went lighter and softer and killed a Kalak to give you a haven. And a temporary one because soon after slaver enemies come from everywhere.

And DS diehards hate 4e Dark Sun.

I don’t think that’s really true. All of the Dark Sun fans I know love 4e Dark Sun. A lot of them miss the Brom art, and a lot of them didn’t care for the revisions to Dray or the addition of Tieflings. But most agree that the Eladrin were actually a really cool addition, and it’s otherwise pretty much the same setting, rolled back to one of the most well-liked parts of the metaplot.

 

[Charlaquin]

Back in the 4e day, I saw a bunch of DS fans keep saying they hated 4e Dark Sun and it's changes and lightening.

But I guess it may have been a vocal minority or people projecting 4E hate on it.

I saw a bit of that online, but my experience in meat space was that even people who didn’t like 4e were willing to play it for Dark Sun.