Here I am, looking for Eberron products, and this is what comes up!
www.wizards.com/dnd/Catalog.aspx
Release date: 8/17/10 (man, that seems so far away!)
Dark Sun Campaign Setting (with new cover and short product description, with intro adventure)
www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/p...
Dark Sun Creature Catalog (with old cover, and WHOOHOO! Was wondering how they planned to put all those monsters in the Campaign Guide. Simple answer, they won't try! Problem solved!)
www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/p...
Marauders of the Dune Sea (the first adventure, levels 2-5, ala Eberron, and we kind of see a Kank and kind of a Kreen on the cover... I think)
www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/p...
Can't wait till the END of the summer! ;)
I'm nearly crying, but that may be the Sunshine soundtrack playing.
You forgot this: Dungeon Tiles: Deserts of Athas
A D&D adventure set in the world of Athas or your own campaign world.Now that Tyr is free of Kalak the Sorcerer-King, opportunity abounds in the city and the surrounding wastes. But some see Kalak's fall as the beginning of Tyr's end, and the unpatrolled deserts nearby are rife with danger. Outlaws openly defy the city's Revolutionary Council and threaten outlying holdings. If Tyr is to thrive, heroes must arise to tame the lawlessness and evil that threatens the free city.
This stand-alone D&D adventure is designed to take characters from 2nd to 5th level. Although nominally set in the Dark Sun campaign setting, Dungeon Masters can easily incorporate it into their "homebrew" D&D campaigns.
OMG free tyr...so now we know it is a free city again...
Wow, wow wow. I must admit that the cover artwork looks really good.
It's got some kind of Brom style, though not as gritty but it will do.
Free Year One is ok I think, it's nice to have one SK free Citystate.
One can use Urik or Nibenay as his Homebase if he dislikes that idea,
or ignore Kalaks death.
Except of this I'm sure there will be a lot of things that will contradict
existing stuff but nothing that can't be handled, after all we are used
to contradiction ;).
Overall an good motivation to keep working on my own DS website.
It will contain almost only fluff stuff. I bought the 4e corebooks and
took a quick look at the rules, they seem great and easy, but before
I can use them I need another, closer look ;).
From the Campaign Setting description...
"a savage desert world abandoned by the gods and ruled by terrible sorcerer-kings"
I don't really like the idea of them definitely saying...there used to be gods but they're gone now...eh...
What a great find! It's going to immensely difficult to wait till August 2010 (if they don't push it back for some reason). It's interesting that unlike FR and Eberron, there isn't a players guide to complement the campaign setting. From the description, it looks like the campaign setting is both. Not complaining, just an interesting difference.
good thing is you can change any fluff you don't like...hell, there's lots of stuff i don't like yet and stuff i like.....so will just change whatever don't like :D
Sanjay
Another thought just crossed my mind. Instead of Tyr being free from the start, they could do an epic level adventure to kill Kalak. That would be pretty cool.
I don't really like the idea of them definitely saying...there used to be gods but they're gone now...eh...
IMO, it is not anyone saying what anything factually is.
It's marketing. Marketing tries to get across the tone of the setting. The tone of the setting is often what the inhabitants believe about the world. If the inhabitants believe there used to be gods . . . well, that's not any different than the original boxed set. :D
The campaign setting, creature catalog, and adventure all come out on the same day? Oh man, I better start saving. :-)
I guess I've got a lot of time for that!
umm no players guide?
but over all its cool
umm no players guide?
Yeah, having no player's guide means that DM's won't have any way to keep players from learning DM-only campaign stuff, especially history and NPCs. But having the Creature Catalogue its own book helps preserve the mystery just a bit. Rarely would PCs need to get a monster book, so at least the area PCs come in contact with the setting most often (monsters, hazards, NPCs) will have a level of DM/Player separation.
Great find! This is so cool seeing all this DS stuff! I'm really happy that we will see more than just two books.
At first, I was wondering why they didn't do a player's guide and a DM's guide, with history in both but a basic, potentially false history in the player's guide. Then, put the monster's in the DM guide to it along with the background information. I liked the old FR Guide for 2E where it was stories about the areas and think that would be great for players.
Then I remember my players. I am grateful for them but they won't read the player's guide, much less me having to worry about any "secret" stuff! So, maybe this format won't be so bad after all!
I, too, cannot wait until next August. I was sure hoping it was sooner than that! *sigh*
turlough
I rather like the idea of not having special "DM's Only" information, and hence the lack of a player's guide. That's usually the good stuff players can build awesome characters and stories out of, so I prefer they have it all right up front to work with for them.
Awesome!
I wonder if the need playtesters? ;)
I've heard 4e was like heroquest, but with a bit of role playing thrown in.
The Waunderer's Journal is my favorite book.
Felt like?
All the D&D I've played since 2e has felt "like D&D", with different rules each time. How much combat or RP you do while playing any of its editions is you and your DM's decisions alone.
Agreed.
While it is easy at first glance to find 4E a bit like MMOs and whatnot, that soon falls to the many enjoyable aspects of the game. And the RP is undiminished. While I do think 4E is a bit more aproachable for the munchkin (as was 3E), it in no way reduces for me or my friends our ability to RP.
(And, many players are both optimizers and RPers).
But, back to Dark Sun, I am really curious what led them to create more product tie-ins than FR or Eberron. I wonder to what extent it was due to DS being unique (needing its own critters, for example) or due to a change in how future campaigns will be introduced. I think it is real smart to tie things like desert tiles (which anyone can use) to a campaign world. Everyone wins.
While it is easy at first glance to find 4E a bit like MMOs and whatnot, that soon falls to the many enjoyable aspects of the game. And the RP is undiminished. While I do think 4E is a bit more aproachable for the munchkin (as was 3E), it in no way reduces for me or my friends our ability to RP.
At my first glance I thought the opposite. It looked very balanced.
BTW I think the best way to get the original Dark Sun feeling back would be including multiclassing and level- and class limits to Demihumans. They could become level 30 but they could only use the powers up to their level limit. For example, an Dwarf Fighter/Cleric could become level 30 but only use the Fighter powers till level 16 and the Cleric powers till 12. He would have a lot of abilities to choose from, but not the best ones. If he takes Psionicist also he would however get the Psi powers till 30. So Humans should be able to Dualclass (gainig new abilities only).
[...] I am really curious what led them to create more product tie-ins than FR or Eberron. I wonder to what extent it was due to DS being unique (needing its own critters, for example) or due to a change in how future campaigns will be introduced.
I despaired when discovering that apparently all the settings would be presented the same way, knowing there would not be enough room in a DS campaign's book to cover both a world and its critters, and DS has lots of unique critters, far more so than FR or Eberron (and many of the latter's critters had become generic critters, available in any current or future MM WotC would release).
I was joyful when discovering they had seen the wisdom of the above analysis, that DS was the setting with so many unique creatures that it required its own MM.
Hopefuly they will do similar twists for other settings, be it with MMs or not.
And btw, I found that the presentation of the previous setting's (4e Eberron) books sucked greatly. They contained very little usable data, had big space-wasting irrelevant images, were quite vague in the coverages they contained, compared to 3e's Eberron and FR Campaign Setting books, which had created precedents on how much info you could cram into a WotC book, and the overall synergy of these books was memorable and felt quite confortable. You could actually read them in your bed before sleep without skipping pages.
I hope they won't do the big info shrink again for DS and subsequent settings.
And btw, I found that the presentation of the previous setting's (4e Eberron) books sucked greatly. They contained very little usable data, had big space-wasting irrelevant images, were quite vague in the coverages they contained, compared to 3e's Eberron and FR Campaign Setting books, which had created precedents on how much info you could cram into a WotC book, and the overall synergy of these books was memorable and felt quite confortable. You could actually read them in your bed before sleep without skipping pages.
Part of me as a fan of Eberron wants to dispute your position, particularly since I find the books rather good. I don't want to rant though, so I'll limit myself to one point that is at least indirectly on topic. You complain about the images, but a picture is worth a thousand words. Tell me, would you be just as upset if the Dark Sun books were to include a few page and a half images from Brom? I highly doubt you would, but I don't have direct access to your brain.
Moving back on topic, I don't mind the shift from player book and campaign book to campaign book and monster book. Dark Sun is just adding more dungeon master options than player options. There are going to be still some player options, though, and those have me a little worried. How to handle fighters and warlords without heavy armor can't be entirely a dungeon master concern. Since they want to keep dungeon master and player material separate, I'm hoping they provide a Dark Sun player's handout for players online. It would be the common sense thing to do.
Part of me as a fan of Eberron wants to dispute your position, particularly since I find the books rather good. I don't want to rant though, so I'll limit myself to one point that is at least indirectly on topic. You complain about the images, but a picture is worth a thousand words. Tell me, would you be just as upset if the Dark Sun books were to include a few page and a half images from Brom? I highly doubt you would, but I don't have direct access to your brain.
I'm a fan of 3e Eberron, and those books were great. 4e Eberron had bad books: my personal opinion, and we can leave it at that ;)
And yes, if they do the same to DS I'll be upset.
Dont´t you think that the actual DS Campaing Setting Cover Ilustration seen to be originally designed for the a DS Player´s Guide rather than the DS CS?
Maybe that´s because the original plan was to release a DS CS and a DS PG, but with the exchange in the last minute they also had to exchange covers: the former DS CS cover became the DS Creature Catalog Cover, and the former DS PG cover became the DS CS cover.
With this clear shrink in the DS CS we can expect fewer information about the setting, maybe something in line with the Dragon/Dugenon Magazine articles, with a brief description of the tablelands and the seven cities, only. (it is always better save your old 2e books to use in conjunction with 4e, just in case).
Also, the DS official CS is starting with TYR free. Didn´t they promissed us a full-reboot? Didn´t the designer Rodney said he was a purist? So why free Tyr? If it where to start in the same point of the first-old 2e DS CS, it should start with Kalak alive (and not dead).
So we don´t have a proper rebbot. We have only a half-reboot. 4E DS CS starts in a middle point between the old DS box and the Revised one. It contradicts WotC earlier previews and fans expectations. But ok, to have Dark Sun officially back everything goes...
By the way, I like the fact we will have the Dray as a player class, and that WotC will keep their original background linked to Dregoth. What I don´t like is the idea of making Dray a roaming clan-based race. Better keep than as common-sense: brutal savage warriors, outcasts from Giustenal , usually loners, who survive and earn life as mercenaries (Fighters and Warlords), afterall why the editors want to "invent" hte new? Just to withdraw from the obvious? But, if the obvious is cool and makes sense?
Just my personal opinion.
I like the idea of Tyr being free as the starting place in the timeline. This is where I set my DS campaign at so many years ago. I feel it makes for a more dynamic setting than the stagnation of the status quo of a 1000+ years of SK rule. Events will have to start moving, how will the slave tax get paid? Who will defend the city from bandits and possible invasion? Who will raise to power in the vaccuum of Kalak's death? Will Tyr me a 'safe' place for adventurer's to go?
With Tyr being free, it creates a location that is different from the other cities. Adventure stories that would not work in a SK controlled city, can be set in Tyr. Think of those stories that would just not work because the SK or their agents would step in to take care of the issue themselves would work fine in Tyr. That's why they killed off all the high level NPCs in FR, so the players could be the heroes.
I like the idea of Tyr being free as the starting place in the timeline. This is where I set my DS campaign at so many years ago. I feel it makes for a more dynamic setting than the stagnation of the status quo of a 1000+ years of SK rule. Events will have to start moving, how will the slave tax get paid? Who will defend the city from bandits and possible invasion? Who will raise to power in the vaccuum of Kalak's death? Will Tyr me a 'safe' place for adventurer's to go?
With Tyr being free, it creates a location that is different from the other cities. Adventure stories that would not work in a SK controlled city, can be set in Tyr. Think of those stories that would just not work because the SK or their agents would step in to take care of the issue themselves would work fine in Tyr. That's why they killed off all the high level NPCs in FR, so the players could be the heroes.
I respectfully disagree.
I think it´s a mistake to start with Tyr free, and an even bigger mistake to run the first DS official adventure in a free city. Here are my arguments:
1 - Kalak is an instereting vilain and the plot behind the Ziggurat and Tyr's dramatical situation makes a big adventure hook (or even campaing final goal) for the PCs. It is just too good to be leaved behind or wasted with the events of the Prism Pentad. I believe nobody here is against having a free city in the future, but to start with a free city just seens too soon for me (and too easy, if you accept the dumb manner by wich kalak is killed by the Pentad heroes, I think the PP plot should have been longer, more dramatic and elaborated, and it could have been...).
2 - My second concern is a direct consequence of the first, and relates to the first official adventure. I think its a mistake to start the first adventure in the free city of Tyr. In my opinion, it would be better to present the setting to the PCs showing first the harsh side of DS, with slavery, templar corruption, noble treachary, etc. so knowing what´s wrong with the world and suffering (and seeing people suffering) in the hands of the wrong doers, the PCs would have the motivation to start to fight for the possible change. (much like they did in the 2e Freedom adventure, when PCs come in contact with the routine of living in a despotic city-state ruled by a sorcerer-king and his templars and had, first, to win their freedom... by the way, it was in the Revised CS that PCs first official adventure started in a free-city, and it was a F@G).
3 - As somebody else said at En-World, in the original DS CS there are many non-controled places to start a DS campaing free from the SKs meneance and the iron grip of templars: merchant forts, client villages and slave tribes that populate the wastes (some are indeed very well know, such as Altaruk, wich the leader is a preserver). So it´s just pointless and lack of imagination to say that we need to start with a free city to have more adventure hooks in DS. No, smart DMs, who know how to handle the setting, don´t need a free city at the start.
I respectfully disagree.
. . .
No, smart DMs, who know how to handle the setting, don´t need a free city at the start.
I would counter that smart DMs, who know how to handle the setting, can easily rewind the timeline to before Kalak's deposing if they can't play in a setting with a SK-free city-state.
I would counter that smart DMs, who know how to handle the setting, can easily rewind the timeline to before Kalak's deposing if they can't play in a setting with a SK-free city-state.
Dear Anodson,
It is out of question that DMs and players, as consumers, have autonomy to use the product as they want.
The question is, we, as consumers, really have an imperative need or, they, as designers, a decent justification, to make Tyr free already at the start?
In my opinion NO. Bringing a free Tyr at the start does not open any significative "new" possibilities for adventures (since the default setting already had places free from SKs - "safe heavens" - that could easily work for different kinds of adventures), but, instead, it steals from the DM and players an important campaing hook reggarding the discovery of the purpose of the ziggurat´s construction, the attempt to stop (if not defeat) kalak, and eventually save the future of Tyr citizens.
In other words, the cost for making Tyr free is clearly greater than the payment.
That is, you, as a DM, would exchange kalak´s ziggurat solid campaing hook, for an uncertain expectation for adventures reggarding the "free-city" and it´s unbeliveable, miraculously-installed, democracy? Me, as a DM, would not (with much more reason if I were a designer, taking the lesson from the old Revised DS-box failure).
But people here may think different than me. Just waiting for solid arguments.
Just waiting for solid arguments.
Your taste is subjective, the counterpoint is subjective. There is no "solid argument" for a Kalak-ruled 4e Tyr (your take) or against a Kalak-ruled 4e Tyr (the apparent 4e designer's choice), it is all opinion.
The WotC reprinting of the Prism Pentad concluded with book 5 being reprinted in October 2009 and the 4E rules are set for publication in August 2010. Therefore, the timeline of release dates mirrors more the revised rules than the original set.
So, 4E will most likely be set following the Decade of Heroism. The question becomes whether any further books, printed before the release, will affect the setting (The Rise and Fall of a Dragon King ... is about the only other world altering book).
... any word on new novels?
I'd like to see a return to that original format with a caveat. Much as I liked the original setting I wasn't terribly impressed with all the sorcerer kings. At the time, with so little information on them, there was not much difference between them and their cities. A couple stood out, but not enough for my tastes. Later supplements fixed this, though. As much as many people decry the 3.5 Paizo reboot, I really enjoyed it for the dynamic of the seven cities. It seemed to give those cities much more personality.
I like something like this:
- Tyr-while the city is free of the tyrany of a sorcerer king, there is still the potential for much adventure and intrigue with different factions trying to have control.
- Urik-a military city always under martial law. This city and its sorcerer king made for a good bad guy as he was always trying to increase his holdings and resources. Not to mention protecting those he already enjoyed.
- Nibenay-a city of shadows and secrets. A city with the most powerful sorcerer king, unbeknownst to the others.
- Gulg-a forest city, which in the region is an anomoly. While she was interested in preserving the forest, it was only for her own self-interest and power.
- Balic-a city which lost and regained its sorcerer king. This created an interesting dynamic in that not only was he regaining control of his city from his people, but he needed to protect the city from outside forces, too. This city had a lot of potential.
- Draj-a city that had lost its sorcerer king and had propped up someone to replace him. Unbeknownst to them, the replacement found a way to elevate themselves to the beginning stages of becoming a dragon. They now have their own new sorcerer king to deal with.
- Raam-the city that Dregoth, the undead sorcer king, took over. The city lost its sorcerer king only to have it replaced with something possibly even worse.
Now, the Paizo set up was a few hundred years after the death of the Dragon, but I would like to see an interesting reboot making all the cities a little more interesting. The potential here is great. Depending on the type of game you wish to run, you could run it in different cities. Military games could be run in Urik. Games of assassination could be run in Nibenay. Straight up exploration could be done from Tyr. And more.
So, 4E will most likely be set following the Decade of Heroism.
But we know this is not the case. The only standalone DS 4e adventure occurs not long after after the deposing of Kalak, not many many years after.
It will be for PC levels 2–5. There could be some that are published for DDI Dungeon subscribers.
... any word on new novels?
We have been told there will be some . . . that's about all that has been said so far.
Just waiting for solid arguments.
Your taste is subjective, the counterpoint is subjective. There is no "solid argument" for a Kalak-ruled 4e Tyr (your take) or against a Kalak-ruled 4e Tyr (the apparent 4e designer's choice), it is all opinion.
Say, for the sake of argument, I want to run a game set before Tyr is free. The objective of the campaign is for the players to defeat Kalak and free Tyr. If the base rules imply that Kalak still controls Tyr and is not dead, stats for him will likely be included in the products as well as underlings and whatnot from Tyr. I don't have to do any work to run my campaign. If the rules imply that Kalak is dead, I have to write up stats for him and his underlings as well as come up with what his governent is like. Fundamental things would be missing from the products.
Now say, for the sake of argument, I want to run a game set after Tyr is free. If the rules imply that Kalak is still alive, I can just ignore his stats and those of his underlings, and come up with how Tyr is run post-Kalak. I have to do very little work.
Having NPCs being the ones that free Tyr rather than having the option for having the players do it is a bad thing.
If the base rules imply that Kalak still controls Tyr and is not dead, stats for him will likely be included in the products as well as underlings and whatnot from Tyr. I don't have to do any work to run my campaign. If the rules imply that Kalak is dead, I have to write up stats for him and his underlings as well as come up with what his governent is like.
You are assuming we will have stats for sorcerer kings. There has never been comprehensive stats produced for sorcerer kings in previous editions of a Dark Sun campaign set. When they appeared they were in a side accessory or adventure (I'm thinking Dregoth particularly). I would think that you are assuming things too freely. So I would counter that in all likelihood you would have to invent your stats for Kalak regardless of what Kalak's fate would be in the new campaign since we are getting but one adventure and it is for 2nd to 5th level adventurers.
Based on all history, not so fundamental after all.
Also, the WotC magazines have again started to include fiction, so we may see Dark Sun fiction within its pages.
What would satisfy most, I imagine, is a campaign that has Kalak alive, and the mention of a metaplot to get rid of him, to go along with the announced adventure post-Kalak's death. One can add or ignore any part of it, have the plans foiled, etc.
That would be interesting, as we have been told that the PP was but "one of many possible outcomes". It would be intriguing for them to support alternate metaplots from within the 4e campaign book, one of which is even the only 4e adventure. Hmm . . .
2E revised DS - The Wanderer's Chronicle:
"I believe that the newest age has already begun, but we who stand upon its brink do not possess the hindsight to see where this age will lead. Perhaps it is presumptuous of me to call this the Age of Heroes, and so I have satisfied myself by calling this time the Decade of Heroism. I leave the true naming of this period for the chroniclers that will come after me. This new age began just over ten years ago, when King Kalak of Tyr attempted to cheat nature much like Borys had done two millenia past." ... And it goes on to summarize the events of the Prism Pentad. None of this is mentioned in the original boxed set.
4E DS - Marauders of the Dune Sea blurb:
"Now that Tyr is free of Kalak the Sorcerer-King, opportunity abounds in the city and the surrounding wastes. But some see Kalak’s fall as the beginning of Tyr’s end, and the unpatrolled deserts nearby are rife with danger. Outlaws openly defy the city’s Revolutionary Council and threaten outlying holdings. If Tyr is to thrive, heroes must arise to tame the lawlessness and evil that threatens the free city."
...
And the Next Campaign Setting is ... article posted August 14
"James Wyatt: Our goal with the setting was to cleave as close to the original boxed set as possible while still allowing as many D&D options as we could and making the setting ideal for 4th Edition play. We’re in the process of re-releasing Troy Denning’s excellent Prism Pentad series of novels, and we didn’t want readers to come away from those books and look at the campaign setting and not recognize it as the same world. So we tried to capture the essence of the original Dark Sun boxed set while ensuring that the Prism Pentad novels could be one possible way things turn out. "
I would just like to see a "Dungeon Delve" length adventure involving the death of Kalak. You have the Heartwood Spear, you are in the ziggurat...go get em. Pre-generated characters for Rikus, Agis, etc. It would be a fun one-shot adventure before starting with a proper DS campaign.
Also, since someone mentioned SK stats...theres a full statblock for Abalch-Re in Forest Makers.
What I think I'm going to try and create (because I'm 99.9% positive this won't happen in Dungeon or from Wizards) is a "Super" Adventure that takes place before Kalak's demise. I've read the books by Troy Denning and I can use the first one as an inspiration of the final battle and maybe change a few things here or there. But how cool would it be to have my players go from Level 1 to 30, befriend characters like Rikus and Neeva to help change the world. To be a part of the near cataclysmic event and defeat a Socerer King. I'm getting excited. Time to start writing.
I think immature players want to be Rikus and Sadira, and mature ones interested in that kind of stuff want a shot at replaying some or all of the Prism Pentad events with their own characters replacing Rikus and Sadira.
I'd rather go with the second option, but again I'm 30, not 12 again.
Between the way they'll be doing the psionic classes in the PHB3 and the return of Dark Sun, I may just start to like 4e again ...
Also, we Star Wars Saga players are used to having all the player and GM stuff in the same book. I'm sure you D&D players will get used to it eventually too ...
Also, don't forget that WotC often just shows placeholder covers on its website. What you see now may not be what you'll get come next August.
I think immature players want to be Rikus and Sadira, and mature ones interested in that kind of stuff want a shot at replaying some or all of the Prism Pentad events with their own characters replacing Rikus and Sadira.
I think the more mature/older players admit they would be pretty afraid of Rikus and Sadira in real life.
I think immature players want to be Rikus and Sadira, and mature ones interested in that kind of stuff want a shot at replaying some or all of the Prism Pentad events with their own characters replacing Rikus and Sadira.
I think the more mature/older players admit they would be pretty afraid of Rikus and Sadira in real life.
No not really, real life physics would prevent most of what they are known for - awe of our world would deal with the rest of the problem.
I think immature players want to be Rikus and Sadira, and mature ones interested in that kind of stuff want a shot at replaying some or all of the Prism Pentad events with their own characters replacing Rikus and Sadira.
I'd rather go with the second option, but again I'm 30, not 12 again.
You have grown very bitter through all the ages. Old and bitter :D
Immature Players call other players immature :p
But seriously. There is nothing wrong, being Rikus or Neeva, or replacing them. The most mature players would humbly team up with Rikus and Sadira, help them or go out to kick another SK's ass. ;)
Btw age isn't an indicator of maturity *g*
PS: I'm almost as old as you Pen, 29. But not as bitter ^^.
BTW I think the best way to get the original Dark Sun feeling back would be including multiclassing and level- and class limits to Demihumans. They could become level 30 but they could only use the powers up to their level limit. For example, an Dwarf Fighter/Cleric could become level 30 but only use the Fighter powers till level 16 and the Cleric powers till 12. He would have a lot of abilities to choose from, but not the best ones. If he takes Psionicist also he would however get the Psi powers till 30. So Humans should be able to Dualclass (gainig new abilities only).
Worst idea EVER!!!!
That would be the sort of rule that would stop me from buying anything to do with 4e Dark Sun, despite the fact that I love 4e, and the fluff of Dark Sun. Level caps and race/class restrictions were the worst part of 2e. Removing them was the one few things that 3e managed to get really right. I have no intrest in a product that hearkens back to the dark ages of RPGS, and the stupid ideas that designers mistakenly thought would be fun (hey, you can't play the race class combo that interests you! Oh, and if you pick that other race/class combo, you are going to suck. Play ONLY what we want you play!).
Worst idea EVER!!!!
That would be the sort of rule that would stop me from buying anything to do with 4e Dark Sun, despite the fact that I love 4e, and the fluff of Dark Sun. Level caps and race/class restrictions were the worst part of 2e. Removing them was the one few things that 3e managed to get really right. I have no intrest in a product that hearkens back to the dark ages of RPGS, and the stupid ideas that designers mistakenly thought would be fun (hey, you can't play the race class combo that interests you! Oh, and if you pick that other race/class combo, you are going to suck. Play ONLY what we want you play!).
You could still allow Singleclassed Demihumans to advance till 30, but with some restrictions. And Dark Sun was built on this ideas. Demihumans couldn't become sorcerers, those who could, couldn't advance as high as humans, that was the only reason for Rajaat to choose his champions.
It would stay true to the original Dark Sun. And I don't think it was that bad. I don't know anyone who went past Level 15 during 2nd Ed but from what I've heard this changed. ;)
You could still allow Singleclassed Demihumans to advance till 30, but with some restrictions. And Dark Sun was built on this ideas. Demihumans couldn't become sorcerers, those who could, couldn't advance as high as humans, that was the only reason for Rajaat to choose his champions.
It would stay true to the original Dark Sun. And I don't think it was that bad. I don't know anyone who went past Level 15 during 2nd Ed but from what I've heard this changed. ;)
Or we could allow all demihumans to advance to the same levels as humans, because outdated ideas from the Dark Ages of RPGs are not fun. If I decide my character concept works better as a elf multiclassed rogue, I don't want to be told that suddenly I can only get powers up to level 16. That is a horrible, horrible, awful idea. Dark Sun was built on 2e D&D. It was a great campaign setting, but it suffered from the same failings as 2e D&D. Reincorporating those failings into a game that has finally shucked the un-fun limitations, and managed to achieve a fair semblance of balance between different classes and races, is NOT a good idea.
Either a new explanation needs to express why Rajaat chose human champions, or whatever. But race/class restrictions, either in the form of outright restrictions, or power caps that make such combinations inferior to other characters, are not ok. They have gone the way of the dodo, and that is the way they should stay... extinct, never to be reintroduced into D&D, ever, for any reason. Such restrictions are not fun from the point of game mechanics (so, because I like this concept I have to suck now!?) and they are not fun from the point of view of role-playing (huh... I wonder why everyone seems so stereotypical and lacks any real depth... oh, right... its because that is what the mechanics enforce).
Or we could allow all demihumans to advance to the same levels as humans, because outdated ideas from the Dark Ages of RPGs are not fun. If I decide my character concept works better as a elf multiclassed rogue, I don't want to be told that suddenly I can only get powers up to level 16. That is a horrible, horrible, awful idea. Dark Sun was built on 2e D&D. It was a great campaign setting, but it suffered from the same failings as 2e D&D. Reincorporating those failings into a game that has finally shucked the un-fun limitations, and managed to achieve a fair semblance of balance between different classes and races, is NOT a good idea.
Either a new explanation needs to express why Rajaat chose human champions, or whatever. But race/class restrictions, either in the form of outright restrictions, or power caps that make such combinations inferior to other characters, are not ok. They have gone the way of the dodo, and that is the way they should stay... extinct, never to be reintroduced into D&D, ever, for any reason. Such restrictions are not fun from the point of game mechanics (so, because I like this concept I have to suck now!?) and they are not fun from the point of view of role-playing (huh... I wonder why everyone seems so stereotypical and lacks any real depth... oh, right... its because that is what the mechanics enforce).
Ok, it's pointless.
We can do nothing. Wizard will do what they want, they already established their way, officially.
But just because you don't like the concept of race/class limits, doesn't mean that it's a bad concept for all players. Try to imagine, there are people out there who liked the class/race and even limit restrictions, who even roleplayed them
. Just because it is beyond your imagination doesn't mean that it is for anyone else. Limits are nothing bad, they can enchance an game or destroy it, it depends only on the DM and the Players. But in the end, each DM has to decide for himself what kind of houserules he will use to "improve" the "Fun" for his players.As for stereotypical. We will see how far this concept with the Leaders/Strikers etc goes.
Let's agree to disagree.
And hopefuly I am mature, although how could anyone tell from reading a forum?
Bitterness is a temporary sensation at best
And hopefuly I am mature, although how could anyone tell from reading a forum?
I hope so
Bashing around calling people immature because they have other preferences could indicate this, but who am i to judge
What I wrote is that "I think immature players want ..." bla bla. No judgment was brough unto those other people that want the same thing for different reasons.
Perhaps the following would have left a smaller window to exploit: "In my experience, immature players (read teens) are the most likely to want ... , while mature players (read adults) ..."
One could argue the merit of not having made the statement in the first place, or changing it afterwards, but there's probably a nasty word in the English language for those people who backward censor themselves! Best I can do is explain. There will be no editing of posts.
Did I call anyone besides teens immature? Which, you might agree, is likely to be true by definition.
What I wrote is that "I think immature players want ..." bla bla. No judgment was brough unto those other people that want the same thing for different reasons.
Perhaps the following would have left a smaller window to exploit: "In my experience, immature players (read teens) are the most likely to want ... , while mature players (read adults) ..."
One could argue the merit of not having made the statement in the first place, or changing it afterwards, but there's probably a nasty word in the English language for those people who backward censor themselves! Best I can do is explain. There will be no editing of posts.
Nevermind, I don't think anyone took that serious. BTW i don't know a lot of nasty words in english, you could enlight me though :D
I'm going to convert Dark Sun into Cyberpunk 2020 and or NWoD, though, I haven't played NWoD that much...
With Cyberpunk, there's an even greater chance of death; and the psychic powers/magic are really good. When I first ran Dark Sun, I though out the Psconics. I didn't understand them. In Cyberpunk, I understand them fully and I would like to create a society based around psiconics.
eh, I'm not too excited about up coming products.
I'm going to convert Dark Sun into Cyberpunk 2020 and or NWoD, though, I haven't played NWoD that much...
With Cyberpunk, there's an even greater chance of death; and the psychic powers/magic are really good. When I first ran Dark Sun, I though out the Psconics. I didn't understand them. In Cyberpunk, I understand them fully and I would like to create a society based around psiconics.
Cyberpunk was great. What is the difference between the old system and 2020?
I only played the "classic" one. There were no Psi powers. The abilities had an natural max of 10, you could rise them with cyberparts though.
I would like to see your conversion.
2 is it definite that dregoth is included? one of my favorite elements from the revised setting.
3 with the cs and pg both being one book do you think the scope of the setting will be reduced to just the tyr valley?
4 the initial rollout is going to be very important to me as the complete lack of support for the other settings has my outlook pessimistic on getting anything further in the future.
im reusing the old cloth map no matter what that thing was just way too cool
1 i think starting with tyr free changes the dynamic of the setting. with kalak its nowhere is free we must rise up with free tyr its nowhere is safe we must protect the weak. i think the world seems bleaker oddly with tyr being free.
2 is it definite that dregoth is included? one of my favorite elements from the revised setting.
3 with the cs and pg both being one book do you think the scope of the setting will be reduced to just the tyr valley?
4 the initial rollout is going to be very important to me as the complete lack of support for the other settings has my outlook pessimistic on getting anything further in the future.
im reusing the old cloth map no matter what that thing was just way too cool
1. Honestly, I don't see what the problem is with starting right after the "Freedom" module and having Tyr free. I mean...the original setting had 1 module before Tyr was free. We don't even know what the adventure included with the setting will entail. For all we know, it could be something similar to "Freedom" in whic Tyr is freed. I would actually like that.
2. I don't know is Dregoth is included, but he's supposedly tied to the origins of the DS version of Dragonborn they have coming.
3. I think the initial CS will emcompass all that the original box set had in it.
4. I think it will get some support. I actually think DS will draw players into 4E that didn't try it previously.
4. I think it will get some support. I actually think DS will draw players into 4E that didn't try it previously.
I couldn't agree more. The rebirth (or reboot?) of Dark Sun in 4E is the sole reason for my new found interest in D&D again. I received the 4E PHB as a gift about a year ago but hardly even opened it until I heard that Dark Sun was coming back as an official campaign setting.
I've mentioned the news about Dark Sun to my old gaming group and it's clear that I'm far from the only one who is interested in picking up D&D again and having another go at Athas.
I couldn't agree more. The rebirth (or reboot?) of Dark Sun in 4E is the sole reason for my new found interest in D&D again. I received the 4E PHB as a gift about a year ago but hardly even opened it until I heard that Dark Sun was coming back as an official campaign setting.
I've mentioned the news about Dark Sun to my old gaming group and it's clear that I'm far from the only one who is interested in picking up D&D again and having another go at Athas.
Likewise. I've had a 4E PHB for quite a while just to read over and see how much things have changed. I never gave any serious consideration to running anything in 4E, though. That all changed when I heard Dark Sun was being introduced next year and it's rebooting back to the '91 box set in the timeline. Dark Sun alone would have got my attention, but the reboot back to '91 is what made me dust off my 4E PHB, pick up a few other supplemental books, and then call up a few old gaming buddies who are all now interested in possibly getting something going in 4E Dark Sun as time permits.
None of them ever had any desire to play 4E, and none of us have played anything since 2E.
1 i think starting with tyr free changes the dynamic of the setting. with kalak its nowhere is free we must rise up with free tyr its nowhere is safe we must protect the weak. i think the world seems bleaker oddly with tyr being free.
2 is it definite that dregoth is included? one of my favorite elements from the revised setting.
3 with the cs and pg both being one book do you think the scope of the setting will be reduced to just the tyr valley?
4 the initial rollout is going to be very important to me as the complete lack of support for the other settings has my outlook pessimistic on getting anything further in the future.
im reusing the old cloth map no matter what that thing was just way too cool
1. Honestly, I don't see what the problem is with starting right after the "Freedom" module and having Tyr free. I mean...the original setting had 1 module before Tyr was free. We don't even know what the adventure included with the setting will entail. For all we know, it could be something similar to "Freedom" in whic Tyr is freed. I would actually like that.
2. I don't know is Dregoth is included, but he's supposedly tied to the origins of the DS version of Dragonborn they have coming.
3. I think the initial CS will emcompass all that the original box set had in it.
4. I think it will get some support. I actually think DS will draw players into 4E that didn't try it previously.
1) i dont know i just felt like freeing tyr sets a standard that your pcs can change the world as if it can all go back to shiny happy trees which then led them on an arch of disapointment. if you free tyr off screen then its more of a chopping wood and carrying water type thing.
2) dragonborn and gnomes are actually two races im interested to see the fluff on. im also really interested to see how they do kreen (multiple appendages could really wreck teh balance thing) half giants (whose overwhelming strength was thier biggest advantage) and muls. i love muls. seriously why did it take so long for people to think why is there half elves but not half dwarves?
3) the original box set was seriously limited in scope which is exactly my concern. the original box didnt really lend itself to multiple campaigns. veiled alliance dune trader etc really added depth and flavor to the setting.
4) the standard prcedure so far has been sporadic updates and articles in dragon magazine so the fluff is limited but most of what made dark sun so great was its themes and tone which rely on exactly that