Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Guysery2k Sep 04, 2010 10:39:46	I'm not very inclined to use those classes in my campaign, because magic sources on Athas are very atypical, as written in the 2e books and romances, and we old Dark Sun fans surely remember Magic in all forms is so confined, so specialized, that even Rangers could not cast druidic spells, iirc. So, while i'm very satisfied with the "No Divine source" approach in the DSCS, i'm not regarding the possibility of Bards with magic coming from songs and Sorcerers with magic coming from within (on Athas, fey or creature with magic affinity are very rare or non existant...even Eladrin were changed about their innate powers, now psionic in nature). So, what are your thoughts? Are you houseruling something or what?
#2 beej_silver Sep 04, 2010 11:08:23	I personally never played 2E, so I don't have a reason for banning them in my own games. To me, it's a new edition, and a new Athas. On the other hand, I understand where your coming from, having read many 2E DS sourcebooks. PC's are special though,  and if anyone will shatter the norms, it would be them. Maybe the dragon sorcerer gained innate power by virtue of being a descendant/offspring of one of the sorcerer-monarchs (Abalach-Re and Nibenay seem to be good ancestor/parent candidates). The bard's songs may be so awe-inspiring that it seems like magic, but isn't (just block defiling as an option for the player). IMO, if a player truly wants to play a particular class, both DM and player should work together to make it fit their vision of DS.
#3 Tectuktitlay Sep 04, 2010 11:20:09	I have absolutely no problem with them, since I alter the lore left and right.  There is very little I use right out of the box.  Since I see the fluff as entirely mutable, there are very little limitations.  Mechanics have limitations far beyond what the fluff and lore does.  Fluff changes are NOT what I consider to be houseruling.  Not in any way, shape or form.  You can change the fluff all day long, every day, and twice on Tuesday, without changing a single piece of mechanical detail.  Easily.  Trivially.  Therefore...  A sorcerer does not need to have an innate ability to channel arcane power due to bloodline, genetics, whatever.  So, that rules it right out as a potential problem.  They simply cast their spells with a slightly different focus.  They have a sharper ability to know how to utilize arcane energy without requiring spellbooks.  However, in exchange they don't have nearly the same sort of variety of options, methods of control, secondary effects, etc, that, say, a wizard has.  The spells they know are easier to memorize, but are also much simpler and straightforward in nature.  They tend to like to go "BOOM!" at the expense of everything else. A bard, interestingly enough, is called a "minstrel" in my DS campaigns, and is an arcane caster that happens to use music and instruments as both a means of channeling arcane power as well as a spellbook.  The name "bard" is strictly reserved for someone who, ironically, takes the "Athasian Minstrel"...i.e. the "Athasian Bard" theme.  Bards are poisoner assassins, minstrels are arcane casters.  A minstrel's musical notations aren't merely notes and chords recording musical pieces, the patterns are in fact a hidden spellbook.  With their generally high Bluff checks, minstrels also happen to be amazing at hiding their arcane casting as something else, which makes sense.  Such a means of hiding your arcane knowledge and having your spellbook/ritual book on you is a logical advantage that makes internal sense. All arcane casters in my Dark Sun campaigns, be they wizard, bard, artificer, swordmage or sorcerer, are all colloquially referred to as "sorcerers" by the general populace.  The names "artificer", "bard", "sorcerer", "swordmage" and "wizard" are mechanical placeholders, not common names for careers as spoken by the inhabitants of Athas.
#4 Nyarlathotep Sep 04, 2010 11:37:07	Not changing those things at all, to me, they both fit quit well.  And besides I have a player who really wants to take the 4e bard for a spin.   As I see it, the difference between a (4e) bard and a wizard isn't really all that much.  They emphasize different things and their techniques are superficially different, but in the end they are doing the same thing, manipulating arcane power.  In fact given the warm reception arcane users tend to get on Athas, I could easily see the way of the Bard being developed as a means to disguise magic use. Sort of the way in the real world that the martial art Capoeira was supposedly developed to disguise fighting practice among slaves. Sorcerers are a little bit of a different case, but I still think they fit.  With the Elemental Chaos being so close to Athas and infusing some creatures (i.e. the 'elementally infused' creature theme in the creature catalog), I can easily see that happening to PC races as well.  If someone learns to control that, that's pretty much a sorcerer.  Dragon sorcerers I have a little more trouble with, but given that some spellcasters turn into dragons naturally on Athas, I doubt I would have trouble coming up with a satisfactory explanation if someone wanted to play one in my game.
#5 Nyarlathotep Sep 04, 2010 11:39:48	All arcane casters in my Dark Sun campaigns, be they wizard, bard, artificer, swordmage or sorcerer, are all colloquially referred to as "sorcerers" by the general populace.  The names "artificer", "bard", "sorcerer", "swordmage" and "wizard" are mechanical placeholders, not common names for careers as spoken by the inhabitants of Athas. That makes a lot of sense and I think I am going to adopt the same policy.
#6 Wolf505 Sep 04, 2010 12:07:54	The only arcane class I've ruled out in my game is the Artififcer, just because it really doesn't fit well with Dark Sun IMO.  The other classes all have there place though.  Like the above poster said, any arcane class would be considered a "sorcerer" by the populace since all arcane casters are capable of defiling.  Nobody chose to play an arcane class in my game though, so it was a moot point.
#7 mr_teapot Sep 04, 2010 12:15:12	While making our Dark Sun PCs, one player suggested playing a bard, because sucking the life force out of the surrounding area would be wickedly thematically awesome.  Each time you heal a person, it comes at the expense of the planet as a whole. (Bards don't need to explicitly be singing if you don't want them to.  This isn't the previous edition's bard.) Sorcerers fit really well in Dark Sun.  The average sorcerer is an untrained cannon waiting to fire.  You just know that they're running around defiling stuff without knowing that they could turn the defiling off.  Plus, you can have real X-men mutant persecution type stories for them: you naturally developed your powers with no training, and now your town wants to lynch you before their crops turn to dust.   Sorcerers might fit Dark Sun better than wizard, actually.  I mean, you gain power from some sort of inherent draconic character?  In a setting where the most powerful spellcasters literally turn into dragons?  Yeah, I'd say that fits in just fine.  (Chaos and cosmic sorcerers would fit in just fine in different ways, but I don't see any reason they'd be inappropriate.)
#8 Tectuktitlay Sep 04, 2010 12:19:58	The only arcane class I've ruled out in my game is the Artififcer, just because it really doesn't fit well with Dark Sun IMO.  The other classes all have there place though.  Like the above poster said, any arcane class would be considered a "sorcerer" by the populace since all arcane casters are capable of defiling.  Nobody chose to play an arcane class in my game though, so it was a moot point. Actually, we have a Draji artificer in our campaign.  He does not create mechanical objects, he uses blood magic and life magic and infuses flesh, blood and bone with arcane magic.  He alters small creatures in place of tinkering, enhances allies' bodies, and twists the bodies of enemies.  He spontaneously grows potion fruit and infuses it with the blood and lifeforce of himself or his allies (his infusions).  It works perfectly.  Thus, with a touch of alteration of the fluff, voila!  Artificer.
#9 Cyber-Dave Sep 04, 2010 12:35:45	Personally, I see absolutely no problem with any arcane power source class. I think all of them make sense in Dark Sun.
#10 sirkaikillah Sep 04, 2010 12:59:06	I'm with Cyber-Dave, I think all the arcane classes can fit in Dark Sun.  I'm an old Dark Sun, but in my opinion, the new approach to defiling, is far more open, interesting and dynamic than the defiler/ preserver classes mechanic of old.
#11 sirkaikillah Sep 04, 2010 12:59:49	.... Actually, we have a Draji artificer in our campaign.  He does not create mechanical objects, he uses blood magic and life magic and infuses flesh, blood and bone with arcane magic.  He alters small creatures in place of tinkering, enhances allies' bodies, and twists the bodies of enemies.  He spontaneously grows potion fruit and infuses it with the blood and lifeforce of himself or his allies (his infusions).  It works perfectly.  Thus, with a touch of alteration of the fluff, voila!  Artificer. That is awesome, thanks for sharing.
#12 Pashalik_Mons Sep 04, 2010 13:40:41	I wouldn't houserule out any classes in Dark Sun.  I'd even re-allow divine if the player had a good story behind it.  To me, "You can't do X" doesn't make a world or campaign more interesting.  A lot of the best parts of Dark Sun, to me, are when you find something familiar but it's so, so different.  If I didn't think a class as printed fit Athas, I'd change the fluff.  That being said, for reasons others have touched on, I don't think a bard or a sorcerer would need any changing to fit into Athas.  People hate arcane magic users, thinking them to be defilers, but the magic is still there, and there will still be people with the talent to use it.  It's only natural that they'd take less formal approaches to learning their crafts, like bard and sorcerer.