I would not mind a Tactical Combat UA, but I wasn't bothered by the idea that people don't like the Flanking rules. I was bothered by someone telling me to stop using the rule because it is hurting my game. No one should be telling anyone how to play at their table. It is just plain rude. If you want to talk about the pros and cons of a rule or possible fixes you might want to see that is great. Just don't tell some one that if they are using a rule that you don't like that they should feel bad or that they are breaking their game or that it is wrong. That is crossing a line.
I will say no more on the subject, but had to get that off my chest.
As far as alternate flanking rules, I like the idea of reverse cover. A flat +2 to hit for being in a tactically advantageous position I think is reasonable. If you really wanted to get deep into it without having to many modifiers to track, it could work just like Advantage/Disadvantage. You can't gain more than one +2 bonus from positioning and there could be things that nullify it as well such as being in difficult terrain. This would allow people that want a more tactical style of combat to do so without bogging down the game with lots of math and tracking modifiers.
I'm . . . torn about the Sorcerer. I love the idea of someone that's born with their magic, and I also love the idea of a Warlock, someone that makes a deal with an otherworldly entity to get their magic, but I currently think there's a bit too much overlap between the two. They both are basically full casters, cast from Charisma, and have very similar subclasses (Celestial Warlock and Divine Soul Sorcerer, Undead Warlock and Shadow Sorcerer, etc). There's also a lot of overlap between Planetouched and Sorcerers (from one point of view, wouldn't it make sense for all Genasi, Aasimar, Hexblood, and Tieflings to automatically be Sorcerers?). In my opinion, a Sorcerer's subclass should be based on what source of magic they have (like it currently is), with higher level subclass features making them more and more like whatever creature/magical entity caused them to get magic (Dragons for Draconic Bloodline Sorcerers, Shadows for Shadow Sorcerers, Celestials for Divine Soul Sorcerers, etc).
But there's also a ton of Warlock subclasses that do basically the same thing, making the Warlock become more and more like their patron as they grow in levels. Genie Warlocks basically become mini-genies, which is something that I would have assumed would be more like a Sorcerer Genie Subclass. Undead Warlocks get more and more undead-like as they grow in powers, which, again, is fairly similar to what most Sorcerer subclasses could/should do. Great Old One Warlocks become more and more alien (like pseudo-Mind Flayers/Aboleths), which makes sense thematically, but again has a lot of overlap with Sorcerers.
Maybe it would be better if the "Warlock" class held both the theme of "I was born with powers/changed by magic to have spellcasting", as well as "my powers were granted by an outsider", and the Sorcerer was more like the Arcane Gish class that it was during the D&D Next Playtest? Possibly making them Constitution-based spellcasters, too? That would make them more mechanically and thematically distinct.
i'd rather have warlocks lean heavier towards the more scholarly lunatic vibe knowing secrets that should not be known that they are eluding to with the current flavour text for the warlock, sort of having them leech power from someplace or something (be it an plane of existance, eldrich god or whatever the ****), and hand the "fiendish sugar daddy" trope to sorcerers, with them either being directly given arcane power or having it inherited from some greater source.
WotC really struck a chord with the 3rd playtest packet from 2012, both sorcerers and warlocks were extremely different from any other spellcaster mechanically and had a lot of interesting flavour in them
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
i'd rather have warlocks lean heavier towards the more scholarly lunatic vibe knowing secrets that should not be known that they are eluding to with the current flavour text for the warlock, sort of having them leech power from someplace or something (be it an plane of existance, eldrich god or whatever the ****), and hand the "fiendish sugar daddy" trope to sorcerers, with them either being directly given arcane power or having it inherited from some greater source.
WotC really struck a chord with the 3rd playtest packet from 2012, both sorcerers and warlocks were extremely different from any other spellcaster mechanically and had a lot of interesting flavour in them
I think part of the problem is not just the fact that the Pacts and Bloodlines overlap, but that they are both Charisma casters. Mechanically speaking, there isn't a lot of overlap between the two classes, it is mostly just overlapping themes but both being Charisma based doesn't help.
I also don't buy into the idea that Sorcerers should become more Dragon or what ever. The mutating aspect fits the Warlock better. As they gain power, they lose parts of their "humanity". Sorcerers should just be learning to control what they already have.
We could see updated versions of the Spelljammer/Darksun UA, but I doubt it. They almost never do two different UA for just new races, it's almost always just Subclasses or Classes that get two+ UA.
Most setting books have new subclasses in them, so if we're getting a Spelljammer or Dark Sun book this year, we'll probably see new subclasses in the UA for them (a Pilot Artificer, maybe? Or Space Magic Wizard? Maybe even a Psion class if we're getting Dark Sun?). Most new setting books also take a variant rule from the DMG or another book and flesh it out more, so we could get something like that in a UA version (Space Combat or Spelljamming Vehicle Stats for Spelljammer? Lingering Injuries or Stone Weapons for Dark Sun?), too.
Or we could get something from one of those "2 completely new D&D settings" that they've been working on for the past year or so, and we currently know nothing about. A UA for those could be literally anything. A new version of the Modern Magic UA (or Modern Weaponry/Armors), new spells/races/subclasses/classes/equipment specific to the worlds, or something along those lines.
Anyone else have any guesses?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I hope we see a new attempt at Psion, but I'm not going to hold my breath. In all honestly I hope that they do a new class UA. Better yet, start giving us revamped classes so there is plenty of time to work through them AND all the PHB subclasses before 2024.
I'm going to guess February, based on nothing at all. The only active UA we have is Travelers of the Multiverse, which came out in September, has been out for around five months, and still isn't going into any announced book. We just got Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse (in the boxed set, not solo until May) and the only other announced book is a Critical Role adventure coming out in March. January is over, and I assume with basically nothing truly new on the officially-announced horizon that we're either going to get a new UA or a new book announcement very soon. By the time Netherdeep comes out at the latest.
We could see updated versions of the Spelljammer/Darksun UA, but I doubt it. They almost never do two different UA for just new races, it's almost always just Subclasses or Classes that get two+ UA.
Most setting books have new subclasses in them, so if we're getting a Spelljammer or Dark Sun book this year, we'll probably see new subclasses in the UA for them (a Pilot Artificer, maybe? Or Space Magic Wizard? Maybe even a Psion class if we're getting Dark Sun?). Most new setting books also take a variant rule from the DMG or another book and flesh it out more, so we could get something like that in a UA version (Space Combat or Spelljamming Vehicle Stats for Spelljammer? Lingering Injuries or Stone Weapons for Dark Sun?), too.
Or we could get something from one of those "2 completely new D&D settings" that they've been working on for the past year or so, and we currently know nothing about. A UA for those could be literally anything. A new version of the Modern Magic UA (or Modern Weaponry/Armors), new spells/races/subclasses/classes/equipment specific to the worlds, or something along those lines.
Anyone else have any guesses?
Again, I would love to see an old setting return, but please tell me how to adapt Dark Sun, with its cannibalism, slavery, xenocides, the way Mul are made and the decidedly alignment driven societies and be made palatable to a 5th edition audience without losing its flavour?
We could see updated versions of the Spelljammer/Darksun UA, but I doubt it. They almost never do two different UA for just new races, it's almost always just Subclasses or Classes that get two+ UA.
Most setting books have new subclasses in them, so if we're getting a Spelljammer or Dark Sun book this year, we'll probably see new subclasses in the UA for them (a Pilot Artificer, maybe? Or Space Magic Wizard? Maybe even a Psion class if we're getting Dark Sun?). Most new setting books also take a variant rule from the DMG or another book and flesh it out more, so we could get something like that in a UA version (Space Combat or Spelljamming Vehicle Stats for Spelljammer? Lingering Injuries or Stone Weapons for Dark Sun?), too.
Or we could get something from one of those "2 completely new D&D settings" that they've been working on for the past year or so, and we currently know nothing about. A UA for those could be literally anything. A new version of the Modern Magic UA (or Modern Weaponry/Armors), new spells/races/subclasses/classes/equipment specific to the worlds, or something along those lines.
Anyone else have any guesses?
Again, I would love to see an old setting return, but please tell me how to adapt Dark Sun, with its cannibalism, slavery, xenocides, the way Mul are made and the decidedly alignment driven societies and be made palatable to a 5th edition audience without losing its flavour?
I don't think that they have to do much to be honest. Dystopian Post Apocalyptic worlds are still a common and well received trope in movies, books and games. I think it will just need to advertised as such.
We could see updated versions of the Spelljammer/Darksun UA, but I doubt it. They almost never do two different UA for just new races, it's almost always just Subclasses or Classes that get two+ UA.
Most setting books have new subclasses in them, so if we're getting a Spelljammer or Dark Sun book this year, we'll probably see new subclasses in the UA for them (a Pilot Artificer, maybe? Or Space Magic Wizard? Maybe even a Psion class if we're getting Dark Sun?). Most new setting books also take a variant rule from the DMG or another book and flesh it out more, so we could get something like that in a UA version (Space Combat or Spelljamming Vehicle Stats for Spelljammer? Lingering Injuries or Stone Weapons for Dark Sun?), too.
Or we could get something from one of those "2 completely new D&D settings" that they've been working on for the past year or so, and we currently know nothing about. A UA for those could be literally anything. A new version of the Modern Magic UA (or Modern Weaponry/Armors), new spells/races/subclasses/classes/equipment specific to the worlds, or something along those lines.
Anyone else have any guesses?
Again, I would love to see an old setting return, but please tell me how to adapt Dark Sun, with its cannibalism, slavery, xenocides, the way Mul are made and the decidedly alignment driven societies and be made palatable to a 5th edition audience without losing its flavour?
I don't think that they have to do much to be honest. Dystopian Post Apocalyptic worlds are still a common and well received trope in movies, books and games. I think it will just need to advertised as such.
I think I will stay away from any dnd forum if it happens. Can you imagine the racism and Mul debate? I can.
Yeah, and I"m not being glib, I could totally see Dark Sun going the YA dystopian route, which may p.o. the Dark Sun die hards out there, but I dunno if that contingent of the market outweighs their interest in a younger market who may well be content with "nerfed bleak." Basically I see a move away from the John Carter aspects that lean toward the Gor rabbit hole and more toward a world like the desert planet Stargate first visits. I don't think that's a bad thing, though again it would irritate the Dark Sun folks, and the Dark Sun folks are the ones who want to see Dark Sun 5e supported.
Other possibility, though it would go against WotC sorta stated principles on DMsGuild, but make it a DMsGuild WotC produced "black label" product, age verification and the like. Sorta like what White Wolf did with Black Dog press where the wanted to push the transgressive aspects of World of Darkness outside comfort zones. I don't think WotC/Hasbro though necessarily wants to "go there" for their images, so it may just be best to license Dark Sun to a third party.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
We could see updated versions of the Spelljammer/Darksun UA, but I doubt it. They almost never do two different UA for just new races, it's almost always just Subclasses or Classes that get two+ UA.
Most setting books have new subclasses in them, so if we're getting a Spelljammer or Dark Sun book this year, we'll probably see new subclasses in the UA for them (a Pilot Artificer, maybe? Or Space Magic Wizard? Maybe even a Psion class if we're getting Dark Sun?). Most new setting books also take a variant rule from the DMG or another book and flesh it out more, so we could get something like that in a UA version (Space Combat or Spelljamming Vehicle Stats for Spelljammer? Lingering Injuries or Stone Weapons for Dark Sun?), too.
Or we could get something from one of those "2 completely new D&D settings" that they've been working on for the past year or so, and we currently know nothing about. A UA for those could be literally anything. A new version of the Modern Magic UA (or Modern Weaponry/Armors), new spells/races/subclasses/classes/equipment specific to the worlds, or something along those lines.
Anyone else have any guesses?
Again, I would love to see an old setting return, but please tell me how to adapt Dark Sun, with its cannibalism, slavery, xenocides, the way Mul are made and the decidedly alignment driven societies and be made palatable to a 5th edition audience without losing its flavour?
I don't think that they have to do much to be honest. Dystopian Post Apocalyptic worlds are still a common and well received trope in movies, books and games. I think it will just need to advertised as such.
I think I will stay away from any dnd forum if it happens. Can you imagine the racism and Mul debate? I can.
I certainly can, but the people on these forums are not a good representation of the player base as a whole, no matter which side they fall on. I think if Dark Sun was properly marketed, it would do well with little alteration. Of course there would likely be some changes, but I don't think it would be as drastic as you may think. Of course this is all speculation on my part.
Yeah, and I"m not being glib, I could totally see Dark Sun going the YA dystopian route, which may p.o. the Dark Sun die hards out there, but I dunno if that contingent of the market outweighs their interest in a younger market who may well be content with "nerfed bleak." Basically I see a move away from the John Carter aspects that lean toward the Gor rabbit hole and more toward a world like the desert planet Stargate first visits. I don't think that's a bad thing, though again it would irritate the Dark Sun folks, and the Dark Sun folks are the ones who want to see Dark Sun 5e supported.
Other possibility, though it would go against WotC sorta stated principles on DMsGuild, but make it a DMsGuild WotC produced "black label" product, age verification and the like. Sorta like what White Wolf did with Black Dog press where the wanted to push the transgressive aspects of World of Darkness outside comfort zones. I don't think WotC/Hasbro though necessarily wants to "go there" for their images, so it may just be best to license Dark Sun to a third party.
The Black Dog approach, I don't see happening (although I loved some works that came out in that line, Freak Legion chief amongst them), a softer version of Athas would be possible, but it wouldn't leave much of the original setting's atmosphere intact. Just look at the way Lizardfolk have been adapted, and then look at cannibal Halflings, cannibal Thri-Kreen, the problematic way Elves are portrayed and the way WotC changed the Vistani. I think creating a setting from scratch would be easier than adapting Dark Sun and still be able to call it Dark Sun. It would be much easier to resurrect other old settings like Greyhawk (yes, even with what that person is doing) or Birthright to only name those two.
It's so weird to me that people think Dark Sun invented slavery in D&D. Mindflayers and drow are two instances of existing D&D societies with slavery. Thralls exist. Necromancers bind souls to do their bidding. Dominate monster is a version of slavery that even PCs can and do regularly engage in.
Lizardfolk are described as very interested in eating people, if not exactly each other. Simic hybrids are living experiments. This stuff is already in D&D. And for that matter, you can have savage, feral halflings without outright branding them as cannibals, or half-dwarves just existing the same way half-elves do. Turns out racial identity doesn't hinge on one thing.
You can do Dark Sun in a way that still leaves the door open for campaigns to fall within a wide spectrum of political correctness in exactly the same way that saying "not all drow in all games must be evil" is not saying that you can't have a campaign where all drow are irredeemably evil.
Well, Athas does get a pretty thorough set of adaptation notes on how to translate Princes of the Apocalypse (5e's version of Temple of Elemental Evil), and I'd say it has gotten almost as much mention as Greyhawk and Krynn from a quick use of what we have for a DDB search function.
A couple points on that Athas is "more grown up even for some grown ups comfort zone" below spoiler:
As for why Dark Sun is particularly singled out as too taboo despite MInd Flayers and other monsters and the possibility of brutality more broadly throughout D&D, I'd say that brutality in Dark Sun is more essential to it's brand of D&D than any other TSR/WotC published iteration of D&D.
Couple that with my quick read, as someone with a little more than a lay background in some of the aesthetics from which Dark Sun pulls, you got dominant cultures in Dark Sun built around a master slave dynamic AND you got a visual "look" for Dark Sun drawing from BDSM leather culture to the point that Dark Sun fans likely saw the Wojchieskis efforts at leveraging SF Folsom Street and Power Exchange's looks into some key set pieces probably thought they were erring on the side of vanilla. That sort of chocolate and peanut butter, or really nutella and nutella gets a little too close to the drift of Gorian aesthetics ... and while that sub sub culture (so to speak) can be practiced by respectful consenting adults, there's a noticeable toxic cohort who also state to be Gorian aficionados and given the level of Hasbro level exposure WotC has D&D under it just may be too taboo for WotC to explore in an official main stream release product. Quite a few recent surveys seem really interested in the play experience or potential play experience of younger players. I've yet to see a question ask "how can we make D&D more adult? Given that trend I think revisiting Dark Sun for 5e (outside a potential black label or 3rd party licensee thing) would be too much headache for the hype.
It's so weird to me that people think Dark Sun invented slavery in D&D. Mindflayers and drow are two instances of existing D&D societies with slavery. Thralls exist. Necromancers bind souls to do their bidding. Dominate monster is a version of slavery that even PCs can and do regularly engage in.
Lizardfolk are described as very interested in eating people, if not exactly each other. Simic hybrids are living experiments. This stuff is already in D&D. And for that matter, you can have savage, feral halflings without outright branding them as cannibals, or half-dwarves just existing the same way half-elves do. Turns out racial identity doesn't hinge on one thing.
You can do Dark Sun in a way that still leaves the door open for campaigns to fall within a wide spectrum of political correctness in exactly the same way that saying "not all drow in all games must be evil" is not saying that you can't have a campaign where all drow are irredeemably evil.
Difference being that those societies are always enemies. Dark Sun, it is the norm. And no, I don't think that Athas introduced slavery in DnD, it just made it part of everyday life for an adventurer. It also added prices for slaves in an easy-to-use table. And as everybody is refusing to understand my nicer way to put it, but the way Muls are made leads to the death of the Human mother with all that implies. I'm not talking about half-dwarves or half-elves, I'm talking about full-blown body horror. And people think this will fly with HASBRO?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I believe that's how it worked in older editions, a small flat bonus instead of freakin' advantage, which is far stronger.
Yeah and only gets progressively better as your attack stat increases....
Could rule it as add proficiency (again) to the attack roll, so it scales as you do. Expertise to-hit, if that makes sense.
I would not mind a Tactical Combat UA, but I wasn't bothered by the idea that people don't like the Flanking rules. I was bothered by someone telling me to stop using the rule because it is hurting my game. No one should be telling anyone how to play at their table. It is just plain rude. If you want to talk about the pros and cons of a rule or possible fixes you might want to see that is great. Just don't tell some one that if they are using a rule that you don't like that they should feel bad or that they are breaking their game or that it is wrong. That is crossing a line.
I will say no more on the subject, but had to get that off my chest.
As far as alternate flanking rules, I like the idea of reverse cover. A flat +2 to hit for being in a tactically advantageous position I think is reasonable. If you really wanted to get deep into it without having to many modifiers to track, it could work just like Advantage/Disadvantage. You can't gain more than one +2 bonus from positioning and there could be things that nullify it as well such as being in difficult terrain. This would allow people that want a more tactical style of combat to do so without bogging down the game with lots of math and tracking modifiers.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
i'd rather have warlocks lean heavier towards the more scholarly lunatic vibe knowing secrets that should not be known that they are eluding to with the current flavour text for the warlock, sort of having them leech power from someplace or something (be it an plane of existance, eldrich god or whatever the ****), and hand the "fiendish sugar daddy" trope to sorcerers, with them either being directly given arcane power or having it inherited from some greater source.
WotC really struck a chord with the 3rd playtest packet from 2012, both sorcerers and warlocks were extremely different from any other spellcaster mechanically and had a lot of interesting flavour in them
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
I think part of the problem is not just the fact that the Pacts and Bloodlines overlap, but that they are both Charisma casters. Mechanically speaking, there isn't a lot of overlap between the two classes, it is mostly just overlapping themes but both being Charisma based doesn't help.
I also don't buy into the idea that Sorcerers should become more Dragon or what ever. The mutating aspect fits the Warlock better. As they gain power, they lose parts of their "humanity". Sorcerers should just be learning to control what they already have.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Any guesses when we’ll see anything else from UA?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
We could see updated versions of the Spelljammer/Darksun UA, but I doubt it. They almost never do two different UA for just new races, it's almost always just Subclasses or Classes that get two+ UA.
Most setting books have new subclasses in them, so if we're getting a Spelljammer or Dark Sun book this year, we'll probably see new subclasses in the UA for them (a Pilot Artificer, maybe? Or Space Magic Wizard? Maybe even a Psion class if we're getting Dark Sun?). Most new setting books also take a variant rule from the DMG or another book and flesh it out more, so we could get something like that in a UA version (Space Combat or Spelljamming Vehicle Stats for Spelljammer? Lingering Injuries or Stone Weapons for Dark Sun?), too.
Or we could get something from one of those "2 completely new D&D settings" that they've been working on for the past year or so, and we currently know nothing about. A UA for those could be literally anything. A new version of the Modern Magic UA (or Modern Weaponry/Armors), new spells/races/subclasses/classes/equipment specific to the worlds, or something along those lines.
Anyone else have any guesses?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I hope we see a new attempt at Psion, but I'm not going to hold my breath. In all honestly I hope that they do a new class UA. Better yet, start giving us revamped classes so there is plenty of time to work through them AND all the PHB subclasses before 2024.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I'm going to guess February, based on nothing at all. The only active UA we have is Travelers of the Multiverse, which came out in September, has been out for around five months, and still isn't going into any announced book. We just got Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse (in the boxed set, not solo until May) and the only other announced book is a Critical Role adventure coming out in March. January is over, and I assume with basically nothing truly new on the officially-announced horizon that we're either going to get a new UA or a new book announcement very soon. By the time Netherdeep comes out at the latest.
Again, I would love to see an old setting return, but please tell me how to adapt Dark Sun, with its cannibalism, slavery, xenocides, the way Mul are made and the decidedly alignment driven societies and be made palatable to a 5th edition audience without losing its flavour?
I don't think that they have to do much to be honest. Dystopian Post Apocalyptic worlds are still a common and well received trope in movies, books and games. I think it will just need to advertised as such.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I think I will stay away from any dnd forum if it happens. Can you imagine the racism and Mul debate? I can.
Yeah, and I"m not being glib, I could totally see Dark Sun going the YA dystopian route, which may p.o. the Dark Sun die hards out there, but I dunno if that contingent of the market outweighs their interest in a younger market who may well be content with "nerfed bleak." Basically I see a move away from the John Carter aspects that lean toward the Gor rabbit hole and more toward a world like the desert planet Stargate first visits. I don't think that's a bad thing, though again it would irritate the Dark Sun folks, and the Dark Sun folks are the ones who want to see Dark Sun 5e supported.
Other possibility, though it would go against WotC sorta stated principles on DMsGuild, but make it a DMsGuild WotC produced "black label" product, age verification and the like. Sorta like what White Wolf did with Black Dog press where the wanted to push the transgressive aspects of World of Darkness outside comfort zones. I don't think WotC/Hasbro though necessarily wants to "go there" for their images, so it may just be best to license Dark Sun to a third party.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I certainly can, but the people on these forums are not a good representation of the player base as a whole, no matter which side they fall on. I think if Dark Sun was properly marketed, it would do well with little alteration. Of course there would likely be some changes, but I don't think it would be as drastic as you may think. Of course this is all speculation on my part.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
The Black Dog approach, I don't see happening (although I loved some works that came out in that line, Freak Legion chief amongst them), a softer version of Athas would be possible, but it wouldn't leave much of the original setting's atmosphere intact. Just look at the way Lizardfolk have been adapted, and then look at cannibal Halflings, cannibal Thri-Kreen, the problematic way Elves are portrayed and the way WotC changed the Vistani. I think creating a setting from scratch would be easier than adapting Dark Sun and still be able to call it Dark Sun. It would be much easier to resurrect other old settings like Greyhawk (yes, even with what that person is doing) or Birthright to only name those two.
It's so weird to me that people think Dark Sun invented slavery in D&D. Mindflayers and drow are two instances of existing D&D societies with slavery. Thralls exist. Necromancers bind souls to do their bidding. Dominate monster is a version of slavery that even PCs can and do regularly engage in.
Lizardfolk are described as very interested in eating people, if not exactly each other. Simic hybrids are living experiments. This stuff is already in D&D. And for that matter, you can have savage, feral halflings without outright branding them as cannibals, or half-dwarves just existing the same way half-elves do. Turns out racial identity doesn't hinge on one thing.
You can do Dark Sun in a way that still leaves the door open for campaigns to fall within a wide spectrum of political correctness in exactly the same way that saying "not all drow in all games must be evil" is not saying that you can't have a campaign where all drow are irredeemably evil.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I don't think Dark Sun or Athas is ever getting more than a slight reference in 5e.
Well, Athas does get a pretty thorough set of adaptation notes on how to translate Princes of the Apocalypse (5e's version of Temple of Elemental Evil), and I'd say it has gotten almost as much mention as Greyhawk and Krynn from a quick use of what we have for a DDB search function.
A couple points on that Athas is "more grown up even for some grown ups comfort zone" below spoiler:
As for why Dark Sun is particularly singled out as too taboo despite MInd Flayers and other monsters and the possibility of brutality more broadly throughout D&D, I'd say that brutality in Dark Sun is more essential to it's brand of D&D than any other TSR/WotC published iteration of D&D.
Couple that with my quick read, as someone with a little more than a lay background in some of the aesthetics from which Dark Sun pulls, you got dominant cultures in Dark Sun built around a master slave dynamic AND you got a visual "look" for Dark Sun drawing from BDSM leather culture to the point that Dark Sun fans likely saw the Wojchieskis efforts at leveraging SF Folsom Street and Power Exchange's looks into some key set pieces probably thought they were erring on the side of vanilla. That sort of chocolate and peanut butter, or really nutella and nutella gets a little too close to the drift of Gorian aesthetics ... and while that sub sub culture (so to speak) can be practiced by respectful consenting adults, there's a noticeable toxic cohort who also state to be Gorian aficionados and given the level of Hasbro level exposure WotC has D&D under it just may be too taboo for WotC to explore in an official main stream release product. Quite a few recent surveys seem really interested in the play experience or potential play experience of younger players. I've yet to see a question ask "how can we make D&D more adult? Given that trend I think revisiting Dark Sun for 5e (outside a potential black label or 3rd party licensee thing) would be too much headache for the hype.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Difference being that those societies are always enemies. Dark Sun, it is the norm. And no, I don't think that Athas introduced slavery in DnD, it just made it part of everyday life for an adventurer. It also added prices for slaves in an easy-to-use table. And as everybody is refusing to understand my nicer way to put it, but the way Muls are made leads to the death of the Human mother with all that implies. I'm not talking about half-dwarves or half-elves, I'm talking about full-blown body horror. And people think this will fly with HASBRO?