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.