Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 sithis May 18, 2005 16:26:39	I get the feeling these questions have come up before, but I never heard the answers presented then and haven't been particularly convinced by what I have seen so I'm going to bring them up now. Before anyone tells me, I've read the FAQ, I know there's an agreement to keep DS balanced with basic D&D. I'm questioning why exactly this prevents implementing certain ideas from DS2E as blanket setting specific modifications (not replacements) or even as simple manipulations of (balanced) options. 1. Why aren't the races more extreme? DS2E was known for very extreme races. When normal races would have +1/-1 to their strengths/weaknesses, DS races would double that (and include smaller modifications to other stats). This was even more pronounced because of 2E's exponential stats. The idea was that Dark Sun contained all the normal races, but pushed to extremes of evolution because of the setting. Why couldn't this be done with DS3E races? A DS elf sporting a only +2 dex seems somewhat odd to me (especially when half-elves have that as well). If this threatens balance, a +1 LA could be given across the board (except to possibly humans). 2. Why isn't everyone psionic? "To one extent or another, every human and demihuman on Athas has psionic powers." - Wanderer's Journal This is could potentially be seen as a subissue of the above (depending on how you would want to balance it). Where did the psionics go? Yes, the Wild Talent system from DS2E was horribly horribly broken, but why not fix it instead of just scrapping that flavor? Give everyone a Wild Talent feat. The idea of free feats is not inimical to core D&D settings (Forgotten Realms gives a free regional feat) and this can be mechanically balanced either through being a trait of +1 LA DS races or as a balance for a setting-wide penalty (like reduced wealth below). 3. Why doesn't weapon quality and material matter? In DS2E it matters quite a bit whether you were carrying a bone dagger or an obsidian dagger or a metal dagger. Currently the first two are practically identical and the only big difference is in resistance to sundering. Secondly, why is it so easy to get around the shortage of metal? As is, I can't see why anyone would buy a metal weapon when it seems like every worthwhile base weapon has a non-metal Dark Sun clone or is simply considered to be unaffected. It's a nice flavor that people have to rely on crappy weapons because of the shortage, but in reality it has no effect. Longswords and Greatswords are expected to be two of the top martial weapons, but instead of investing in a metal version of these weapons, a player might as well just buy a Macahuitl or a Great Macahuitl. Maces, staves, and crossbows are already considered non-metal so simple weapons are similarly perfectly covered with no-loss alternatives. Even exotic dual weapons are just as strong in their non-metal version as in the supposedly valuable metal version. About the only reason one might want a metal weapon is to bypass damage reduction, so it now basically fills the hole of silvered and cold iron weapons now rather than being a highly valued treasure. 4. Why are characters just as rich as normal worlds? Yes, metal costs 100x as much, but otherwise adventurers in DS are said to progress along the same wealth chart as any of the more cosmopolitan worlds. Bountiful resources interfere with the bleakness of the setting and minimize the affect of higher costed metal. Why free slaves when you could buy them? Assuming that most parties begin at 3rd level (in order to allow Half-Giant and Thri-Kreen players), players would be expected to start with 2700 cp. This means that even if for some reason a metal weapon was considered useful it is easily within a character's means to start with one. I'm confused as to when a character would ever own an obsidian weapon. Lastly, increased wealth reduces game options. While it may be stereotypical, being caught and stripped of your items was not an uncommon occurence in DS2E games. While in many games this would cause a player rebellion, in DS people didn't really have much in the first place and were much more capable on their own. The system was built around being personally capable, not lugging around the most swag. If you start a party at 3rd level and use the "slave pens" as the DS version of the "tavern", you're either going to have to finagle their equipment back to them or break with expected wealth patterns (and possibly have some quite put-out players). Better to start them poor despite their class levels and make the progression from crappy equipment to decent equipment mean something. -------------------------------- As far as balancing, yes, straying from basic D&D's mechanics does require more work. It's easier to just shift around minor racial abilities and rename longswords, but it loses much of the alien feel of Dark Sun. Racial changes (possibly including innate psionics) can be balanced (if need be) within the system by adding +1 LA across the board. The players all start out equal and their increase in power is accounted for mechanically so there's no problem. If psionics is not folder into the races, a blanket feat can either be just ignored as not problematic (as FR does) or can be balanced against the other hardships of the world (metal scarcity, magic persecution, lower wealth). The current equipment system is almost certainly balanced against base D&D, but that's primarily because the lack of metal doesn't actually have any real effect on it. What used to be one of the defining characteristics of Athas is now just a sidebar that means if you grab a weapon from some schmoe it might suck (not that I can see why anyone would wield a poor weapon given the bountiful options), but needs no worry as far as personal equipment goes. This again folds into balance of wealth vs. personal power. A character with the Metaphysical Weapon power can make up for being 1 point behind the weapon bonus curve. What he loses in needing to activate his power, he gains in flexibility (and possible greater bonuses, depending on the Wild Talent rules). Similar arguments can be made about other reductions in wealth. The last thing I'll say, to try to make this all constructive if the hard line must be held, is that these sorts of options should at least be presented as optional rules (preferrably in the rulebook itself). If the system should be kept relatively vanilla in order to attract newbies at least give some optional rules so that the old fanbase can run DS in an unaltered form. Can anyone help answer these questions for me?
#2 sithis May 18, 2005 16:31:54	Some of the discussion that spawned this is in this thread, DS3 Equipment Feedback, feel free to copy quotes from that thread into here.
#3 star_gazer_02 May 18, 2005 16:58:09	I get the feeling these questions have come up before, but I never heard the answers presented then and haven't been particularly convinced by what I have seen so I'm going to bring them up now. Before anyone tells me, I've read the FAQ, I know there's an agreement to keep DS balanced with basic D&D. I'm questioning why exactly this prevents implementing certain ideas from DS2E as blanket setting specific modifications (not replacements) or even as simple manipulations of (balanced) options. 1. Why aren't the races more extreme? DS2E was known for very extreme races. When normal races would have +1/-1 to their strengths/weaknesses, DS races would double that (and include smaller modifications to other stats). This was even more pronounced because of 2E's exponential stats. The idea was that Dark Sun contained all the normal races, but pushed to extremes of evolution because of the setting. Why couldn't this be done with DS3E races? A DS elf sporting a only +2 dex seems somewhat odd to me (especially when half-elves have that as well). If this threatens balance, a +1 LA could be given across the board (except to possibly humans). Why would you want this? Seriously, this doesn't change the flavor of the game any, it just gives players the equivalent of magic items that you have no control over. It is a far, far better option to have the player's power resting in items, be they magic or psionic in nature. That way, I can personally adjust the power-level of each player individually. If I want to make the game really hard for awhile, I take their items away, if I want to make it easier for awhile, I give them some. Items allow for much more fine-grained control of your play balance. That, and as I've said before, stats don't scale, items do. Stats frontload characters, items don't. Having character power vested in items is vastly superior to granting them permanent plusses. 2. Why isn't everyone psionic? "To one extent or another, every human and demihuman on Athas has psionic powers." - Wanderer's Journal This is could potentially be seen as a subissue of the above (depending on how you would want to balance it). Where did the psionics go? Yes, the Wild Talent system from DS2E was horribly horribly broken, but why not fix it instead of just scrapping that flavor? Give everyone a Wild Talent feat. The idea of free feats is not inimical to core D&D settings (Forgotten Realms gives a free regional feat) and this can be mechanically balanced either through being a trait of +1 LA DS races or as a balance for a setting-wide penalty (like reduced wealth below). 1.) See the reworked wild talent feat. Everyone is psionic, if they choose to be. If you don't like that, give everyone the wild talent feat for free. It's not that hard. 2.) XPH races have PPs, allowing them to take psionic feats. This is better than giving people access to powers, and not different at all, considering the level of powers normally given out. Little girls with world busting power should be the purview of DMs, not the dice. 3. Why doesn't weapon quality and material matter? In DS2E it matters quite a bit whether you were carrying a bone dagger or an obsidian dagger or a metal dagger. Currently the first two are practically identical and the only big difference is in resistance to sundering. Secondly, why is it so easy to get around the shortage of metal? As is, I can't see why anyone would buy a metal weapon when it seems like every worthwhile base weapon has a non-metal Dark Sun clone or is simply considered to be unaffected. It's a nice flavor that people have to rely on crappy weapons because of the shortage, but in reality it has no effect. Longswords and Greatswords are expected to be two of the top martial weapons, but instead of investing in a metal version of these weapons, a player might as well just buy a Macahuitl or a Great Macahuitl. Maces, staves, and crossbows are already considered non-metal so simple weapons are similarly perfectly covered with no-loss alternatives. Even exotic dual weapons are just as strong in their non-metal version as in the supposedly valuable metal version. About the only reason one might want a metal weapon is to bypass damage reduction, so it now basically fills the hole of silvered and cold iron weapons now rather than being a highly valued treasure. 1.) The benefits of metal weapons have changed to vastly superior hardness and hp. If you don't see that this has a large effect in your game, you aren't using Sunder properly. 4. Why are characters just as rich as normal worlds? Yes, metal costs 100x as much, but otherwise adventurers in DS are said to progress along the same wealth chart as any of the more cosmopolitan worlds. Bountiful resources interfere with the bleakness of the setting and minimize the affect of higher costed metal. Why free slaves when you could buy them? Assuming that most parties begin at 3rd level (in order to allow Half-Giant and Thri-Kreen players), players would be expected to start with 2700 cp. This means that even if for some reason a metal weapon was considered useful it is easily within a character's means to start with one. I'm confused as to when a character would ever own an obsidian weapon. Lastly, increased wealth reduces game options. While it may be stereotypical, being caught and stripped of your items was not an uncommon occurence in DS2E games. While in many games this would cause a player rebellion, in DS people didn't really have much in the first place and were much more capable on their own. The system was built around being personally capable, not lugging around the most swag. If you start a party at 3rd level and use the "slave pens" as the DS version of the "tavern", you're either going to have to finagle their equipment back to them or break with expected wealth patterns (and possibly have some quite put-out players). Better to start them poor despite their class levels and make the progression from crappy equipment to decent equipment mean something. 1.) Low-magic and Monty-haul variants of D&D must be the purview of individual DMs. DS3.5 is an official project and therefore must keep the same balance as the core books. This is not an option. Classes are balanced against monster CR's on the basis of item frequency (actually, on having a particular amount of purchasing power, but that's just a nit-pick). We cannot change that balance, not even a little bit. This is not up for discussion. You are free in your own game to do as you like, but the official product must conform to Core Rulebook standards in terms of CR and monetary availability, period. Furthermore DS has always been arcane item poor. At no time, at no place, and in no way has DS EVER been low item. This is a misconception you need to disabuse yourself of immediately or nothing done here will make sense to you. -------------------------------- As far as balancing, yes, straying from basic D&D's mechanics... ... is something an official product cannot do. End of story.
#4 eric_anondson May 18, 2005 17:14:21	1. Why aren't the races more extreme? Because they do want to keep it closer to Core balance. This means more specifically making sure that monsters that are assigned a CR rating (important for determining experience awards and for DMs to ensure appropriate challanges) and DMs don't need to tweek them everytime they borrow from another D20 product. Not every DM uses Dark Sun monsters exclusively. If suddenly PCs in 3e are given higher stats that the Core assumptions, then PCs with "extreme" stats are actually unbalanced to the CR/EL mechanism. 2. Why isn't everyone psionic? "To one extent or another, every human and demihuman on Athas has psionic powers." - Wanderer's Journal "Every character and monster has a base chance of 1% to be a wild talent (10% for Dark Sun NPCs and monsters)." - Way of the Psionicist 3. Why doesn't weapon quality and material matter? Again, reducing the damage capability of the common weapons alters the ability to build appropriate encounters based on existing 3e CRs. The thought went that it functioned something like a –2 penalty to attacks and damage, and this something like a –4 penalty to Strength. Implementing weapon quality issues as something everyone must deal with injected more problems with the CR system than Athas.org wanted to bother people with. Feel free to being them back yourself though. Give everyone a +4 Strength boost to compensate for this? Does giving a Con bonus actually compensate for this feature, or does it actually cause other unforeseeable complications elsewhere that also need to be counterbalanced... 4. Why are characters just as rich as normal worlds? The problem arises with Core 3e equipment functioning like a secondary ability system. CR ratings for higher CR beasts are designed around the assumption of PCs owning a specific amount of equipment that improves their capabilities. Reduce the wealth PCs have or value of things they own and you mess up the CR/EL system again. Keeping PC wealth "equivalent" to Core assumptions is less headache. Shifting racial abilities around can't compensate for this.
#5 the_slayer_of_heroes May 18, 2005 17:28:32	I'm probably going to get lynched for saying so, but most of these problems aren't issues in paizo's Dark Sun write up. now, on to the problems... In regards to the first two items... on page 67 of the XPH, there is listed the Hidden Talent feat, which must be taken at first level. it grants 2 power points and 1 first level power to use as a psi-like ability. It notes that this is an expanded version of the Wild Talent feat, which only grants you the power points. These two feats could easily be used to solve both the problem of racial power and naturally psionic peoples. In regards to materials... Sunder and acid. burn through weapon and equipment hp. Metal has higher hp and hardness, so use stuff that that actually matters against. In regards to cash... Does it actually say anywhere that you have to begin play with money to buy stuff or equipment on hand? And aside from the party's initial money, make them work for it. Have them roll their searches and spots to locate a creature's stash of items or money. I don't see how starting cash is a problem if their forever afterwards short on monatary units.
#6 pringles May 18, 2005 17:59:38	That why I keep playing 2e edition. You can change what you want without fearing of unbalancing the game.
#7 eric_anondson May 18, 2005 18:35:00	That why I keep playing 2e edition. You can change what you want without fearing of unbalancing the game. Because it wasn't balanced to begin with. :angelhide
#8 sithis May 18, 2005 18:55:19	1. Why would you want this? Seriously, this doesn't change the flavor of the game any, it just gives players the equivalent of magic items that you have no control over. Uh, I think you aren't understanding this point. More extreme means greater diversity between races. Higher highs, lower lows. It's nothing like magic items and I'd want it because it comes from DS2E flavor. DS3E shouldn't be developing in a void. It is a far, far better option to have the player's power resting in items, be they magic or psionic in nature. Items are a crutch and always will be. A character reliant on items is not a tough survivor, he's a guy with neat toys. Items allow for much more fine-grained control of your play balance. As do a million other GM devices. The ability to manipulate players through their items is by no means a required game concept. That, and as I've said before, stats don't scale, items do. They work just fine if the items ARE scaling, just at a lower level. A guy with a +1 sword and +2 strength is only superficially different from a guy with a +2 sword. Not that any of this section had to do with items... 2. 1.) See the reworked wild talent feat. Everyone is psionic, if they choose to be. If you don't like that, give everyone the wild talent feat for free. It's not that hard. Why am I forced to houserule (and manually balance) core concepts? Psionics was a core concept. 2.) XPH races have PPs, allowing them to take psionic feats. This is better than giving people access to powers, and not different at all, considering the level of powers normally given out. Little girls with world busting power should be the purview of DMs, not the dice. There is nothing saying DS3E needs to give broken wild talents, that's just an old bias of yours. PPs are an extremely poor way to do wild talents and more importantly nothing like DS2E. There was a game system and they should be trying to convert it... 3. 1.) The benefits of metal weapons have changed to vastly superior hardness and hp. If you don't see that this has a large effect in your game, you aren't using Sunder properly. That's called building a game around patching a hole. Yes, hardness matters in some cases, but in many cases it doesn't matter at all. In addition, once again this is nothing like DS2E. 4. 1.) Low-magic and Monty-haul variants of D&D must be the purview of individual DMs. DS3.5 is an official project and therefore must keep the same balance as the core books. This is not an option. Classes are balanced against monster CR's on the basis of item frequency (actually, on having a particular amount of purchasing power, but that's just a nit-pick). We cannot change that balance, not even a little bit. This is not up for discussion. You are free in your own game to do as you like, but the official product must conform to Core Rulebook standards in terms of CR and monetary availability, period. That's BS. Dark Sun already has wealth differences by virtue of metal scarcity and in "normal" campaigns characters can quite naturally function without wealth or vastly inflate their personal wealth while still remaining at a relative normal CR. Furthermore DS has always been arcane item poor. At no time, at no place, and in no way has DS EVER been low item. This is a misconception you need to disabuse yourself of immediately or nothing done here will make sense to you. Really? DS2E started characters with crappy equipment and a metal sword was a blessing equivalent to a magic one. The crux of my argument did not hinge on magic items in treasure, it hinged on both less overall wealth and generally lower quality gear. From what I've heard most of the fiction also consists of characters that are never all that wealthy. Also, depending on the entry, the DS2E treasure tables themselves give vastly inferior amounts of monetary wealth (** though I will admit that magical items are just as plentiful). Dark Sun was a poor setting. As far as balancing, yes, straying from basic D&D's mechanics... ... is something an official product cannot do. End of story. Perhaps the Templarate should talk with Wizards then instead of continually passing the buck, because as long as they're just giving D&D a window dressing and abandoning core concepts of DS2E, their product is going to remain a substandard conversion. Also the point of much of that section was explaining ways in which at least some of these changes could be internally balanced (without even messing with D&D's core mechanics). Perhaps you should have read it rather than taking a bad quote and dismissing the rest.
#9 sithis May 18, 2005 19:10:45	If suddenly PCs in 3e are given higher stats that the Core assumptions, then PCs with "extreme" stats are actually unbalanced to the CR/EL mechanism. Not if those stats are balanced by an equivalent level adjustment. Then the system works just fine with no modifications (other than requiring that characters start at at least character level 2). "Every character and monster has a base chance of 1% to be a wild talent (10% for Dark Sun NPCs and monsters)." - Way of the Psionicist Touché...[/Peter Griffin] Again, reducing the damage capability of the common weapons alters the ability to build appropriate encounters based on existing 3e CRs. The thought went that it functioned something like a –2 penalty to attacks and damage, and this something like a –4 penalty to Strength. Implementing weapon quality issues as something everyone must deal with injected more problems with the CR system than Athas.org wanted to bother people with. Feel free to being them back yourself though. Well, my problem has to do not with the system existing (lower price, -1 to attack/damage is close enough, even if it doesn't differentiate), but it being meaningless. Again, even if this is a pain in the ass, it really isn't Dark Sun if you just ignore the materials problem. Give everyone a +4 Strength boost to compensate for this? Does giving a Con bonus actually compensate for this feature, or does it actually cause other unforeseeable complications elsewhere that also need to be counterbalanced... That is true. Though presumably a stat bonus should be in some way equivalent to another stat bonus (even if STR ends up being valued higher there is still some exhange). Thank you for replying and doing so in a calm and even manner by the way.
#10 the_slayer_of_heroes May 18, 2005 19:34:15	the way i'm reading it, the materials problem you're addressing could simply be solved by roleplaying the flavor of the world. Looking through the treasure charts of the DMG, there are actually very few entries that list what the equipment in question is actuall made of... and if PC's buying metal weapons is a problem, where does it say that a shop must have items of that material? Logically, if metal isn't very common, only very few stores are actually going to have metal items. and to turn two arguments against into one for; if the PC's having worse weapons and armor lowers their effective party level, and if stronger PC's with psionic abilities and LA's raises their effective party level, shouldn't those two factors cancel out if the level-adjusted PC's have worse gear?
#11 eric_anondson May 18, 2005 21:12:24	the way i'm reading it, the materials problem you're addressing could simply be solved by roleplaying the flavor of the world. Looking through the treasure charts of the DMG, there are actually very few entries that list what the equipment in question is actuall made of... and if PC's buying metal weapons is a problem, where does it say that a shop must have items of that material? Logically, if metal isn't very common, only very few stores are actually going to have metal items. The materials issue almost entirely comes into play with regards to weapons, shields, and armor. When using alternate materials (lower-than-metal quality) the DMG gives modifiers for what happens when the material is used in weapons or armor. Hardness and hit point values are pretty irrelevent to encounter balance as they rarely if ever come into play, which is about the only characteristic using alternate materials will change for items that aren't weapons or armor. and to turn two arguments against into one for; if the PC's having worse weapons and armor lowers their effective party level, and if stronger PC's with psionic abilities and LA's raises their effective party level, shouldn't those two factors cancel out if the level-adjusted PC's have worse gear? At low levels they do balance out, at mid levels the stats don't help as much for the reduced gear and at higher levels the stat boost is really out of whack from the expected. Another option can be to re-zero the +0/+0 material to the worst quality material, and have the rarer metal (iron/steel) work as +2/+2 bonus to the weapon. PCs will start with the low-quality item at lower levels and as they gain in levels they will be finding better and better quality materials. While not being a perfect way to work this out it does alleviate the problem of having lower equipment availability at higher levels. Instead of having a static bonus to abilities granted at 1st level to compensate the bad quality, the poor materials are the starting point and the bonus given to PCs come as they improve where the bonuses are especially important. Personally, I'm using the Black Company Campaign Setting rules for equipment. In that setting magic items are extremely rare. Green Ronin came up with an alternate system for equipment. They have 6 levels of above average quality improvements. Starting at average, it improves to fine, excellent, exceptional, superior, masterwork, then masterpiece. Something that could help with a Dark Sun campaign, IMO.
#12 the_slayer_of_heroes May 18, 2005 21:19:50	so the real problem here is making hardness and hp matter.... and i thought we were trying to stay with the SRD as far as balance was concerned... so rezoreing wouldn't really work all that well as a publication aspect. there's always the option of giving more monsters improved sunder and similar feats, as well as making sure that NPC encounters always have an acid flask or two at hand....
#13 Pennarin May 18, 2005 22:38:15	Monsters - including monstrous humanoids like tarek and gith - ought always to go for the weapon, either to disarm the opponent or sunder his weapon to allow a follow-through with a grapple attempt or other close-quarter tactic. Remember those wraiths in the PP? They had no qualms damaging a priceless relic such as the Scourge with their taint (i.e. Troy Denning had no qualms), and so should DMs. In the real-world you go for the throat, eyes, and hears, while in D&D you go for the weapon.
#14 kalthandrix May 19, 2005 7:07:51	Monsters - including monstrous humanoids like tarek and gith - ought always to go for the weapon, either to disarm the opponent or sunder his weapon to allow a follow-through with a grapple attempt or other close-quarter tactic. Remember those wraiths in the PP? They had no qualms damaging a priceless relic such as the Scourge with their taint (i.e. Troy Denning had no qualms), and so should DMs. In the real-world you go for the throat, eyes, and hears, while in D&D you go for the weapon. Show no mercy! In my campaign, I make use of the critical miss rule- you roll a one and something bad happens. For DS, and because of the low quality of material, my critical miss chart includes damaging/breaking you weapon. Steel and iron weapons are exempt from this feature of the chart in my world.
#15 dawnstealer May 19, 2005 11:43:56	You could check out my house rules; they take a similar path to what you're saying. Like Eric says, this unbalances the game, so I'd never suggest using them beyond a house system (ie. I don't think Athas.org would accept them as canon), but it does take care of the stats, different weapon materials, and so on. Links to the different sections are at the bottom of this initial page, which is fluff for my players.
#16 jon_oracle_of_athas May 19, 2005 15:51:26	Really? DS2E started characters with crappy equipment and a metal sword was a blessing equivalent to a magic one. The crux of my argument did not hinge on magic items in treasure, it hinged on both less overall wealth and generally lower quality gear. From what I've heard most of the fiction also consists of characters that are never all that wealthy. The introductory adventure included a +1 short sword that could cast healing spells. Black Spine contained a +5 vorpal sword, more +1 longswords than most athasians can count to, and other adventures have plenty of magical items too. Guess what makes up the majority of the wealth level in the 3.5 DMG for normal characters? You guessed it - magical and psionic items. You can't separate magical items from wealth levels.
#17 jon_oracle_of_athas May 19, 2005 15:56:01	"Every character and monster has a base chance of 1% to be a wild talent (10% for Dark Sun NPCs and monsters)." - Way of the Psionicist All characters have at least one feat. Nothing prevents that feat from being Hidden Talent. Certainly 10% can have that feat.
#18 dawnstealer May 19, 2005 16:07:22	All characters have at least one feat. Nothing prevents that feat from being Hidden Talent. Certainly 10% can have that feat. Agreed, although as a house rule, I allow my players to start with one 0-level power from the 3e psionic book (not the 3.5 which no longer has 0-level "talents," although I do use that book for everything else). In my campaigns, there are far, far more psionic items than magical ones.
#19 sithis May 19, 2005 17:36:36	The introductory adventure included a +1 short sword that could cast healing spells. Black Spine contained a +5 vorpal sword, more +1 longswords than most athasians can count to, and other adventures have plenty of magical items too. Very well... Guess my DMs (who were rather monty haul in normal settings) just saw the silliness of doling out vast wealth when things like food and water were a concern and a metal sword was a great prize. I don't think they ever ran any of the published adventures though, so I'll just have to admit I didn't have a wide enough experience with DS2E treasure. I'm not really sure how much can be judged from the setting as a whole from a published adventure (it's sort of like working backward from a MM entry to decide how feats can work), but I can certainly admit that my perceptions aren't all-inclusive. That said, isn't the character of the setting lessened by having thousands of cp of wealth available just to start the game? Guess everyone just has different desires, but I can scoop up cash in any game, DS had charm because I was proud to have made it through the desert or equipped my character with a metal dagger. Next game I play I'm going to save it all. If we run into some slaves being mistreated, I'll just buy them. Guess what makes up the majority of the wealth level in the 3.5 DMG for normal characters? You guessed it - magical and psionic items. You can't separate magical items from wealth levels. Athasian magic item tables didn't have more magic than normal, it had exactly the same. It did have less treasure of other types though (less relative coin and no art whatsoever), so the characters did have less wealth overall.
#20 dawnstealer May 19, 2005 18:01:39	I have my PCs roll for normal (3.5e) starting funds, but convert the gold to ceramic. Works quite well. I should add that I tend to protect my players until they hit about third level (the original starting level for 2e Dark Sun player characters). At the point, the gloves come off.
#21 Shei-Nad May 19, 2005 18:15:17	Sithis, I have the same concerns as you with the official conversions (athas.org's and Pazio's). I humbly suggest you visit my website for a d20 alternative to the 3.5 conversion of Dark Sun. Hope you can use some things from there. Will update soon with some adjustments too, for those interested...
#22 RunningWilder May 19, 2005 18:23:08	Unless an area is suffering from drought (um... more than usual) or famine, there the player's shouldn't have that much trouble acquiring food in actual towns. Towns that lack food and water die. Its that simple. The only time food and water really become an issue is during treks across the sands. In those cases, the difficulty becomes the amount of food and water you have brought with you and if it can last you through mishaps, unforseen weather conditions and other problems that you might come across. The player's are adventurers, gaining rewards for acts of homicide. Since they're seeking out treasure (because they want it or they stumble across it during the adventure), they're going to find it. The cash and items don't help in the middle of the desert when they're getting ready to kill the wizard's familiar and quench their thirst with his blood. Let them have the cash and equipment, but make the armor and weapons you dole out equal in cost to those on the DMG list (making metal weapons a real treat). If they want to buy something, make the metal stuff exclusive to a handful of merchants (most of whom sell only to those with certain credentials). As for buying all the slaves, go ahead. Now you have people that you have to take care of. If you let them go, they either die or get re-enslave and you've only helped the slavers, encouraging them to go raid some more. If you really want to make a difference, you can't just throw money at it.
#23 dawnstealer May 19, 2005 18:49:19	The player's are adventurers, gaining rewards for acts of homicide. Disagree with that; is your GM GW? Anyways, there always mystery threads, political problems, and so on. The case of money should be driven home, though: do not start your players with too much. If they start as nobles, that's fine, but if they're just regular freemen, don't start them with any metal money. They shouldn't even see metal money till they hit 5th level or so.
#24 Shei-Nad May 19, 2005 18:55:50	I disagree with many things said here, but this issue always fascinates me: The introductory adventure included a +1 short sword that could cast healing spells. Dark Sun: The intro adventure for 4 to 6 characters starting at 3rd level with NO magical or psionic items whatsoever, or wealth, for that matter, had a +1 sword which could cast cure serious wounds twice per day, but with 10 charges left. So lets see. That's a masterwork shortsword (310gp) +1 (2000gp) with a "wand" power (3rd level spell, caster level 5, 10 charges left, that means 750gp x 3 x 5 / 5 (1/5 charges) = 2250gp) so a 4560gp sword. And some ceramics. For 4 to 6 4th or maybe 5th level characters, at that point. D&D Intro adventure for 4 characters starting at 1st level with standard wealth (about 600gp total). - 3 +1 bolts - everburning torch and everburning candle - 5 first level divine scrolls - 2 first level arcane scrolls, 1 second level arcane scrolls - quaal feather token - potion of fire breath - potion of endure elements - potion of cat's grace - ption of protection from fire - Azan-gund flute (worth 3000gp) - +1 morningstar (2310gp) - 3 potion of cure light wounds - wand of entangle (13 charges) - Shatterspike sword (4,315gp) - couple thousand gp (in coin, gems and other loot) For a total of 24 magic items worth about 13,000 gp, not counting more than 2000gp in loot, for 4 characters of 3rd level, at that point. so... 1 magic item, 24 magic items... 5000gp, 15,000gp... potato.... ;) Shei-Nad
#25 star_gazer_02 May 19, 2005 19:05:26	Really? DS2E started characters with crappy equipment and a metal sword was a blessing equivalent to a magic one. The crux of my argument did not hinge on magic items in treasure, it hinged on both less overall wealth and generally lower quality gear. From what I've heard most of the fiction also consists of characters that are never all that wealthy. Also, depending on the entry, the DS2E treasure tables themselves give vastly inferior amounts of monetary wealth (** though I will admit that magical items are just as plentiful). Dark Sun was a poor setting. Ahh, and now we reach the crux of the issue. All of these problems really have nothing to do with mechanics. Magic items are just as plentiful, as you yourself have just acknowledged, on Athas as they are elsewhere. We have been trying to tell you this all along, what have you been complaining about? A 15th level Athasian fighter will have just as many 'toys' as you so eloquently put it as a 15th level fighter from Toril. This has been true since 2ed and is true now. Athas has never been enchantment poor. So, what do we have left? The hardship factor, which is what you have been driving at all along, correct? Unfortunately, 'hardship' is a function of DM interaction with his players, nothing else. The rules have absolutely nothing to do with how hard or easy Athas appears to your players. Given the same rules, I can make Athas a cakewalk for my players, or I can make it a gauntlet of terror and pain. The only thing that Athas, as a world, has ever accomplished that other worlds can't ever quite reach is this: It gives DMs explicit license not to pull punches, and players know this going in. THAT is the essential difference between Athas and the Best-Forgotten Realms, nothing more. Sorcerer Kings do not make Athas hard, deserts, bone swords, braxat, beast-head giants and bald dwarves do not make Athas hard. Who has what power, how much gold, what neat toys and how many slaves do not make Athas hard. None of these things do. You, the DM, have sole responsibility for how Athas feels to you and your players. On to some things that will help you out: RE: prevalent psionics.[*] First off, every character, be they the tanner down the silt encrusted alleyway, the old elven alchemist with one leg, or the stupid and abused 1/2 Giant guard of house Wavir's slave pens has access to at least one feat. On other worlds, this would probably be Skill Focus or Toughness, on Athas they tend to be Wild Talent or Psionic Weapon. Your concern here is taken care of, really. When everyone has a feat slot open, you - as DM - should be filling them with psionic feats. DS3.5 can't create NPCs for your campaign, it's up to you whether or not they are psionic in nature and it always has been. Let me just reiterate here, little girls with earth shattering powers are plot devices and should not be available through a roll of the dice. RE: Weapon Materials I'm not really sure why this has such a bone in your throat, though I suspect that even you don't really understand what has happened here (I promise you, it's much, much less than you think). The changes weapon materials have gone through I promise you, is not to the players' benefit. Back in the bad old days, various materials made for differing plusses and minuses, and it was good. This is still true (DMG3.5 pg. 144), stone and bone weapons are -2/-2 and bronze has a -1/-1. Now, however, you also have hardness and hp to worry about, bone, for instance, is hrd 6, 10 hp/inch. Taking up the PHB3.5 (pg 158) , we can see that a steel longsword has 5 hp and a steel bastard sword might, at most, have 10 hp. A bone longsword would then have hrd 6 and 3 hp. Most fighters above level 5 can easily do 9 hp of damage... RE: Why pick steel over bone? Well, one of the reasons is that players can afford it. Remember that 15th level athasian Fighter? Regardless of how much coinage the world does or does not have, he still has the toys he as picked up along the way, he can barter for what he wants and needs, and if that doesn't do, well, he is 15th level. The way things are built (on purpose, I might add), players don't really have to worry about the quality of their equipment past 5th or 6th level, and this has always been true, in 2ed. as well as 3ed, DS as well as FR. However, that does not mean that steel weapons are cheap. A steel bastard sword costs 35 gold. That's 3,500 Cp, or just about half way to a +2 weapon and just 1,165 Cp more than a bone bastard sword, +1. Example: bastard sword Bold entries are better purchases. ----------------------------------------- bone, +0: 35 Cp, -2/-2 bone, MW: 335 Cp, -1/-2 bone, +1: 2,335 Cp, -1/-1 steel, +0: 3,500 Cp, +0/+0 steel, MW: 3,835 Cp, +1/+0 steel, +1: 5, 835 Cp, +1/+1 bone, +2: 8,335 Cp, +0/+0 steel, +2: 11,835 Cp, +2/+2 ------------------------------------------ As you can see, the choice to buy a steel or bone bastard sword is pretty easy. As you progress in levels, it makes more and more sense to buy steel because the price difference of ~3,8oo Cp takes up a smaller percentage of the total. Not to mention that at any particular price point, there is a similarly priced steel weapon that does more damage. If you want, reducing the penalties to -1/-1 for using stone and bone will make them competitive for your player's attention, so will additional factors multiplied to the price of steel weapons. Double an objects price in gp would be effective, so would saything that metal objects are 1,000x more expensive, though that seems a tad - draconian. [*] Re-read the discriptions of these people again, consider this an object lesson on just why Athas depends on flavor, not rules.
#26 squidfur- May 19, 2005 19:26:15	OK....? So, again, why pick a non-metal weapon? You just basically helped out our argument. If a starting character (as most will be 3-4th level) can begin with a metal weapon, how is it that they are reserved for the few? Mechanically, it just doesn't fit with fluff. And to the statement about Athas having just as much treasure/enchanted items, try reading Shei-Nad's post (#24). And his example isn't the only one. The rest of the adventures are some what scimpy on treasure to character level ratios as well.
#27 RunningWilder May 19, 2005 19:54:47	Disagree with that; is your GM GW? GW? I'm simplifying, of course, but it is the core of DnD. The point is that they are going to find more resources through adventuring than the average person on their world. Anyways, there always mystery threads, political problems, and so on. The case of money should be driven home, though: do not start your players with too much. If they start as nobles, that's fine, but if they're just regular freemen, don't start them with any metal money. They shouldn't even see metal money till they hit 5th level or so. I agree with you. Still, they shouldn't be so poor by tenth level that they have to scrounge for enough money for a place to stay (barring their own stupid decisions).
#28 star_gazer_02 May 19, 2005 20:06:55	OK....? So, again, why pick a non-metal weapon? You just basically helped out our argument. If a starting character (as most will be 3-4th level) can begin with a metal weapon, how is it that they are reserved for the few? Mechanically, it just doesn't fit with fluff. And to the statement about Athas having just as much treasure/enchanted items, try reading Shei-Nad's post (#24). And his example isn't the only one. The rest of the adventures are some what scimpy on treasure to character level ratios as well. That may well be, but look at the treasure tables, they are not significantly different from their other 2e counterparts. As for non-metal weapons, even if they were equal in quality but metal weapons were 3,8oo Cp more expensive, most characters would buy metallic weapons anyways, because of what they mean as status symbols. There is nothing that can be done, other than adjusting treasure tables to give out weapons of differing materials and weighting those tables against metal, to prevent the fact that once characters have a few tens of thousands of Cp in property, metal items are going to be springing up like bloodvines on agafari trees. Athas makes metallic items have a very large 'oooOOOoo' factor, regardless of final effectiveness, and players will pick up on that right away. Whenever they have the money, they will buy metal items. Then again, you may feel free to Rule 0 any aspect of the game you disagree with... As for what goes on in the beginning adventure, I would like to remind you that anecdotes are not data, and as such are not an argument until you have gone through a significant percentage of Athasian adventures, a significant percentage of other-worldly adventures, explained how they are equivalent, and then shown that your hypothesis that Athasian adventures have fewer treasures fits the data you've accumulated. Granted, most of us will be happy with less, but really, you should know that people around here don't fall for rhetoric when data is available. Lastly, I would argue that the initial adventure uses a form of rhetoric that you see a lot of in the military whenever a command changes hands: Shove how different things now are into peoples faces, so that the first impression they have of you sticks in their heads. First impressions are a powerful motivating force. I suspect that if you look at the treasures found in the later adventures things have evened out quite a lot.
#29 Shei-Nad May 19, 2005 21:48:03	hehehehe.... A 15th level Athasian fighter will have just as many 'toys' as you so eloquently put it as a 15th level fighter from Toril. This has been true since 2ed and is true now. Sure, just look at our typical Athasian Fighter... Lets call him, i dunno, Rukis. Rukis, male mul ftr15 NG ... possessions: +2 steel full plate, +2 steel heavy shield, amulet of natural armor +2, ring of protection +1, +3 steel longsword, +1 mighty composite longbow +4, 20 +2 steel arrows, 5 adamantine arrows, quiver of Elhona, boots of speed, cloak of resistance +2, potion of bear endurance, potion of cure moderate wounds, potion of heroism Hmm... wait, that doesn't feel right... somehow... AH HA! I know, lets try that again!: possessions: +2 shell full plate, +2 wooden heavy shield, amulet of natural armor +2, ring of protection +1, +3 steel carrikal, +1 mighty composite longbow +4, 20 +2 bone arrows, 5 steel arrows, quiver of Athas, boots of speed, cloak of resistance +2, potion fruit of Dwarf endurance, potion fruit of cure moderate wounds, potion fruit of heroism And of course, all these + items are psionic, not magical... duh! Hmm... still something that bothers me... SOMEHOW.... wait... Oh... I knew this couldn't make sense... see, I used the DMG models for fighters equipment, but those are NPCs... PCs, of course, are a bit different... Lets see.. this makes about 62,000gp worth of equipment. so thats only... 116,000gp to go... Lets get this right! possessions: +3 quickness shell full plate, +3 heartening wooden heavy shield, amulet of natural armor +2, ring of protection +1, +3 psibane steel carrikal, +2 psychokinetic mighty composite longbow +4, 20 +2 bone arrows, 5 +1 steel arrows, quiver of Athas, boots of speed, cloak of resistance +3, potion fruit of Dwarf endurance, 4 potion fruit of cure moderate wounds, potion fruitof heroism, 4 shards, ring of self-sufficiency, psicrown of cautious warrior THERE! right there! THAT'S your typical 15th level Athasian fighter. Wasn't sure about that last 35,000gp of psionic items for a warrior, but that psicrown just fits nicely... :p ... Get my point? But hey, you like it that way, fine. To each his own. Shei-Nad
#30 pringles May 19, 2005 22:24:39	****,you guys give a lot of magical item to your player. In my campaign, the PC are average 10 level and they only have for now a +1 steel sabre, the Scourge of Rkard, two steel hallberd, a +2 talisman of protection (work like the ring) and that it. Also, presently, they are very poor. They were rich at one point, but they depleted all there cash during scenario and a lot got stolen. They had other magical and steel item, but they lost it by either, selling, getting stolen, breaking or character dead and you cant retrieve the item. I always keep the balance of there equipement using different technique and harsh environementto get ride of annoying item. Thew last scenario I runned, the PC had to buy an erdlu herd in Raam for a hidden slave village that lost its erdlus. The PC depleted all half there cash buying the erdlu and lost the other half at the hand of Fenaeyon and his Sun runner tribe (that was a really cool part, Amber enchantress inspired me, in short, Fanaeyon blackmailed two of them when they were isolated, he asked for all there money or he and Magnus would kick there ass. The PC were afraid so they gave the money.) I think the favor of Athas is kept when sometime the PC are rich like noble but tomorrow, they can turn poor as slave. And my player love it. Two month ago, they could take on a Braxat with almost no problem. Presently, they have only two weapons (for six character) that can arm the braxat, so they are in trouble. You can remain deadly even if the player are 10th level.
#31 RunningWilder May 20, 2005 6:34:59	****,you guys give a lot of magical item to your player. In my campaign, the PC are average 10 level and they only have for now a +1 steel sabre, the Scourge of Rkard, two steel hallberd, a +2 talisman of protection (work like the ring) and that it. Only one artifact? How do your players survive? :D Also, presently, they are very poor. They were rich at one point, but they depleted all there cash during scenario and a lot got stolen. They had other magical and steel item, but they lost it by either, selling, getting stolen, breaking or character dead and you cant retrieve the item. I always keep the balance of there equipement using different technique and harsh environementto get ride of annoying item. Thew last scenario I runned, the PC had to buy an erdlu herd in Raam for a hidden slave village that lost its erdlus. The PC depleted all half there cash buying the erdlu and lost the other half at the hand of Fenaeyon and his Sun runner tribe (that was a really cool part, Amber enchantress inspired me, in short, Fanaeyon blackmailed two of them when they were isolated, he asked for all there money or he and Magnus would kick there ass. The PC were afraid so they gave the money.) I think the favor of Athas is kept when sometime the PC are rich like noble but tomorrow, they can turn poor as slave. And my player love it. Two month ago, they could take on a Braxat with almost no problem. Presently, they have only two weapons (for six character) that can arm the braxat, so they are in trouble. You can remain deadly even if the player are 10th level. And that's perfectly viable, as long as they don't have to run away from every second battle because they lack the correct equipment and can never get/keep it.
#32 dawnstealer May 20, 2005 10:30:10	In my opinion, this line is kind of off track - awards will always be a GM preference, and good GMs know how to balance these wants so they're right below what the players want (so they continue to want it, dig?). As far as the aspects of 2e go, I still say that the stats were better when they were more min/maxed, although I wholeheartedly support Athas.org for taking the route that would appeal to more people and not just us "hard-core DSers." Elves, in my game, have the following stat line: +4 Dex, -4 Con, +2 Int, -2 Wis
#33 sithis May 20, 2005 12:57:46	Magic items are just as plentiful, as you yourself have just acknowledged, on Athas as they are elsewhere. Athas has generally been a poor setting in fluff and will remain so in my games as it makes absolutely no sense given the challenges that it is supposed to present (at least at level <10). It would be nice if the game system supported this, but I have no "proof" to support my opinion so I'm just going to have to houserule it right out of the box. A 15th level Athasian fighter will have just as many 'toys' as you so eloquently put it as a 15th level fighter from Toril. Not quite, as he could buy more. (** this all assumes that treasure was distributed equally among monsters) The rules have absolutely nothing to do with how hard or easy Athas appears to your players. Given the same rules, I can make Athas a cakewalk for my players, or I can make it a gauntlet of terror and pain. They do have to do with the source of that hardship. There is a fundamentally different flavor between a game where the PCs can lose all their possessions after they're beyond around 4th level without feeling like the GM has horribly slighted them. I could just as easily run a really difficult FR game as I could a DS game. The two systems are entirely equivalent. Is the only difference between Athas and Toril be how mean I feel like being? First off, every character, be they the tanner down the silt encrusted alleyway, the old elven alchemist with one leg, or the stupid and abused 1/2 Giant guard of house Wavir's slave pens has access to at least one feat. And so I can either brush the flavor (even if 1% of everything and 10% of NPCs were psionic, 100% of PCs were) away or force my players into a feat selection? Again, Dark Sun is mechanically no different from ANY other world with psionics in this respect. And the end answer seems to again be that I can ignore the system and make up my own... Houseruling should not be required to match core flavor. I'm not really sure why this has such a bone in your throat, though I suspect that even you don't really understand what has happened here (I promise you, it's much, much less than you think). Because it's meaningless now? I cannot picture a circumstance that would require a character to own a poor quality weapon. In 2E you used bone because a real weapon was too freakin' expensive (you didn't start with thousands of cp) and the few weapons that could be bought normally weren't that good. The changes weapon materials have gone through I promise you, is not to the players' benefit. Interesting, because to me it seems like the only weakness they have is sundering. Now if my first action in every battle is to sunder my players' weapons, this is going to get old REAL fast. This is still true (DMG3.5 pg. 144), stone and bone weapons are -2/-2 and bronze has a -1/-1. The Dark Sun players guide lists -1/-1 for all non-metal substitutes. Again, not that anyone would ever bother with such. Well, one of the reasons is that players can afford it. Remember that 15th level athasian Fighter? Regardless of how much coinage the world does or does not have, he still has the toys he as picked up along the way, he can barter for what he wants and needs, and if that doesn't do, well, he is 15th level. So my complaint (material being meaningless) is null and void because of my other complaint (everyone's so rich that they can suck up the cost)? And when I say that they can afford metal just for the hell of it, I'm not talking about 15th level, I'm talking about starting characters. The way things are built (on purpose, I might add), players don't really have to worry about the quality of their equipment past 5th or 6th level, and this has always been true, in 2ed. as well as 3ed, DS as well as FR. Players don't have to worry about the quality of their equipment AT ALL now (nor do they now or did they ever need to do so in any of the standard non-DS worlds). If you want, reducing the penalties to -1/-1 for using stone and bone will make them competitive for your player's attention, so will additional factors multiplied to the price of steel weapons. Double an objects price in gp would be effective, so would saything that metal objects are 1,000x more expensive, though that seems a tad - draconian. You're right, I can houserule my own system to match old Dark Sun. I'm really very little concerned about 15th level characters. At that point I could care less what the system says or doesn't say, book-based balance and challenge are pretty much useless. I'm concerned about 3rd level characters. The levels when the system is supposed to just work.
#34 the_slayer_of_heroes May 20, 2005 16:10:51	so, really, the only issue is the money issue... by the way, just where does it say players start with thousands of cp, like you've been saying they do?
#35 sithis May 20, 2005 16:27:47	so, really, the only issue is the money issue... by the way, just where does it say players start with thousands of cp, like you've been saying they do? Thri-Kreen and Half-Giants, two standard PC races from DS2E, both need to start at level 3 to be included and the wealth table for level 3 characters gives them 2700 cp. Since everyone is so keen on keeping balanced on the wealth table, starting character should therefore have that much wealth.
#36 dawnstealer May 20, 2005 17:21:35	Maybe I've misunderstood the rules for epic character levels, then. I thought that when a race got a +1 to their level, they were treated as being a level higher when calculating experience. I don't think they're actually 3rd level characters, they just have abilities that give them enough of an advantage that they take a penalty in the experience point range. So a 15th level aarakocra is treated as a 16th level aarakocra when they fight something and win. They don't gain any of the benefits a 16th level character of their class has, though (more spells, bonus feats, extra skill points, etc). A half-giant doesn't actually start at 3rd level - they're a 1st level character - it's just that they have abilities or powers/advantages that give them an edge a "normal" 1st level human, elf, dwarf, etc would not have. Don't give them 3rd level funds: give them 1st level funds.
#37 roguemonkeychief May 20, 2005 18:03:09	ECL is used for determining experience and character wealth. From the SRD: Use ECL instead of character level to determine how many experience points a monster character needs to reach its next level. Also use ECL to determine starting wealth for a monster character.
#38 dawnstealer May 20, 2005 18:24:00	Hmm... Then I would ignore that and just use it for experience. Problem solved.
#39 sithis May 20, 2005 18:34:52	Then I would ignore that and just use it for experience. Problem solved. Then you have the problem of more powerful characters in a group. Also, both of those get racial hit dice which have to be treated as levels (they provide BAB, skills, HP, feats). If you want to allow one of those races in your game, it has to start higher than 1st level and then at least those people that choose ECL +0 races should be getting more cash (by wealth progression).
#40 dawnstealer May 20, 2005 18:39:46	Agreed that it should, but I think the disadvantages of all these races that have +1 ECLs, in the hands of the right GMs, outweigh their enormous bonuses. Take aarakocra, for example: They can fly! Yeah, but if you ever so much as go inside a building (much less that dungeon) you aren't really roleplaying your character right, are you. No experience for that adventure. Half-giants: I'm 13 feet tall and weigh 1200 lbs! Yeah, but try walking across that flimsy rope bridge over the miles-long canyon that creaked when the halfling went over it. Try going into that cave where all the treasure's at. Oops! Thri-kreen: I'm a big bug with poison! The elf tribe gets your butt alone in an ally and pays you back for Feylla, their sister that was eaten a few years ago by to'ksa out in the wastes (all those bugs look the same, anyway). Dig?
#41 eric_anondson May 20, 2005 21:38:20	So many of the problems with 3e's level adjustments, ECLs, and the difficulties with experience awards and equivalent treasure values being discussed here are eliminated with Grim Tales's $1.95 Gamemastering product matched with the $7.95 Creature Creation product. About the best $10 I ever spent on electronic RPG stuff, especially the Gamemastering .pdf and spreadsheet. I wholeheartedly recommend to everyone who has $1.95 to spare (pop money?) give it a look. The insanity of the DMG's LA, ECL, EL, CR, XP no longer...
#42 star_gazer_02 May 20, 2005 22:26:41	Ok, so a 3rd level character has 2,700 Cp to play with, if you're following the rules in the DMG3.5 (pg. 199) then not more than 1/4 of that - 675 Cp - is going to get spent on any one item. So, for 6.75 gold, what can someone buy... checking the PHB3.5 (pg. 116) you can buy a metal handaxe and have 7 silver, 5 ceramic left over. Hardly earth-shattering. As for armor, a suit of full plate will cost you a whopping 1,500 gold, or 150,000 ceramic, hardly within the range for a starting character, not to mention the fact that you'll quickly boil in it. In 2e a metal weapon was the same as buying a +2 on the cheap, and that hasn't changed at all. Remember, the rules for inferior materials got harder: Bone is now -2/-2, stone is now -2/-2 and on top of that, weapons now have hardness and hit points. A steel longsword has a whopping 5 hp; bone and stone ones have even less!! I fail to understand how making it harder for PC's to keep their weapons is not in keeping with Athas' flavor. And so I can either brush the flavor (even if 1% of everything and 10% of NPCs were psionic, 100% of PCs were) away or force my players into a feat selection? Again, Dark Sun is mechanically no different from ANY other world with psionics in this respect. And the end answer seems to again be that I can ignore the system and make up my own... Houseruling should not be required to match core flavor. Again, Athas is now harder for PCs. When every NPC has the Hidden Talent feat (XPH, pg. 67), they are at a distinct disadvantage when they don't take it as well. But, as is proper for Athasian flavor, you don't get anything for free, you have to pay for it - in this case, a precious feat slot. I'm not certain how that's 'brushing aside flavor for balance', if anything that's enforcing Athasian flavor. The Dark Sun players guide lists -1/-1 for all non-metal substitutes. Again, not that anyone would ever bother with such. You are correct, but the guide is also not completely updated to 3.5 rules. So my complaint (material being meaningless) is null and void because of my other complaint (everyone's so rich that they can suck up the cost)? And when I say that they can afford metal just for the hell of it, I'm not talking about 15th level, I'm talking about starting characters. No, your complaint about material being meaningless is null and void because your other complaint about being able to absorb the cost was also true in 2e. See above for how affordable metalic items are for 3rd level characters. See my posts below for how it has always been the case that players will purchase metal weapons in preference to non-metal weapons. Regardless, the only thing we can do is set guidelines on the price of metal, it is up to you, the DM to determine availabilty, just as it is in any game. If you want your characters using weapons of inferior materials, don't make metal weapons for sale, don't put them in treasure and have them guarded as family heirlooms when the players do encounter them. See? No ad hoc rulings, no house rules, no doing anything but what you are supposed to be doing as DM. But seriously, how do you suppose the rules could possibly address this issue? If you must have some sort of rule for this, make metal items cost not 100x, but 1,000x their price in ceramic, now a steel bastard sword costs 35,000 ceramic, certainly out of the reach of almost every player. That however, is up to you. DS2 set the price at 100x, DS3 keeps it there and you are arguing that we need more DS2 'flavor', when, in reality, we haven't changed a single thing. Let's go through it step by step, so that you can point out where I'm going wrong here, ok? I really want to understand what your complaints are so that I might see if something can be worked out. Magic Items Magic items in 2ed and DS2 were equal, DS was touted as magic poor, not item poor. Psionic items were always intended to take the place of arcane items. Take one look at the DS2 treasure tables and you will see that is true. Magic items in DS3.5 are going to be following DS2, ie. the same as regular 3.5ed. So, we have not lost any 'flavor' there. Weapon Materials In DS2, there was a nice little chart that examined the properties of stone, bone and wooden weapons, there were a bunch of -2s, one -1 (bone) and a -3(wood, iirc). The rules in DMG3.5 clearly state that stone and bone are -2/-2 (remember, we haven't published DS3.5 yet, bear with us on that one, ok?). They have nothing to say about wooden swords (and quite rightly, I would say. I would houserule wooden swords to be -2/-2 and deal non-lethal damage only). Also, weapons now have hardness and hp that matter. This makes life harder for PCs and doesn't really affect combat NPCs much (they're around for one fight...). So, we've dropped the wooden entry, no big loss, added hardness and hp, to the detriment of PCs and made bone weapons worse. Everyone is Psionic In DS2, all PCs were wild talents, and 10% of NPCs were. DS2 also did not have the feat concept at all. In DS3.5, the Hidden Talent feat is available to everyone and anyone to purchase. NPCs of any level or class (even commoner) have at least one feat slot, fill it with Hidden Talent, now, whatever percentage of NPCs you want are psionic, I would lean towards 100% myself. Regardless, the percentage of people with psionic powers is and always has been up to the DM. In DS3.5 PCs no longer get something for free. Athas is a tough world, and if they're not willing to give up something to be psionic, they shouldn't get anything at all. HOWEVER, if you must, give everyone an extra feat slot to put Hidden Talent in. One feat isn't going to mess with game balance too much, but it will mess with it just enough so that it's not feasable to do in an offical product. You can see the sense in that, right? Pumped-up Ability Scores In DS2 characters got some seriously pumped up ability scores. In DS3.5, they don't. So, for the same difficulty of encounter, PCs just got shafted. Again, Athas is now harder for our poor PCs. So, out of four complaints, one has stayed the same between versions, and three have taken away advantages given to PCs, how is this not fitting with athasian flavor? Not to mention, it only takes the most minor of house rules to make every PC psionic for free if that is what you wish (furthermore, don't quote me on this, I don't have the rules in front of me, but I believe there's a sidebar in DS3 that says to give this to characters). The way I see it, players should be even more anxious when playing the new version. Please, have I misunderstood something? Roger.
#43 sithis May 20, 2005 23:40:02	Ok, so a 3rd level character has 2,700 Cp to play with, if you're following the rules in the DMG3.5 (pg. 199) then not more than 1/4 of that - 675 Cp - is going to get spent on any one item. The 1/4 thing isn't actually a rule, it's an optional suggestion for GMs that wish to limit purchases. While I do wish to limit wealth, I personally (in general) find it weirdly constricting for lower level characters (there are only so many miscellaneous non-weapon non-armor trinkets they can buy). In 2e a metal weapon was the same as buying a +2 on the cheap, and that hasn't changed at all. Remember, the rules for inferior materials got harder: Bone is now -2/-2, stone is now -2/-2 and on top of that, weapons now have hardness and hit points. A steel longsword has a whopping 5 hp; bone and stone ones have even less!! I fail to understand how making it harder for PC's to keep their weapons is not in keeping with Athas' flavor. I did not know that the rules had changed. For metal-based weapons the price is now definitely worth it (it was before as well). This just enhancing the problems of the high-quality (stat-wise) non-metal weapons. You don't get much better than a Longsword and with the Macahuitl you pretty much only lose out on hardness, which then requires sundering to be a standard part of battle. Even a small tweak to make the Athas only weapons slightly subomptimal would fix this problem. Again, Athas is now harder for PCs. When every NPC has the Hidden Talent feat (XPH, pg. 67), they are at a distinct disadvantage when they don't take it as well. That assumes that Hidden Talent is better than any other first level feat. It's good, but given its limited use I somewhat doubt that. But, as is proper for Athasian flavor, you don't get anything for free, you have to pay for it - in this case, a precious feat slot. I'm not certain how that's 'brushing aside flavor for balance', if anything that's enforcing Athasian flavor. Athasian flavor is that PCs are psionic. Hidden Talent is not an optimal feat and thus many won't take it. No, your complaint about material being meaningless is null and void because your other complaint about being able to absorb the cost was also true in 2e. In DS2E you start at 3rd level but you only get around 3x starting money. Initial Character Funds Warrior: 5d4 x 30 cp Wizard: (1d4 + 1)x30cp Rogue: 2d6 x 30 cp Priest: 3d6 x 30 cp Psionicist: 3d4 x 30 cp See my posts below for how it has always been the case that players will purchase metal weapons in preference to non-metal weapons. Not when they're statistically equal. Sundering should exist in Dark Sun, but only when appropriate. Not all monsters sunder items and even many humanoid attackers won't. A correction other than a concentrated GM strategy needs to exist. DS2 set the price at 100x, DS3 keeps it there and you are arguing that we need more DS2 'flavor', when, in reality, we haven't changed a single thing. More money. Statistically equal non-metal options. Those right there pretty much turn the system upside down. Magic Items Magic items in 2ed and DS2 were equal, DS was touted as magic poor, not item poor. Psionic items were always intended to take the place of arcane items. Take one look at the DS2 treasure tables and you will see that is true. True. I have been shown to be in error as far as the official tables dictate. Weapon Materials In DS2, there was a nice little chart that examined the properties of stone, bone and wooden weapons, there were a bunch of -2s, one -1 (bone) and a -3(wood, iirc). The rules in DMG3.5 clearly state that stone and bone are -2/-2 (remember, we haven't published DS3.5 yet, bear with us on that one, ok?). They have nothing to say about wooden swords (and quite rightly, I would say. I would houserule wooden swords to be -2/-2 and deal non-lethal damage only). Also, weapons now have hardness and hp that matter. This makes life harder for PCs and doesn't really affect combat NPCs much (they're around for one fight...). So, we've dropped the wooden entry, no big loss, added hardness and hp, to the detriment of PCs and made bone weapons worse. The high-quality non-metal items cause the largest problem. Inferior materials are harsh when they have an active penalty. When they don't (Athasian weapons) it relies on GM fiat for effect. At least with when there are trade-offs a PC may choose to go for the metal-type weapon. I would actuallly personally suggest the penalty stay at -1/-1. (Say because while Athas is metal-poor, it is more advanced than cave men.) The goal I would have is making materials a trade-off. Items with no metal at all generally have poorer stats (staff, club, sling) but would receive no penalty while the superior weapons (maces, swords, arrows for damage only) would suffer from substandard materials. Then there is a real choice as to whether to go with the superior stats or go with the weapon without penalties. Costs are just fine, I'm just going to keep my players 2 levels below the curve (and it sounds like there's really nothing that can officially be done about that). Everyone is Psionic In DS3.5 PCs no longer get something for free. Athas is a tough world, and if they're not willing to give up something to be psionic, they shouldn't get anything at all. Unless paired with some other balance, I agree. However the problem will probably end up being that once players play once (and everyone goes for the neat psychic talent) they'll realize that manifesting a power twice a day at manifester level 1 isn't actually all that useful and go for less interesting but more powerful feats like Point Blank Shot. HOWEVER, if you must, give everyone an extra feat slot to put Hidden Talent in. One feat isn't going to mess with game balance too much, but it will mess with it just enough so that it's not feasable to do in an offical product. You can see the sense in that, right? I'm not sure I really agree it's enough, but I can understand the hesitation. Should weaponry be a little less kind I would think it acceptable (small tweaks in either way and of limited scope). Alternatively, all races being ECL +1 would allow for both a free feat and more unique (in meaningful ways) races. This sort of thing has enough balance issues that I would really appreciate some sort of playtested optional rules (if it was deemed generally desired). Pumped-up Ability Scores In DS2 characters got some seriously pumped up ability scores. In DS3.5, they don't. So, for the same difficulty of encounter, PCs just got shafted. Again, Athas is now harder for our poor PCs. High stats are purely in the DM's purview. The races could use some differentiation from their normal versions (primarily in more extreme statistics). Not one of my biggest worries though. The biggest concern is that the normal races will get overshadowed by the DS specific races because they're so close to normal.
#44 star_gazer_02 May 21, 2005 1:46:50	I did not know that the rules had changed. For metal-based weapons the price is now definitely worth it (it was before as well). This (is) just enhancing the problems of the high-quality (stat-wise) non-metal weapons. You don't get much better than a Longsword and with the Macahuitl you pretty much only lose out on hardness, which then requires sundering to be a standard part of battle. Even a small tweak to make the Athas only weapons slightly subomptimal would fix this problem. Ahh, I understand now. Phew. How to explain this though? This was something that I wrestled with for a long time, until I figured out on my own why things really had to be this way. Gods, I really hope I can explain this well, because it's a really spiffy idea and I don't want to turn you off to it right off the bat... sooo... here goes: Concept A: Athasians use savage weapons to kill and maim their foes in horrible ways. Concept B: People in the Best-Forgotten Realms prance about on their silly ponies and give each other cute little slices with delicate, precise weapons. Problem: How to get people used to B to use A by choice? Easy Answer: Make metal expensive and this will 'force' people to use the spiffy new weapons the DS team has thought up. Unfortunately, this does not take into account the fact that players will always have more money than they know what to do with, hence they have absolutely no reason to go with the savage, but inferior, weapons. Grrr, this is a real problem. But that's ok, because we aren't done yet, read on... The only real solution is to take away the reason people would want to use those silly steel weapons. Fortunately, the answer is right at hand. Athasians are nothing if not cunning, deadly and smart. They have had no metal to speak of in the entire history of their world. Even in the Green Age metal weapons were more numerous only because people had more leisure time: the environment wasn't actively out to get them. Over the course of thousands of years, Athasians have developed weapons that are just as effective as those of their bretheren on other worlds, just weaker when it comes to hardness and hit points of the weapons themselves. The same goes for their armor. Sure, none of it is quite as sturdy as iron and steel armor, but it doesn't rust either. Now, you may not particularly like this idea, and I'll be the first to admit, it seems a bit tough to swallow - at first. First you need to realise that this is entirely plausable, these are the same people who invented Dragons, found the Elements when there were no gods to turn to and have survived several thousand years in a climate so harsh as to make one wonder why they don't just give up and end it all by walking naked into a sandstorm. That's the fluff. Here's the metagaming reason: Athas is metal poor, this is a design decision that we really have no choice over, and wouldn't change even if we could, it's part of Athas' ... charm. Any weapons made of materials other than metal are inferior, almost by definition - to say otherwise defies common sense and threatens to break the suspension of disbelief that is so necessary to Athas. So, the real problem is how to get people to use weapons made of material they have been brought up to believe as sub-optimal by preference? There really is only one way: Make them equal, for entirely different reasons, but equal nontheless. The issue of bone and stone and steel should only be a problem if one of your players insists that his character uses a weapon from the PHB. If he does, then he will forever be -2/-2 behind all of his buddies. Once he has some ceramic in his pocket, he can quite easily buy himself a steel longsword, but by then he will [hopefully] have gotten used to his macahuitl. The difference between a +2 longsword and a +2 macahuitl is nothing - and everything. Statistically, the differences are almost meaningless: the longsword is 2 lbs. heavier, has 10 hardness, 5 hp and the macahuitl has 8 hardness, 3hp. The longsword also costs 1,500 Cp, specifically to keep it out of the hands of low-level characters. But the differences go far beyond statistics: one is a precise weapon used by knights to pierce platemail and slash through heavy chainmail, the other is more akin to a saw and does damage by being drawn against the skin, opening ragged, bleeding wounds that are hard to heal. The whole point is to encourage use of weapons other than longsword/shortsword/2H-sword. By and large, it succeeds, because by the time player's characters can afford the shiny steel weapons that they are used to in other worlds, they have become attached to their puchiks, lotulis and gythka. This is the only way it can work, because the concepts embodied in the longsword and platemail are just to simple to do away with realistically. Does that make more sense?
#45 the_slayer_of_heroes May 23, 2005 10:17:42	Was browsing through my books and came up with an interesting fix: start the party at 2nd level. The LA'd races could be started at 0th (apprentice) level of their class. This would keep the party at second level, therefor giving them less starting funds to buy equipment with. apprentice levels appear in a ruling about being multiclassed at first level in the 3.0 DMG. not sure if this made it's way into 3rd edition, as i haven't been able to locate the multiclassing rules yet (they're not where they used to be).... this would solve the wealth issue and the issue of the PC's having enough funds to buy better equipment with.
#46 zombiegleemax May 23, 2005 13:13:01	After reading philosophical books on metaphysics, I never really liked Dark Sun's 'Everyone's pscionic' rule. It seemed really lame. However, in a world devoid of magic, I can see pscionists replaceing the traditional sorcerer/seer/witch. If you don't like the rule changes, change them to how you want in your game. If you're players don't like it, well, get new players or compromise. No rule should ever be considered canon.
#47 lordfrye May 23, 2005 13:48:36	Even if the 2ED DS materials had the same magic item charts as normal 2ED, Dark Sun characters did end up with much less loot. It is a by-product of character trees. Each time a character leveled, another character leveled. They didn't get more loot for leveling, they just got a level. Now the character tree concept seems to have been abandoned even by the diehard Dark Sun fans, but I find it great for the setting. Killing PC has never been more worry free. The loot would be about 1/2 of a normal campaign, but I give much less than the DMG. My goal is for the characters to have about DMG wealth for their entire tree (I run 3 characters on a tree). Of course, this doesn't help the argument of the thread, about the conversion not living up the the flavor of the setting, and why. But it does support the argument that DS characters had less loot.
#48 sithis May 23, 2005 15:03:42	start the party at 2nd level. The LA'd races could be started at 0th (apprentice) level of their class. The Thri-kreen and Half-Giant have both 2 racial hit dice and level adjustment +1, so they already start without a class at 3rd level. They can't really go any lower.
#49 terminus_vortexa May 23, 2005 15:06:46	When calculating starting level, LA and racial HD don't stack. Only add in Level Adjustment.
#50 sithis May 23, 2005 15:08:06	After reading philosophical books on metaphysics, I never really liked Dark Sun's 'Everyone's pscionic' rule. It seemed really lame. Like it or not, it was a part of 2nd Edition Dark Sun, thus 3rd Edition is a departure from the setting's core. If you don't like the rule changes, change them to how you want in your game. Houseruling should not be required to put a conversion in line with its source.
#51 sithis May 23, 2005 15:12:42	Wen calculating starting level, LA and racial HD don't stack. Only add in Level Adjustment. Um, no? "Level Adjustment +1: Half-giants are more powerful than the other races of the Tablelands and gain levels accordingly. A half-giant is a two Hit Die monster and may be played without class levels as the equivalent of a third level character." I know I'd sure love to give up a single level for two levels of BAB, saves, HP, and skills IN ADDITION to amazing stats, but that isn't balanced.
#52 Sysane May 23, 2005 15:18:49	Actually, your suppose to add the races LA and racial hit die together to get the character's ECL (Effective Character Level).
#53 terminus_vortexa May 23, 2005 15:24:12	Therin lies the problem. ExPsiHB races vs. Athas.org races. If you examine the ones in the ExPsiHb, you see that their level adjustment is on par with the abilities gained, and usually is equal to any racial HD, plus or minus 1. The Athas.org Half-Giant is much,much more powerful that a standard ExPsiHb half giant, and the Athas.org half giant should have a much higher level adjustment. If I recall correctly, the whole point of adding Level Adjustment into 3.5E D&D was to make character creation calculations simpler, without having to add up racial HD and assess what abilities are worth in terms of level. To sum it up, if you're using any race from a hardcover, the level adjustment is all you need to add in. I'm not so sure about the Athas.org ones. They are faced with a difficult set of decisions, because in order for them to use any race that is not considered OGL, they have to alter it considerably in order to use it in their official material. And thus, things like a half-giant, size L, with a LA of only +1 arises. Don't get me wrong, their Half-Giant is way better, but they need to assess that LA issue a little more carefully (I think the low LA is a throwback to the 3E version, before the revision). Anyone on the Monster Bureau care to clarify this for me?
#54 terminus_vortexa May 23, 2005 15:26:10	OOps, Sysane posted before I finished typing.... I think my question's answered. Hey, waitaminit.... Does this mean you could forgo the monster levels, and then use the straight level-adjustment ? That would make things a little cooler. I've never been a fan of racial HD for PCs. I'd rather have character levels.
#55 sithis May 23, 2005 15:52:42	To sum it up, if you're using any race from a hardcover, the level adjustment is all you need to add in. "Level Adjustment and Effective Character Level: To determine the effective character level (ECL) of a monster character, add its level adjustment to its racial Hit Dice and character class levels." It works that way in all the printed books. You also can't forgo the monster levels because some of the monster's abilities/stats are worked into those (otherwise it would be much worse than any normal class). I'm sure an enterprising GM could tweak a monster-race down for you, but as written you can't simply separate the LA and the HD. (If you just wanted class levels you'd have to deal with something like the XPH half-giant.)
#56 the_slayer_of_heroes May 23, 2005 18:21:55	wait, you're not using XPH Half-Giant and Thrikreen? Weren't we arguing earlier about the whole "don't change the core mechanics" issue? Now we're just being counter-intuitive.... :P Half-Giants (XPH) = no racial HD + Apprentice level in their class + LA+1 = 1st level character. Half-Giants (DS3) = 2d8 racial HD + Apprentice level + LA+1 = 3rd level character. Mul (DS3) = nor racial HD + Apprentice level + LA+1 = 1st level character. Thri-Kreen.... now, thri-kreen we have a problem with.... with the XPH+oth lvl formula, they're still starting at 4th level.... and DS3's is only slightly better, starting at 3rd level.... I'd probably go with majorly enforcing their societal drawbacks during the campaign but there still needs to be something limiting their particular monotary issue....
#57 sithis May 23, 2005 19:03:46	wait, you're not using XPH Half-Giant and Thrikreen? Weren't we arguing earlier about the whole "don't change the core mechanics" issue? Now we're just being counter-intuitive.... :P Is this in reference to me or the DS3E designers? I actually really like their version of the Half-Giant, as the 2E one was broken as all hell and the XPH one is just silly. I have nothing against balance, I'd just like that balance to match the flavor of original Dark Sun. In the DS3E incarnation Half-Giants are really tough and naturally superior soldiers, which covers things pretty well. That said, a lower starting level does solve the money issue, but it's jumping through hoops to make the current system work, when I can just say that their 3rd level characters start with 1st level money.
#58 the_slayer_of_heroes May 23, 2005 19:31:44	That is, of course, the simplest solution. Not using ECL, instead using actual Class Level, to determin starting funds. I'm kind of wondering why wizards didn't do that in the first place....
#59 Kamelion May 24, 2005 4:07:50	Now the character tree concept seems to have been abandoned even by the diehard Dark Sun fans, but I find it great for the setting. I still use it :D. And I gotta agree, it makes for a better game. Not just from the body-count angle, but more from the fact that each character comes equipped with all these neat story hooks and in-game relations, simply by virtue of his tree. Don't get me wrong, their Half-Giant is way better, but they need to assess that LA issue a little more carefully (I think the low LA is a throwback to the 3E version, before the revision). Anyone on the Monster Bureau care to clarify this for me? The half-giant seems fairly well-balanced to me. It has a 4-point imbalance on its abilities, which can be assigned across 2HD with no trouble, especially given that the HD in question are giant HD. Giant HD are not awful, but they're not the best HD. I would also say that the darkvision could be subsumed into the HD while still maintaining balance. That means that your Level Adjustment is paying for 10' reach and a +2 armour bonus. This seems balanced to me.