Unpopular opinion: let the past die. Kill it if you have to.
Dark Sun was fun, but resources spent on a DS reboot would be at the expense of something new and potentially better.
That does seem to be how things are trying to go here on DDB.
Not the way I see it. We're getting a Greyhawk reboot for core 2024, and the first supplements are Forgotten Realms books. We'll inevitably have another Eberron book, too. That's just more of the same. Radiant Citadel was basically the only new setting we've seen since 2014, and they didn't really take it anywhere.
I think one of the bigger issues with Dark Sun is the resource tracking. Equipment is fragile and weapons and armor break fairly frequently. But food and water is the bigger deal. In 5e, yes, technically you can track rations, but I’ve gotten a sense that few groups do so. And if you don’t track food and water and just assume you have enough, you’ve really taken out one of the big factors that gives the setting its feel. The concept of always being on the verge of starving is an huge part. And along with tracking food and water, you need to track encumbrance. You need to be forced to make decisions about if you should try and carry some loot back from the place you raided or water, because you can’t do both.
That kind of bookkeeping, while certainly possible, really is a drastic shift from current 5e, where it basically says you can carry whatever you need, and only worry about it in exceptional circumstances. I think that, and as others have said, banning a huge number of classes and subclasses, which leads to a complete lack of magical healing, is what makes it hard. The social issues, are way more easily fixable than the practical ones — lore changes just require some new lore, but new mechanics are very tricky.
Each setting they do has optional rules and subsystems.
They could easily add a variant encumberance and tracking subsystem to such a campaign setting.
Unpopular opinion: let the past die. Kill it if you have to.
Dark Sun was fun, but resources spent on a DS reboot would be at the expense of something new and potentially better.
First, the point of that line was is that the speaker was wrong.
Second, the catch is, something new might have fans. Something old will have fans. It's always a gamble if a new setting will resonate with people. AND it just adds one more setting that needs to be updated or revisited in future editions.
Not the way I see it. We're getting a Greyhawk reboot for core 2024, and the first supplements are Forgotten Realms books. We'll inevitably have another Eberron book, too. That's just more of the same. Radiant Citadel was basically the only new setting we've seen since 2014, and they didn't really take it anywhere.
Well, they published some MtG conversions (Ravnica, Theros, Strixhaven), but D&D hasn't been big on setting creation since they had a burst in AD&D 2e era, which was too many for TSR to support effectively and probably contributed to them going bankrupt. 3e basically only had one new setting (Eberron), 4e officially had zero new settings but effectively had one (Nentir Vale/Nerath).
The biggest setting they've dropped by the wayside (likely due to redundancy) is Mystara.
I think one of the bigger issues with Dark Sun is the resource tracking. Equipment is fragile and weapons and armor break fairly frequently. But food and water is the bigger deal. In 5e, yes, technically you can track rations, but I’ve gotten a sense that few groups do so. And if you don’t track food and water and just assume you have enough, you’ve really taken out one of the big factors that gives the setting its feel. The concept of always being on the verge of starving is an huge part. And along with tracking food and water, you need to track encumbrance. You need to be forced to make decisions about if you should try and carry some loot back from the place you raided or water, because you can’t do both.
That kind of bookkeeping, while certainly possible, really is a drastic shift from current 5e, where it basically says you can carry whatever you need, and only worry about it in exceptional circumstances. I think that, and as others have said, banning a huge number of classes and subclasses, which leads to a complete lack of magical healing, is what makes it hard. The social issues, are way more easily fixable than the practical ones — lore changes just require some new lore, but new mechanics are very tricky.
Each setting they do has optional rules and subsystems.
They could easily add a variant encumberance and tracking subsystem to such a campaign setting.
Unpopular opinion: let the past die. Kill it if you have to.
Dark Sun was fun, but resources spent on a DS reboot would be at the expense of something new and potentially better.
First, the point of that line was is that the speaker was wrong.
Second, the catch is, something new might have fans. Something old will have fans. It's always a gamble if a new setting will resonate with people. AND it just adds one more setting that needs to be updated or revisited in future editions.
But with the introduction of Origin Feats, it's easy to have someone in the party have Goodberry or Create/Destroy Water with one freebie cast per day. So you really have to prune at core game options to make the survival elements significant to the party, and from what we've seen that's not something they're looking to make a part of their core books. Heck, they specifically made a section in Dragonlance that basically said not to worry about handwaving having party members from all the races that aren't a part of the setting.
Unpopular opinion: let the past die. Kill it if you have to.
Dark Sun was fun, but resources spent on a DS reboot would be at the expense of something new and potentially better.
I sorta share this sentiment.
But I am less interested in the kinds of "generic, Eurocentric, medieval aesthetic, allow everything in the game into it" sorts of settings. I find the common ideas about a lot of 5e to be misinformed or informed by localized, limited experience, and many of the things have either a videogame-inspired sense of "exploit the rules" or lack any real serious creativity.
A good example of this is the whole idea that the classes and species are what define the game. They aren't. If they did, we wouldn't keep getting new ones.
Another is the advice I see far too often of "try a different game for that", especially if someone is trying to do something that might "require a lot of work" or "there's something that does it better already" without ever realizing that "better" is a subjective concept without something specific to support that beyond "who likes it and how well did it sell".
Things like "It is harder to kill a PC is 5e than 1e. The death saves thing makes them immortal." do little more than tell me that the speaker never played 1e, where you would just lie there and bleed out for 10 minutes in-game time. THe obsession with "making every encounter balanced" and "six encounters per day".
In my view, they are using D&D to about one twelfth of its full potential, and a large part of that falls to the success principle -- 5e is stunningly successful. So, keep giving them more of the same. However, they need to mix it up a little, give it a boost in the creativity department.
Show them how it is done, really. I mean, folks talk about Tucker's Kobolds like it was a revelation -- and all it is really is a lesson into how to use monsters effectively repacked. Something that was widely known before 2e even came out.
Would it be as popular as Forgotten Realms? I really don't think so. Forgotten Realms is popular with about a fifth, stretching it to the max, of the player base. Because it was used as the setting of design in 2014, people often feel as if it is the "default" setting for 5e, and when you've never played any others, you wouldn't know that it isn't, and would discount and forget the other examples. The introduction of Greyhawk will shake hat up a bit, but the release of the two books for FR next year will have an impact.
So, I would like to see something extremely different. Something that is not just your basic blah blah fantasy set in a period sometime prior to the 1500's in a fake version of europe. Something that highlights the importance of exploration over other elements, as well, would be nice, but that might be stretching it; I'm not certain folks know what exploration is, let alone how to run a game around it -- knowing that most folks haven't ever read the DMg and analyzed it the way they have the PHB puts a sour taste in my mouth.
I see things like Humblewood and I get some hope in me -- and then I watch folks who enjoy humblewood basically chased off the mainline forums and groups, because to a lot of folks it isn't D&D. There's not even dedicated forums here for it, and in my opinion there should be. There should be for each of the worlds that are active and current.
However I am biased and old, so it ain't like anyone's gonna care what I think, lol. Out of the target demographic...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000 Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Not the way I see it. We're getting a Greyhawk reboot for core 2024, and the first supplements are Forgotten Realms books. We'll inevitably have another Eberron book, too. That's just more of the same. Radiant Citadel was basically the only new setting we've seen since 2014, and they didn't really take it anywhere.
Well, they published some MtG conversions (Ravnica, Theros, Strixhaven), but D&D hasn't been big on setting creation since they had a burst in AD&D 2e era, which was too many for TSR to support effectively and probably contributed to them going bankrupt. 3e basically only had one new setting (Eberron), 4e officially had zero new settings but effectively had one (Nentir Vale/Nerath).
The biggest setting they've dropped by the wayside (likely due to redundancy) is Mystara.
They dropped everything but AD&D and on -- 0e and B/X/BECMI were killed as soon as they secured the rights from Arneson.
The entire Basic line was killed and laid dead the moment Hasbro bought Wizards. They sorta go out of their way to avoid it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000 Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
First, porting Dark Sun to 5e is fairly easy and straightforward, and could be done without the "problematic" aspects by simply shifting a few elements around.
The problematic aspects would be hard to remove without removing the Sorcerer Kings and Muls and more.
The real issue with Athas isn't the "problematic" or "limited" stuff -- it is that over the last decade, the majority of new folks have come to the game thinking and believing that there is only one D&D word, and then a few minor little things that are only different in flavor, and flavor is free, and besides, they are just the same thing because you can use all the species and classes. Also, that 5e is a combat game, only good for a narrow range of genre.
...
But most of them don't know any better and follow the lead of influencers who don't know any better, and so you end up with people who have no clue that D&D has done Space Fantasy, Gothic Gaslamp (1890's) Fantasy, Wild West Fantasy, low magic fantasy (Hyborian Age, specifically), and a few dozen more (many with completely original classes and species that are unique to those worlds and settings).
Well... 5e has had Planescape and Spelljammer and Eberron and Dragonlance and the Forgotten Realms and Theros and Ravnica and Exandria and Ravenloft. More settings than any since 2e. I don't think many new players are as narrow minded in the types of game that can be played with 5e.
The thing about settings in D&D is that they mostly exist as the location where you put the adventure, so the real question for any setting is "what adventure type does this enable that isn't convenient in another setting, and is that an adventure type people want to run/play". Dark Sun is essentially for post-apocalyptic wasteland stories (e.g. Mad Max), which isn't an entirely dead genre, but isn't terribly alive either.
Frankly, I think the biggest adventure type hole in the FR is that you can't really run a Lord of the Rings type campaign, because there just isn't a space for a vast Evil Empire. You can run a lesser evil empire, but something like Thay just lacks the credibility of Mordor.
I think one of the bigger issues with Dark Sun is the resource tracking. Equipment is fragile and weapons and armor break fairly frequently. But food and water is the bigger deal. In 5e, yes, technically you can track rations, but I’ve gotten a sense that few groups do so. And if you don’t track food and water and just assume you have enough, you’ve really taken out one of the big factors that gives the setting its feel. The concept of always being on the verge of starving is an huge part. And along with tracking food and water, you need to track encumbrance. You need to be forced to make decisions about if you should try and carry some loot back from the place you raided or water, because you can’t do both.
That kind of bookkeeping, while certainly possible, really is a drastic shift from current 5e, where it basically says you can carry whatever you need, and only worry about it in exceptional circumstances. I think that, and as others have said, banning a huge number of classes and subclasses, which leads to a complete lack of magical healing, is what makes it hard. The social issues, are way more easily fixable than the practical ones — lore changes just require some new lore, but new mechanics are very tricky.
Each setting they do has optional rules and subsystems.
They could easily add a variant encumberance and tracking subsystem to such a campaign setting.
It wouldn’t be an added variant. There’s already rules for carrying capacities and how much things weigh, just no one uses it, because, well, it’s not very fun and people aren’t into the bookkeeping. Honestly, most of us never were, I don’t think. I know I never tracked encumbrance and I’ve been playing since the early 80’s. (Obviously, this is anecdotal and it’s very possible I’m in the minority here.)
What they’d need for a variant is a psionic system that’s more robust than 3 subclasses, but the various attempts they’ve made at that over the past few years haven’t gotten past the UA phase.
What they’d need for a variant is a psionic system that’s more robust than 3 subclasses, but the various attempts they’ve made at that over the past few years haven’t gotten past the UA phase.
Well, maybe. It depends a lot on how core you think psi is to the setting, you can preserve a lot of the themes of Dark Sun without having psi at all.
What they’d need for a variant is a psionic system that’s more robust than 3 subclasses, but the various attempts they’ve made at that over the past few years haven’t gotten past the UA phase.
Well, maybe. It depends a lot on how core you think psi is to the setting, you can preserve a lot of the themes of Dark Sun without having psi at all.
Yeah, thematically speaking, Dark Sun could work without psi. Except a bunch of ornery fans will hate WotC for not making a fully-functional gamewide psi system (oh wait, they already hate that).
To make it (mechanically) work with "standard 5e" or "standard 5.24e":
Redefine the environmental destruction as coming from whatever-necromantic-bullshit the sorcerer kings used to become immortal / stay alive / keep power, rather than "arcane magic."
Tune up the CRs at any level by some number, and make some of the resources (magic items etc) more scarce.
Tier 1 can be gritty survival, Tier 2 can be sword-and-sorcery young-conan stuff, Tier 3 can be elite desert shadowrun stuff...and Tier 4 can be "overthrowing the sorcerer kings." All of which work great with a fantasy mad max theme.
Not the way I see it. We're getting a Greyhawk reboot for core 2024, and the first supplements are Forgotten Realms books. We'll inevitably have another Eberron book, too. That's just more of the same. Radiant Citadel was basically the only new setting we've seen since 2014, and they didn't really take it anywhere.
Well, they published some MtG conversions (Ravnica, Theros, Strixhaven), but D&D hasn't been big on setting creation since they had a burst in AD&D 2e era, which was too many for TSR to support effectively and probably contributed to them going bankrupt. 3e basically only had one new setting (Eberron), 4e officially had zero new settings but effectively had one (Nentir Vale/Nerath).
The biggest setting they've dropped by the wayside (likely due to redundancy) is Mystara.
It was absolutely a contributing factor in TSR's demise: they created new settings that they didn't support, which caused gamers to stop buying new settings on the belief that they wouldn't be supported, so the new settings were generally losing money. It's kind of like Netflix's approach to new shows.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The best elevator pitch for Dark Sun I've ever heard was: "It's D&D, but in a post-apocalyptic desert where nobody has swords or water." It could be a great setting as long as we're not too tired to making it the same as it was in the past.
I don't even think the problem is the gross lore stuff that hasn't aged well. The lore should be updated/rebooted; we know the purists are going to complain but they're going to complain no matter what. I'm curious how much of a stink the creative teams behind the old Dark Sun setting material and novels might raise over changes to their precious.
The mechanics are the major challenge, with everything that y'all have identified about psionics, limiting arcane and divine magic, encumbrance, supply rations, etc. But that's not an insurmountable hill.
But the best we can do for now is to keep expressing interest in Dark Sun any time WotC puts out aa survey.
Tune up the CRs at any level by some number, and make some of the resources (magic items etc) more scarce.
Dark Sun is a prime candidate for Gritty Realism or some variant (taking a long rest requires some special/limited resource; defilers can long rest easily by defiling the land...).
Or there's just that it's not special anymore. Broken and edgy worlds are an oversaturated genre these days, and I think Warhammer Fantasy has taken up a lot of the niche now in TTRPG space. And, again part of it is the simple fact that these days D&D is going for mass market appeal. They want a product that doesn't toss up big red flags when teenagers say they want it and their parents look up reviews on it, and as I previously said, Dark Sun is very much in M/R content territory and therefore not within their main focus.
It's hard to reconcile "this thing was so awesome" with "this thing is trauma-inducing." I'd go so far as to say those two statements are mutually exclusive.
If it ever gets revamped for 5E (or a future edition) it will still be plenty awesome without the gross, toxic bits.
Well, being generic and derivative has never stopped something turning into a D&D setting. I think the bigger problem is that it's not a particularly popular genre right now; if D&D wants to break out of its current High Fantasy default, into something it hasn't already tried (Horror is covered by Ravenloft, Steampunk is more or less covered by Eberron, Epic Fantasy is more a style of play than a setting), I suspect Urban Fantasy has a lot more fans than Post-Apocalyptic Fantasy.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You are right. Let's kill the past. That means D&D is no longer. Or are you admitting that what this game is NOT D&D?
What?
That does seem to be how things are trying to go here on DDB.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
Not the way I see it. We're getting a Greyhawk reboot for core 2024, and the first supplements are Forgotten Realms books. We'll inevitably have another Eberron book, too. That's just more of the same. Radiant Citadel was basically the only new setting we've seen since 2014, and they didn't really take it anywhere.
Each setting they do has optional rules and subsystems.
They could easily add a variant encumberance and tracking subsystem to such a campaign setting.
First, the point of that line was is that the speaker was wrong.
Second, the catch is, something new might have fans. Something old will have fans. It's always a gamble if a new setting will resonate with people.
AND it just adds one more setting that needs to be updated or revisited in future editions.
Well, they published some MtG conversions (Ravnica, Theros, Strixhaven), but D&D hasn't been big on setting creation since they had a burst in AD&D 2e era, which was too many for TSR to support effectively and probably contributed to them going bankrupt. 3e basically only had one new setting (Eberron), 4e officially had zero new settings but effectively had one (Nentir Vale/Nerath).
The biggest setting they've dropped by the wayside (likely due to redundancy) is Mystara.
But with the introduction of Origin Feats, it's easy to have someone in the party have Goodberry or Create/Destroy Water with one freebie cast per day. So you really have to prune at core game options to make the survival elements significant to the party, and from what we've seen that's not something they're looking to make a part of their core books. Heck, they specifically made a section in Dragonlance that basically said not to worry about handwaving having party members from all the races that aren't a part of the setting.
I sorta share this sentiment.
But I am less interested in the kinds of "generic, Eurocentric, medieval aesthetic, allow everything in the game into it" sorts of settings. I find the common ideas about a lot of 5e to be misinformed or informed by localized, limited experience, and many of the things have either a videogame-inspired sense of "exploit the rules" or lack any real serious creativity.
A good example of this is the whole idea that the classes and species are what define the game. They aren't. If they did, we wouldn't keep getting new ones.
Another is the advice I see far too often of "try a different game for that", especially if someone is trying to do something that might "require a lot of work" or "there's something that does it better already" without ever realizing that "better" is a subjective concept without something specific to support that beyond "who likes it and how well did it sell".
Things like "It is harder to kill a PC is 5e than 1e. The death saves thing makes them immortal." do little more than tell me that the speaker never played 1e, where you would just lie there and bleed out for 10 minutes in-game time. THe obsession with "making every encounter balanced" and "six encounters per day".
In my view, they are using D&D to about one twelfth of its full potential, and a large part of that falls to the success principle -- 5e is stunningly successful. So, keep giving them more of the same. However, they need to mix it up a little, give it a boost in the creativity department.
Show them how it is done, really. I mean, folks talk about Tucker's Kobolds like it was a revelation -- and all it is really is a lesson into how to use monsters effectively repacked. Something that was widely known before 2e even came out.
Would it be as popular as Forgotten Realms? I really don't think so. Forgotten Realms is popular with about a fifth, stretching it to the max, of the player base. Because it was used as the setting of design in 2014, people often feel as if it is the "default" setting for 5e, and when you've never played any others, you wouldn't know that it isn't, and would discount and forget the other examples. The introduction of Greyhawk will shake hat up a bit, but the release of the two books for FR next year will have an impact.
So, I would like to see something extremely different. Something that is not just your basic blah blah fantasy set in a period sometime prior to the 1500's in a fake version of europe. Something that highlights the importance of exploration over other elements, as well, would be nice, but that might be stretching it; I'm not certain folks know what exploration is, let alone how to run a game around it -- knowing that most folks haven't ever read the DMg and analyzed it the way they have the PHB puts a sour taste in my mouth.
I see things like Humblewood and I get some hope in me -- and then I watch folks who enjoy humblewood basically chased off the mainline forums and groups, because to a lot of folks it isn't D&D. There's not even dedicated forums here for it, and in my opinion there should be. There should be for each of the worlds that are active and current.
However I am biased and old, so it ain't like anyone's gonna care what I think, lol. Out of the target demographic...
Only a DM since 1980 (3000 Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde.com
.-=] Lore Book | Ruleset | PC Creation [=-.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
They dropped everything but AD&D and on -- 0e and B/X/BECMI were killed as soon as they secured the rights from Arneson.
The entire Basic line was killed and laid dead the moment Hasbro bought Wizards. They sorta go out of their way to avoid it.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000 Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde.com
.-=] Lore Book | Ruleset | PC Creation [=-.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
The problematic aspects would be hard to remove without removing the Sorcerer Kings and Muls and more.
Well... 5e has had Planescape and Spelljammer and Eberron and Dragonlance and the Forgotten Realms and Theros and Ravnica and Exandria and Ravenloft. More settings than any since 2e.
I don't think many new players are as narrow minded in the types of game that can be played with 5e.
The thing about settings in D&D is that they mostly exist as the location where you put the adventure, so the real question for any setting is "what adventure type does this enable that isn't convenient in another setting, and is that an adventure type people want to run/play". Dark Sun is essentially for post-apocalyptic wasteland stories (e.g. Mad Max), which isn't an entirely dead genre, but isn't terribly alive either.
Frankly, I think the biggest adventure type hole in the FR is that you can't really run a Lord of the Rings type campaign, because there just isn't a space for a vast Evil Empire. You can run a lesser evil empire, but something like Thay just lacks the credibility of Mordor.
It wouldn’t be an added variant. There’s already rules for carrying capacities and how much things weigh, just no one uses it, because, well, it’s not very fun and people aren’t into the bookkeeping. Honestly, most of us never were, I don’t think. I know I never tracked encumbrance and I’ve been playing since the early 80’s. (Obviously, this is anecdotal and it’s very possible I’m in the minority here.)
What they’d need for a variant is a psionic system that’s more robust than 3 subclasses, but the various attempts they’ve made at that over the past few years haven’t gotten past the UA phase.
Well, maybe. It depends a lot on how core you think psi is to the setting, you can preserve a lot of the themes of Dark Sun without having psi at all.
Yeah, thematically speaking, Dark Sun could work without psi. Except a bunch of ornery fans will hate WotC for not making a fully-functional gamewide psi system (oh wait, they already hate that).
To make it (mechanically) work with "standard 5e" or "standard 5.24e":
Tier 1 can be gritty survival, Tier 2 can be sword-and-sorcery young-conan stuff, Tier 3 can be elite desert shadowrun stuff...and Tier 4 can be "overthrowing the sorcerer kings." All of which work great with a fantasy mad max theme.
It was absolutely a contributing factor in TSR's demise: they created new settings that they didn't support, which caused gamers to stop buying new settings on the belief that they wouldn't be supported, so the new settings were generally losing money. It's kind of like Netflix's approach to new shows.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The best elevator pitch for Dark Sun I've ever heard was: "It's D&D, but in a post-apocalyptic desert where nobody has swords or water." It could be a great setting as long as we're not too tired to making it the same as it was in the past.
I don't even think the problem is the gross lore stuff that hasn't aged well. The lore should be updated/rebooted; we know the purists are going to complain but they're going to complain no matter what. I'm curious how much of a stink the creative teams behind the old Dark Sun setting material and novels might raise over changes to their precious.
The mechanics are the major challenge, with everything that y'all have identified about psionics, limiting arcane and divine magic, encumbrance, supply rations, etc. But that's not an insurmountable hill.
But the best we can do for now is to keep expressing interest in Dark Sun any time WotC puts out aa survey.
Dark Sun is a prime candidate for Gritty Realism or some variant (taking a long rest requires some special/limited resource; defilers can long rest easily by defiling the land...).
Or there's just that it's not special anymore. Broken and edgy worlds are an oversaturated genre these days, and I think Warhammer Fantasy has taken up a lot of the niche now in TTRPG space. And, again part of it is the simple fact that these days D&D is going for mass market appeal. They want a product that doesn't toss up big red flags when teenagers say they want it and their parents look up reviews on it, and as I previously said, Dark Sun is very much in M/R content territory and therefore not within their main focus.
It's hard to reconcile "this thing was so awesome" with "this thing is trauma-inducing." I'd go so far as to say those two statements are mutually exclusive.
If it ever gets revamped for 5E (or a future edition) it will still be plenty awesome without the gross, toxic bits.
Well, being generic and derivative has never stopped something turning into a D&D setting. I think the bigger problem is that it's not a particularly popular genre right now; if D&D wants to break out of its current High Fantasy default, into something it hasn't already tried (Horror is covered by Ravenloft, Steampunk is more or less covered by Eberron, Epic Fantasy is more a style of play than a setting), I suspect Urban Fantasy has a lot more fans than Post-Apocalyptic Fantasy.