Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Alacryss Jan 14, 2010 1:01:40	In case you haven't seen Rich Baker's blog post here, check it out.  It has something to do with the weapon materials in Dark Sun: community.wizards.com/wotc_richbaker/blo... So, in case you didn't get the gist of the Dark Sun part, or just didn't want to bother to read it, what he explains is that all the junk weapons of Dark Sun are now baseline, and normal steel weapons are masterwork or something. This really ticks me off. First of all, after having run a Dark Sun campaign for a bit, I can say the players' frustration of having to deal with crap weapons really makes getting something mundane like a metal weapon seem spectacular.  And what about enchantments? Who would enchant a stone spear anyway?  These are low-resource times, not caveman times!  Obsidian/bone/etc weapons are meant for quick and dirty work. This is the first time I've felt like the brutality of Athas has really been botched by the new authors. Sad to see.
#2 renteria Jan 14, 2010 3:48:51	I think I respectfully disagree. I like the  flavor of people having magical weapons with a very DS feel to them. While metal weapons will still be awesome for player characters to get their hands on, I don't think they ever felt very DS to me way back when. I like the idea of my character getting a powerful magical weapon made out of obsidian and being happy about it, that feels Dark Sun to me. What would the heartwood spear have been if it had been made out of steel and was all shiny and what not. This way PCs can advance in power and still have equipment that feels very DS AND not draw everyones attention because they have a metal sword clanking at their waste. Just my opinion...
#3 Pennarin Jan 14, 2010 10:23:31	I imagine one of the alternate weapon breaking rules Rick mentions will be a per encounter chance of breaking, further increased if opponents have metal weapons.
#4 big_goon Jan 14, 2010 11:03:36	I will have to agree with Alacryss on many points. First off... in agreement with Baker's post: Dark Sun breakage rules were not well thought out in 2e. There were too many rules that were avoided by players through loopholes... and then like Rentaria mentioned, having the metal weapons available means that PCs would never strive for anything else if there was a potential it would break at any time. Doesn't the idea of a Epic level character having a cool-ass obsidian sword encased with elemental ruins, a wooden-point bow that screams with psionic energy as it flies through the air, or a half-giant sized maul? Or would you rather all of your PCs have metal swords? Balance is very important to lots of DMs and players - especially the large group of them that don't come to the forums and spend excessive amounts of time thinking up new rules. They want to learn the rules quickly and start playing... weapon breakage rules would be another rule that players would need to learn. Fine. In disagreement (uhg... ranty): *** *** ***! DM's options?!?! Why don't you just tell us to make our own house rules?!?! It seems that DS is going to be chalk full of DMs options. I'm really pissed about that. They should all be DS core or not. Period. Make it a DM option and if somebody starts finding a loophole, then WotC just says "Well... it's a DM option, so if you don't like it, don't use it." If I'm paying >$100 for your 2 books plus more for accessories, I want to a) know that I can use a good chunk of it and b) it's a well designed good chunk and c) know that DDI will be expanding on the design! Otherwise, why not just make it up yourself? Take a cool idea like weapon breakage rules and not even try to make them core? What a cop out! Here's a couple of thoughts as counter arguments to what Baker says: 1) Why not go the other way and say that metal weapons are no longer the silver bullet, but they break too! remove the loophole!! Really... metal weapons in the real modern world break all the time, and we have advanced metallurgical technology. 2) TEACH DMs how to role play a game that uses penalties on weapons. Tell players not to expect getting a metal weapon and to build contingency into their combat plans in case a weapon does break! 3) Change the penalty for breakage and/or poor materials. Instead of having a negative to hit/damage, make the penalty a condition. Disallow encounter/daily powers. I don't know! If a -1 or -2 to hit/damage is too severe or too difficult to remember, use something else available in the system. There are limitless options, many of which are much easier to implement/remember.
#5 sir_sparhawk Jan 14, 2010 14:40:02	Might I remind everybody that we're getting information in pieces.  We have yet to see everything that is final in print and see how it all relates to each other.  Ranting and raving about something so minor and claiming all is F'd up now in Dark Sun is rather premature in my honest opinion.  Buy the books, or don't.  If there's something you don't like, change it or don't play it at all.  It's impossible to make something everybody likes and I'm certainly not going to demand that they do.
#6 big_goon Jan 14, 2010 16:39:49	Sorry. Let me explain further while trying to be constructive... Rich Baker and his team (and all of R&D!) are doing a very good job including as much of 2nd Ed DS as possible... especially those that make DS a unique world. They're trying to make it work well in the world and in play - something that I applaud the efforts of. From what I've gathered, a lot of their decisions are determined by "how it affects the game on the tabletop first, which in turn makes the world more colorful": everything from the contents of the map of the tablelands, the class builds, the monsters, fluff, etc... I agree that there are some rules that just won't work - it is a game first and foremost.  When Rich Baker starts talking about "optional" rules, I have the dreaded sense that he's undermining all these efforts to make a "fun, challenging and well-designed" system. Why is it optional? Was it not sufficiently play-tested? Is it too complex for some players? Can I port a player from a system that uses the optional rule to one that doesn't? Something like weapon breakage can heavily influence how players design their characters and thus, how the game is played. This is especially true for martial classes since ALL of their powers are influenced by the weapons they use. But... Sir_Sparhawk is completely correct in saying I haven't seen the printed rule(s)... maybe it won't matter to game play. Maybe I'm completely missing the point here... ...but I'm currently of the opinion that an optional rule is a badly designed rule, because somebody won't like it. A badly designed rule shouldn't be printed in the 4e books.
#7 sir_sparhawk Jan 14, 2010 20:00:06	Perhaps I'm a bit too optimistic but I don't see "optional" rules as poorly designed rules at all.  With the experience Rich Baker and the other game writers have I'm sure I am correct in believing if they create an "optional" rule that is poor, it wouldn't be an "optional" rule to begin with.  The differences between 2e and 4e are staggering, as well as the difference of what Dark Sun 2e was to the other 2e campaign settings.  With the amount of differences that there are because of this fact, I believe they have come up with hundreds of different ways of handling all sorts of problems with some working, and some clearly not.  I like the fact that they're giving many options because as I stated, you can't make everybody happy no matter how hard you try.  So the optional rules are there to help guide a DM in the direction he wants his campaign to go.  In the case of weapon breakage he's saying, here's the direction we're going with it.  If you don't like it that way, here's another way of doing it or try this as well should you go this way with your campaign.  I think that's brilliant.  He's helping his customers create the world in a way that is fun for their specific group of players or style of DM'ing.  Isn't that what all these sourcebooks are all about, i.e.: Primal Powers, Martial Powers, etc.  They're entire books full of optional rules should a DM allow them in his campaign or not.  Just because a new book comes out doesn't mean it's the new law of the land.  So the same goes with Dark Sun 4e.  Here's the core rules of Dark Sun for you to use, however should you choose to do "x" with your campaign, you might find that optional rule "y" will work well with your campaign vision.  I see that train of thought as not only wise, but as a great source of customer support and service as well.
#8 Plaguescarred1 Jan 14, 2010 21:31:51	I was wondering about what they would do with that and i am fairly happy of how they handled it. DS material = baseline. Metals weapons = enhanced or Masterwork Weapon.  I prefer to have everyone almost always using baseline bone or obsidians weapons as the norm, and keep metal weapons fairly rare. It makes PC run after metals for the benefit they give instead of making them running away from non-metal weapons for the penalities they give.  They may do something similar with Armors as well. Well done guys !
#9 ritorix Jan 14, 2010 21:56:31	So, there you go: In 4th Edition Dark Sun you aren’t forced to graduate out of your obsidian-edged wooden swords and mekillot-jawbone axes by a brutal set of penalties. Your character might be running around with a plain old stone-headed spear even at paragon level, and you aren’t behind the power curve. Unlike the 2nd Edition world, it’s perfectly reasonable to enchant inferior-materials weapons, so you can have a +3 jagged bone longsword or a +2 thundering stone warhammer. This is the exact same solution I came up with when statting up characters from the Prism Pentad series.  Making low-quality items the baseline is a great solution to match DS flavor up with 4e.  Added up with Inherent Bonuses, and your 11th level mul gladiator can pick up an unenchanted bone longsword and it acts as a longsword +3.  Same with armor.  Wearing a full suit of metal is deadly and stupid on Athas, but if you have plate proficiency that mekillot shell strapped to your chest gives you the same armor class as plate.  Reflavoring plate as something setting-appropriate, and again the Inherent Bonuses come into play.
#10 Pennarin Jan 14, 2010 23:27:37	The differences between 2e and 4e are staggering, as well as the difference of what Dark Sun 2e was to the other 2e campaign settings.  With the amount of differences that there are because of this fact, I believe they have come up with hundreds of different ways of handling all sorts of problems with some working, and some clearly not.  I like the fact that they're giving many options because as I stated, you can't make everybody happy no matter how hard you try. Yes, the crux of this very thread: some are voicing their unhappiness at the number and uncertitude of the options available to them. The exact same thing will happen later, people will voice their unhappiness at the lack of options. People will voice their unhappiness at anything. Consider the number of 2e DS websites carrying new rules, new options, changes to the setting, the innumerable threads about how people liked and disliked Athas.org's version of a 3e DS.  One official option will make most people shut up but won't necessarily make them happy, and create profound dislike in others, spawning wars of discontent on the boards; multiple official options will make everybody buzz and yap and snarl, yet nearly everybody will be happy with their own prefered, chosen option.  And this is 4e: one can tweek even more out of it than they could in 3e.
#11 Alacryss Jan 14, 2010 23:39:04	I felt like having those negatives in place in 2e really made the characters realize how terrible those weapons are, but then again, that's 2nd edition - it's entirely a different play style.  I am glad he's at least leaving the weapon breakage rules in. Don't get me wrong, this isn't a make-or-break (excuse the pun) thing when it comes to buying the books.  I also concede to Sir_Sparhawk's point that we don't have the whole cohesive book in hand yet and cannot see how things relate to each other. I hate you Rich Baker, making me anxious for the new material even more than before!
#12 mouthymerc Jan 15, 2010 3:48:31	I'm liking what I'm seeing so far.  I was never a fan of the breakage rules so I like that they will be giving options.  Options are always good.
#13 renteria Jan 15, 2010 16:11:13	My only real fear is how having multiple weapon breakage / quality rules will effect later support. Big Goon made a good point in saying that these different systems will generate different kinds of player experiences and games, so how is this going to effect any support we can hope to get when it comes to weapons and weapon specific feats and the like. are they going to be broken in one system and useless in the rest, etc?
#14 Einlanzer Jan 16, 2010 18:55:47	If I'm reading this correctly, I'm very, very elated about this.  It is exactly what I proposed to have masterwork weapons in place of the damn retarded expertise feats...in fact I couldn't believe that isn't what was done to begin with considering masterwork armor already existed.    And I agree with making breakage optional and subject to the DM.  I couldn't be more excited.   Great work, Rich Baker.
#15 Zardnaar Jan 17, 2010 16:06:31	Thats the kicker there. You're never going to keep everyone happy. However even in 2nd ed Dark Sun wasn't that good mchanically with very unbalenced races, contradictory rules in variuous supplements etc.  For the most part I thought Athas.org done a good job even with parts I didn't agree with. There were a few mechanical issue from converting 2nd ed monsters to 3.5 and some of the higher  level stuff was odd. Got to remember though Athas.org is basically fans doing things in their own time and not getting payed for it. Its alot of work trying to design a single class let alone a whole  campaign.
#16 bruul Jan 18, 2010 1:11:18	The idea that wizards is givinig you both sides of the issue is awesome.  You can use weapon breakage, you can ignore it, but if you do use it here are a few different ways of doing that.  Options are good.  How many DMs out there don't use some sort of special house ruled option?  Most do is my guess.  When players read the campaign book they will be wondering which version the DM will use.  Based on that they will build different characters.  It does effect the game but not in a bad way.
#17 xlorep_darkhelm Feb 07, 2010 0:21:34	In case you haven't seen Rich Baker's blog post here, check it out.  It has something to do with the weapon materials in Dark Sun: community.wizards.com/wotc_richbaker/blo... So, in case you didn't get the gist of the Dark Sun part, or just didn't want to bother to read it, what he explains is that all the junk weapons of Dark Sun are now baseline, and normal steel weapons are masterwork or something. This really ticks me off. First of all, after having run a Dark Sun campaign for a bit, I can say the players' frustration of having to deal with crap weapons really makes getting something mundane like a metal weapon seem spectacular.  And what about enchantments? Who would enchant a stone spear anyway?  These are low-resource times, not caveman times!  Obsidian/bone/etc weapons are meant for quick and dirty work. This is the first time I've felt like the brutality of Athas has really been botched by the new authors. Sad to see. Actually, I think it works rather well. The weapon breakage rules actually tended to slow down combat. They were really not there in 3/3.5 edition either (other than through sunder attacks). DS3 more or less relegated the standard Athasian weapons to not having breakage mechanics forced upon anyone.