This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Athas was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 18 July 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Dark Sun. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
World of Dark Sun was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 27 June 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Dark Sun. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
I would prefer if the title "Unofficial Material" was changed to something a bit more accurate. both Dark Sun versions released by Athas.org and by Paizo's Dragon/Dungeon magazine articles are considered official, and are sanctioned by Wizards of the Coast which owns the license/copyrights for the setting. Placing them in an "unofficial material" section is highly misleading. -- Xlorep DarkHelm 19:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
I thought Rajaat was obsessed with killing off all non-halflings, not non-human races. I don't have the books at hand to verify this, so thanks for doublechecking that. -- TheBlueWizard 22:08, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
As a brief overview, the article is fine as is, but the above concerns can be remedied only by significant expansion. Rajaat, for instance, wasn't so much obsessed with racial "purity" as he was with reinstating the mythical "Blue Age" - hence why halflings, and Thri-Kreen, for that matter, were exempt from genocide. -- Albrecht 23:28, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Actually, the page took a little extra reworking, to be slightly more accurate. You are correct, Rajaat was focused on wiping out non-halflings. The Sorcerer-Kings, then Champions of Rajaat, were misled and told that he wanted to wipe out all non-humans. When they discovered the truth, they revolted against him. -- Xlorep DarkHelm 3 July 2005 15:07 (UTC)
The only thing we have on Rajaat's opinion of Thri-Kreen is the Thri-Kreen of Athas book, which says he ignored them because he thought they were animals, it's not mentioned anywhere that there were exempt from Genocide because they were the other blue age race.
rajaat's beef was with all the races that "evolved" from halflings which thri-kreen didnt they where with halflings original inhabitants of athas - syrric —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.152.209.72 ( talk) 23:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, if you can find something where Rajaat said that please add it (and a footnote) There's no place I know that says Rajaat didn't want them dead because they were the other blue age race (that I've ever read at least) Ultimately, Rajaat's reasons for the cleansing wars were he thought he was a freakish accident and then turned his hate outward. The snare ( talk) 01:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
all the relavent info is in the wander's cronicle from the box set - syrric —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.213.22 ( talk) 00:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Should the Last Sea be mentioned in this article? I heard something about it being declared non-canon, although I can't find any sources for that. -- MasterGrazzt 21:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
well the last sea is from the adventure mindlords of the last sea published by tsr so i would think it was cannon- syrric —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.152.209.72 ( talk) 23:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Considering that the entire setting is focused specifically on the only world that exists, Athas, it would stand to reason that these articles should be merged. Whenever you talk about the setting you are automatically talking about the planet itself and thus it should form part of the setting article. Enigmatical 04:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Completely agree.
Go for it. - AndyBQ 18:55, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
CURRENT DRAFT can be found
HERE (Still heavily being worked on)
Well, I added a copy of the cover. I tried to find a version of the logo, but athas.org didn't seem to have any, though I think the old TSR site used to have them. FrozenPurpleCube 01:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I found this. Grey Shadow 02:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Be careful, I believe Wizards of the Coast owns the copyright on that image. -- Xlorep DarkHelm 19:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Doesn't matter, you can use copyrighted material for educational purposes, look up fair use for details.
The snare 08:06, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Enigmatical 00:35, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Removed following sentence, as I can't find a reference for it anywhere:
Psionists are often considered the most 'pure' as their power doesn't come from external sources, though power-hungry Psionists frequently become Defilers.
Korvar The Fox 15:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Fixed publishing date in the infobox to match the text of 1990, not sure which one is correct at this time. If anyone has a reference to whether it was published in 1990 or 1991, please change all the sources in the article (I'll try to check myself, but my original box is in another city right now).-- WildElf 20:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
There seems to be a bit of confusion as to the specific type of fantasy this setting would be covered by. While the use of Fantasy is obviously true, it would be better that we define a genre which most aptly describes it.
The problem here of course is which one it should be:
My personal choice would be High Fantasy simply because it more accurately depicts the struggle between good and evil with fantastical creatures and powers based on magic. Enigmatical 03:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
First off, you forgot something very important. Fantasy Genres such as "High Fantasy" "Low Fantasy" and unfortunately, this relatively new and undeveloped term, "Hard Fantasy" are notoriously poorly defined. This means any discussion on that should probably state what definition is being used. Beyond that, instead of going to a vote, I think it might be worth looking and seeing how TSR billed the setting. See what terms they used. Unfortunately, I don't have the Dragon archive collection, so I can't search it for anything, and the books I do have for the setting didn't mention any particular fantasy archetypes in the introductions. That said, I think it's clear from Dark Sun's very nature that it is not High Fantasy. If anything, it's a twist on the whole setting. Not quite a parody in the style of Discworld or the like, because it's not a joke. It's serious. Not sure what word to use for that though. FrozenPurpleCube 14:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Could someone change the 'The Champions of Rajaat' section to a summary. Extensive details of the campaign setting are encyclopediac. Ashmoo 05:22, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
the best source material for this would be the wanderer's cronicles. Sadira killed one the two floating heads.. but i cant for the life of me remember whether it was sacha or wyan but either way rikus only killed one of the two. why do people keep quoting a novel over actually source material? the rise and fall of a dragon king is not cannon. kalak is the orge doom! the mistakes made in that series are why it was ruled non-cannon by the then tsr. - syrric
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.152.209.72 ( talk) 00:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't know who's responsible for this sort of thing, but much of the section is lifted verbatim from a copyrighted work. I would remove what I know to be copied, but I don't have the book with me at the moment, and I don't want to do anything that drastic without someone giving me the go ahead. -- 70.171.187.183 03:56, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I like the Champions section the way it is. I like the level of detail it provides, though yes, if someone wants to paraphrase it rather than quoting it directly The snare ( talk) 08:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Champions of Rajaat are powerful, evil, immortal sorcerers in service to the Warbringer. Originally Rajaat had promised his champions to make them gods if they were successful in exterminating all nonhuman life. Using specific artifacts they drain the life of sentient beings for later use in their spellcasting and psionics. Champions do not age or die of natural causes. They are immune or resist many damage related spells and can regenerate lost appendages in a short time.
Orb of Energy Storing - artifact used by Champion to drain levels from sentient creatures surrounding Champion. Energy is used to power spells and psionics cast by Champions.
"Legends of Athas" page 99-101, copyright 2008, Wizards of the Coast.
Theory of creation: http://oracle.wizards.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0008c&L=dark-sun-l&P=2900 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.225.125 ( talk) 12:54, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
i deleted the information that was non-cannonical about the information from rise and fall of a dragon king again, due to it being incorrect. its been stated several times that it isnt cannon for the setting for 2nd edition and since 4th edition hasnt stated anything about the future of the setting. ~ Syrric
What is the source of the statement, "Unlike other worlds, there are no "commoners" in Athas..."? This stongly contradicts the AD&D 2nd edition material printed by TSR, which makes frequent mention of slaves, freemen, and others, who have no character class (0-level), nor any unusual training.
If this was overruled by new official material by Athas.org or Pazio, this should be mentioned.
24.166.151.236 16:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)Nick
Where is this stuff about Hamanu coming from? I've read Rise and Fall of a Dragon King and I never read his eyes of fire ability could be used on other champions, and was to kill them after the cleansing wars. Actually, he says during that book that Rajaat is probably making a champion to kill Humans. Nor does it say he used it on Sielba of Yaramuke. It says in that book that "his dagger pierced her heart" The snare 10:01, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Also, this business about Hamanu hundreds of years in the future is speculative and non-canon. -- 68.100.144.156 04:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
the whole series that including rise and fall of a dragon king are non-canonical. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
216.152.209.72 (
talk) 23:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Unless someone objects, the part about Hamanu replacing Myron should be revised - it's non-cannon to my knowledge 210.23.146.66 ( talk) 01:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
No, the revised dark sun boxed set says he did in fact replace Myron. This is first stated in the Cerulean Storm Novel by Wyan or Sacha, one of the two. The snare ( talk) 03:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
I've been working offline (to put on wikipedia) and a contradictions page for dark sun, a master list, if you would. I remember being on AOL in 96 and Kevin Melka said that the Prism Pentad and Dark sun materials contain good continuity for the most part and that Lynn Abbey's stuff is mostly non-canon. I'd like to get some pdf's of the books to get quotes out of them for my contradictions page The snare 10:01, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Why are the Chronicles of Athas considered non-canon?-- Sonjaaa 05:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
because they had many errors in them, ie champion titles etc and where never supported in actually game supplements as was the prizm pentad, the prizm pentad where the only canonical series of books. in the first box set templars where a class and kalak was still alive and tithian was still his high templar. in the second release of the box set it updated the campaign setting to account for the prizm pentad story ie tyr being free the cerleum storm the death of the dragon and it even had a small section for how gm's can introduce the stories of the prizm pentad into thier campaign and the info needed in case they hadnt read the books- syrric
Please, let's bring this up to par. I only recently found this article on Dark Sun, and it is a very valuable resource that should not be lost. Here's my brief proposal: we need to find some good third-party references to Dark Sun to back up the value of the setting, especially as a historically important setting in the canon of D&D. I know that it's out there. Then, we really don't want to lose the information on the cultures and kings of the setting, but they might be able to be moved to linked sub-articles. DaneWeber ( talk) 17:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. Finding original material to use as source is going to be difficult, but I'm going to search anyway. 88.218.67.208 ( talk) 14:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia on some page, should go into depth into this conception of the sorcerer-kings and them all seeking this god-like attainment of becoming athasian dragons. The transformation of high level (20th is it?) multiclass preserver/defiler (wizard/magic-user-mage) & psionicist (psychic/telekinetic mind-power-user) (20th level also), in ten stages (each stage requiring, doing different things, and being bestowed different powers and having different handicaps, etc) to level 30, should be delved into.... In some published work, there was one (or two?) ever Avangions (giant, translucent good aligned demi-god (as far as "god" means anything on Athas) dragonfly-man type beings) this was the "good"/preserver counterpart to the much more common "Dragon".... I use 'common' loosely as there had been only one full 30th level Dragon (Borys of Ebe) but many other partial dragons (at least a third of all the champions?) started the temple building required to become a dragon...... this is why they all own city-states; they require worshippers to build a temple of exceeding value (worth so much, and of such a size, made of such material, stone-wrought, or metal or such at a higher level; hard to come by commodities in the barren world of Athas) and many humanoid sacrifices with each level, so much pre-requirements that it is a difficult task, but full dragons have god-like powers, the same with Avangions. 4.242.174.141 ( talk) 10:03, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
that info is in the high lvl campaign book called dragon kings.. but the thing is that there are only 2 mentions of story line dragons and avangions... for the dragons there is borys who dies.. and a short story in one of the books just for flavor, about a man achieving the dragon transformation being killed by the sorcerer kings.. i would guess he was in his first lvl of dragon.. there are two avangions oronis and one other guy i cant remember his name but he is part of one of the adventures where i believe he died —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
67.182.213.22 (
talk) 18:08, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Guys, Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. Ian.thomson ( talk) 16:10, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
I think the 4th edition information is up to date. I changed the tense on anything already released, and I added a bit more to reflect content provided by WotC. I don't think any of the old information should be out of data, since 4E really just adds material and doesn't really revise much. Just about all of the information on Athas is right out of the previous books, just reworded. -- Alphastream ( talk) 15:39, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
how can you say its no longer part of the setting? has wotc printed books that say the story goes in a different direction? you have to remember wotc is out to make money so they spread the info out through out many books so they can make more profits. and current rajaat being released and killing some of the dragon kings is the only set of info about the future course of events and therefore should still be included. you dont delete information about books that still exist, wikipedia is about knowledge, not whats current and new..
Syrric (
talk)
There's already a template saying so, so I'll just enumerate some of the changes that need to be made for this article to conform to the current edition of the campaign world:
1) all the events and outcomes of what I assume is the Prism Pentad metaplot needs to be removed/rolled back. Abalach-Re and Tectuktitlay are not removed from power (and not about to be, either; not in any official/canon capacity at least) to just mention two factoids.
2) the old 2e assumptions need to be revised. Again, just a short example: not all "common goblinoids" are eradicated from the surface of Athas. There are Gnoll raiders outside Tyr, for instance.
3) ... (there's sure to be more differences. I'm not an expert, though)
Feel free to split off something like a "Differences in former edition (AD&D Dark Sun)" section (or even page) if you like, but the main article should reference the current edition first and foremost, and so let's keep the "outdated" template until this is done. CapnZapp ( talk) 14:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
I haven't read any of the new novels, but I personally hate what I've seen, the whole thing with Tharizdun (Athas has no gods) So, what's going on for 4th edition. Is Wizards retconning everything back to just after Kalak was killed in the first novel, and nothing after that in the Pentad or anything else ever happened? 66.189.38.183 (talk) 05:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.189.38.183 ( talk)
its silly to just want to delete the 2nd edition information, second edition is the heart of the campaign and until they actually change the storyline (which they havent) you cannot just assume that the information is incorrect. Syrric ( talk • contribs) 23:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I think the content removal went a bit too far, but I could see possibly either trimming down some of the information, splitting it off to some sub-articles, like geography of Dark Sun for example, or both. The source book information should definitely stay though. Some of the external links are bit spammy, however, and I'm going to pull a few. — Torchiest talk edits 15:02, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
i support a clean up but i am against the wholesale deletions like was attempted. darksun is very different than the more standard campign settings and the article should reflect those differences, the lists of city states and how different each one is culturally is signifigant to the flavor and the article. -- ~Syrric ( talk) 21:42, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
This article still needs to be reviewed and properly cited in a number of places, and I'll try to mark those places as best I can.
I don't have access to any Dark Sun sourcebooks myself at the moment, but there are a number of references in the current article that are not brought up again and could probably be elaborated upon. I've made a list of a few of those areas where more information could be helpful: the Cerulean Storm, the Dark Lens, the Shipfloaters, the Mind Lords, Death and the afterlife, and a greatly expanded section on Psionics.
Also, the entries for each city in the Geography section are inconsistent in what sort of information is provided. I don't know that this information is available for each location, but a list of standardized entries for each city might be something like: Relative location, Ecology & trade, History & politics.
I'll be picking up some sourcebooks pretty soon, but if anyone can fill in the missing information in the meantime, it's much appreciated. I also feel that any elaboration of the mechanics of the game should be avoided. Zamarren ( talk) 15:46, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Here is what I would expect to see for the parts where we are saying "region X from Dark Sun is like country X from Earth". Either we want to see "Game designer Smith said in an interview that he was reading about Ancient Greece when he thought of Blah" or "Game designer Smith said that he based Blah on Rome", or even "In a review of the Dark Sun campaign book, Reviewer Jones says that Blah reminds him of Thailand". Otherwise, if we random Wikipedians just say we think this is like this, and that is like that, then we are committing original research, which is not allowed; if we can't find sources like what I suggest above, then these lines need to be removed. 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 18:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
I decided to have a go at this page as I've recently take an interest in the setting. I've largely been citing from the Revised and Expanded source book (1995), Dark Sun 3, and Dark Sun 4e. Because the metaplot advances between the 1991 and 1995 releases I included those changes. I plan to add in the Paizo version as well as that bridges the gap between the 1995 release and Dark Sun 3. The 4e book was an attempt to return the spirit of the 1991 source book and leaves it up to the players to decide how to advance the metaplot. Much of the "fat" was cut from the 4e book but in my estimation they stayed true to the original source material. Given that the fans have differing opinions about the metaplot at any given point I included the advanced metaplot from the original releases first and then noted how 4e changed those things. The major differences seem to be the omission of some of the minor or already deceased sorcerer-kings/Champions and the shift from the Great Wheel cosmology, which Athas only marginally participated in, to the World Axis cosmology which is fully participates in. I also created a Dark Sun characters list page which needs expanding. The source material list should also probably get its own page at some point and needs more clean up. I removed the world details and gave them their own page to separate the detailed in-game summary of the world versus the actual development of the setting and what sets it apart mechanically from its contemporaries.
Here's a list of stuff the page needs. Feel free to add it. If I can I'll get to it.
I don't know who tagged the page as containing inappropriate video game information. I altered the section heading to be in line with what was done on the Dragonlance page and changed the working to match how it is done there. Can someone from the video game group have a look at this and let me know what needs to be addressed here? Otherwise I'm going to remove the tag as there is very little information about DS video games on the page. Sugarcoma ( talk) 14:51, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Dark Sun. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:33, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Athas was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 18 July 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Dark Sun. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
World of Dark Sun was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 27 June 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Dark Sun. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
I would prefer if the title "Unofficial Material" was changed to something a bit more accurate. both Dark Sun versions released by Athas.org and by Paizo's Dragon/Dungeon magazine articles are considered official, and are sanctioned by Wizards of the Coast which owns the license/copyrights for the setting. Placing them in an "unofficial material" section is highly misleading. -- Xlorep DarkHelm 19:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
I thought Rajaat was obsessed with killing off all non-halflings, not non-human races. I don't have the books at hand to verify this, so thanks for doublechecking that. -- TheBlueWizard 22:08, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
As a brief overview, the article is fine as is, but the above concerns can be remedied only by significant expansion. Rajaat, for instance, wasn't so much obsessed with racial "purity" as he was with reinstating the mythical "Blue Age" - hence why halflings, and Thri-Kreen, for that matter, were exempt from genocide. -- Albrecht 23:28, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Actually, the page took a little extra reworking, to be slightly more accurate. You are correct, Rajaat was focused on wiping out non-halflings. The Sorcerer-Kings, then Champions of Rajaat, were misled and told that he wanted to wipe out all non-humans. When they discovered the truth, they revolted against him. -- Xlorep DarkHelm 3 July 2005 15:07 (UTC)
The only thing we have on Rajaat's opinion of Thri-Kreen is the Thri-Kreen of Athas book, which says he ignored them because he thought they were animals, it's not mentioned anywhere that there were exempt from Genocide because they were the other blue age race.
rajaat's beef was with all the races that "evolved" from halflings which thri-kreen didnt they where with halflings original inhabitants of athas - syrric —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.152.209.72 ( talk) 23:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, if you can find something where Rajaat said that please add it (and a footnote) There's no place I know that says Rajaat didn't want them dead because they were the other blue age race (that I've ever read at least) Ultimately, Rajaat's reasons for the cleansing wars were he thought he was a freakish accident and then turned his hate outward. The snare ( talk) 01:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
all the relavent info is in the wander's cronicle from the box set - syrric —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.213.22 ( talk) 00:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Should the Last Sea be mentioned in this article? I heard something about it being declared non-canon, although I can't find any sources for that. -- MasterGrazzt 21:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
well the last sea is from the adventure mindlords of the last sea published by tsr so i would think it was cannon- syrric —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.152.209.72 ( talk) 23:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Considering that the entire setting is focused specifically on the only world that exists, Athas, it would stand to reason that these articles should be merged. Whenever you talk about the setting you are automatically talking about the planet itself and thus it should form part of the setting article. Enigmatical 04:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Completely agree.
Go for it. - AndyBQ 18:55, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
CURRENT DRAFT can be found
HERE (Still heavily being worked on)
Well, I added a copy of the cover. I tried to find a version of the logo, but athas.org didn't seem to have any, though I think the old TSR site used to have them. FrozenPurpleCube 01:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I found this. Grey Shadow 02:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Be careful, I believe Wizards of the Coast owns the copyright on that image. -- Xlorep DarkHelm 19:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Doesn't matter, you can use copyrighted material for educational purposes, look up fair use for details.
The snare 08:06, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Enigmatical 00:35, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Removed following sentence, as I can't find a reference for it anywhere:
Psionists are often considered the most 'pure' as their power doesn't come from external sources, though power-hungry Psionists frequently become Defilers.
Korvar The Fox 15:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Fixed publishing date in the infobox to match the text of 1990, not sure which one is correct at this time. If anyone has a reference to whether it was published in 1990 or 1991, please change all the sources in the article (I'll try to check myself, but my original box is in another city right now).-- WildElf 20:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
There seems to be a bit of confusion as to the specific type of fantasy this setting would be covered by. While the use of Fantasy is obviously true, it would be better that we define a genre which most aptly describes it.
The problem here of course is which one it should be:
My personal choice would be High Fantasy simply because it more accurately depicts the struggle between good and evil with fantastical creatures and powers based on magic. Enigmatical 03:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
First off, you forgot something very important. Fantasy Genres such as "High Fantasy" "Low Fantasy" and unfortunately, this relatively new and undeveloped term, "Hard Fantasy" are notoriously poorly defined. This means any discussion on that should probably state what definition is being used. Beyond that, instead of going to a vote, I think it might be worth looking and seeing how TSR billed the setting. See what terms they used. Unfortunately, I don't have the Dragon archive collection, so I can't search it for anything, and the books I do have for the setting didn't mention any particular fantasy archetypes in the introductions. That said, I think it's clear from Dark Sun's very nature that it is not High Fantasy. If anything, it's a twist on the whole setting. Not quite a parody in the style of Discworld or the like, because it's not a joke. It's serious. Not sure what word to use for that though. FrozenPurpleCube 14:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Could someone change the 'The Champions of Rajaat' section to a summary. Extensive details of the campaign setting are encyclopediac. Ashmoo 05:22, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
the best source material for this would be the wanderer's cronicles. Sadira killed one the two floating heads.. but i cant for the life of me remember whether it was sacha or wyan but either way rikus only killed one of the two. why do people keep quoting a novel over actually source material? the rise and fall of a dragon king is not cannon. kalak is the orge doom! the mistakes made in that series are why it was ruled non-cannon by the then tsr. - syrric
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.152.209.72 ( talk) 00:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't know who's responsible for this sort of thing, but much of the section is lifted verbatim from a copyrighted work. I would remove what I know to be copied, but I don't have the book with me at the moment, and I don't want to do anything that drastic without someone giving me the go ahead. -- 70.171.187.183 03:56, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I like the Champions section the way it is. I like the level of detail it provides, though yes, if someone wants to paraphrase it rather than quoting it directly The snare ( talk) 08:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Champions of Rajaat are powerful, evil, immortal sorcerers in service to the Warbringer. Originally Rajaat had promised his champions to make them gods if they were successful in exterminating all nonhuman life. Using specific artifacts they drain the life of sentient beings for later use in their spellcasting and psionics. Champions do not age or die of natural causes. They are immune or resist many damage related spells and can regenerate lost appendages in a short time.
Orb of Energy Storing - artifact used by Champion to drain levels from sentient creatures surrounding Champion. Energy is used to power spells and psionics cast by Champions.
"Legends of Athas" page 99-101, copyright 2008, Wizards of the Coast.
Theory of creation: http://oracle.wizards.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0008c&L=dark-sun-l&P=2900 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.225.125 ( talk) 12:54, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
i deleted the information that was non-cannonical about the information from rise and fall of a dragon king again, due to it being incorrect. its been stated several times that it isnt cannon for the setting for 2nd edition and since 4th edition hasnt stated anything about the future of the setting. ~ Syrric
What is the source of the statement, "Unlike other worlds, there are no "commoners" in Athas..."? This stongly contradicts the AD&D 2nd edition material printed by TSR, which makes frequent mention of slaves, freemen, and others, who have no character class (0-level), nor any unusual training.
If this was overruled by new official material by Athas.org or Pazio, this should be mentioned.
24.166.151.236 16:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)Nick
Where is this stuff about Hamanu coming from? I've read Rise and Fall of a Dragon King and I never read his eyes of fire ability could be used on other champions, and was to kill them after the cleansing wars. Actually, he says during that book that Rajaat is probably making a champion to kill Humans. Nor does it say he used it on Sielba of Yaramuke. It says in that book that "his dagger pierced her heart" The snare 10:01, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Also, this business about Hamanu hundreds of years in the future is speculative and non-canon. -- 68.100.144.156 04:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
the whole series that including rise and fall of a dragon king are non-canonical. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
216.152.209.72 (
talk) 23:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Unless someone objects, the part about Hamanu replacing Myron should be revised - it's non-cannon to my knowledge 210.23.146.66 ( talk) 01:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
No, the revised dark sun boxed set says he did in fact replace Myron. This is first stated in the Cerulean Storm Novel by Wyan or Sacha, one of the two. The snare ( talk) 03:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
I've been working offline (to put on wikipedia) and a contradictions page for dark sun, a master list, if you would. I remember being on AOL in 96 and Kevin Melka said that the Prism Pentad and Dark sun materials contain good continuity for the most part and that Lynn Abbey's stuff is mostly non-canon. I'd like to get some pdf's of the books to get quotes out of them for my contradictions page The snare 10:01, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Why are the Chronicles of Athas considered non-canon?-- Sonjaaa 05:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
because they had many errors in them, ie champion titles etc and where never supported in actually game supplements as was the prizm pentad, the prizm pentad where the only canonical series of books. in the first box set templars where a class and kalak was still alive and tithian was still his high templar. in the second release of the box set it updated the campaign setting to account for the prizm pentad story ie tyr being free the cerleum storm the death of the dragon and it even had a small section for how gm's can introduce the stories of the prizm pentad into thier campaign and the info needed in case they hadnt read the books- syrric
Please, let's bring this up to par. I only recently found this article on Dark Sun, and it is a very valuable resource that should not be lost. Here's my brief proposal: we need to find some good third-party references to Dark Sun to back up the value of the setting, especially as a historically important setting in the canon of D&D. I know that it's out there. Then, we really don't want to lose the information on the cultures and kings of the setting, but they might be able to be moved to linked sub-articles. DaneWeber ( talk) 17:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. Finding original material to use as source is going to be difficult, but I'm going to search anyway. 88.218.67.208 ( talk) 14:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia on some page, should go into depth into this conception of the sorcerer-kings and them all seeking this god-like attainment of becoming athasian dragons. The transformation of high level (20th is it?) multiclass preserver/defiler (wizard/magic-user-mage) & psionicist (psychic/telekinetic mind-power-user) (20th level also), in ten stages (each stage requiring, doing different things, and being bestowed different powers and having different handicaps, etc) to level 30, should be delved into.... In some published work, there was one (or two?) ever Avangions (giant, translucent good aligned demi-god (as far as "god" means anything on Athas) dragonfly-man type beings) this was the "good"/preserver counterpart to the much more common "Dragon".... I use 'common' loosely as there had been only one full 30th level Dragon (Borys of Ebe) but many other partial dragons (at least a third of all the champions?) started the temple building required to become a dragon...... this is why they all own city-states; they require worshippers to build a temple of exceeding value (worth so much, and of such a size, made of such material, stone-wrought, or metal or such at a higher level; hard to come by commodities in the barren world of Athas) and many humanoid sacrifices with each level, so much pre-requirements that it is a difficult task, but full dragons have god-like powers, the same with Avangions. 4.242.174.141 ( talk) 10:03, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
that info is in the high lvl campaign book called dragon kings.. but the thing is that there are only 2 mentions of story line dragons and avangions... for the dragons there is borys who dies.. and a short story in one of the books just for flavor, about a man achieving the dragon transformation being killed by the sorcerer kings.. i would guess he was in his first lvl of dragon.. there are two avangions oronis and one other guy i cant remember his name but he is part of one of the adventures where i believe he died —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
67.182.213.22 (
talk) 18:08, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Guys, Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. Ian.thomson ( talk) 16:10, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
I think the 4th edition information is up to date. I changed the tense on anything already released, and I added a bit more to reflect content provided by WotC. I don't think any of the old information should be out of data, since 4E really just adds material and doesn't really revise much. Just about all of the information on Athas is right out of the previous books, just reworded. -- Alphastream ( talk) 15:39, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
how can you say its no longer part of the setting? has wotc printed books that say the story goes in a different direction? you have to remember wotc is out to make money so they spread the info out through out many books so they can make more profits. and current rajaat being released and killing some of the dragon kings is the only set of info about the future course of events and therefore should still be included. you dont delete information about books that still exist, wikipedia is about knowledge, not whats current and new..
Syrric (
talk)
There's already a template saying so, so I'll just enumerate some of the changes that need to be made for this article to conform to the current edition of the campaign world:
1) all the events and outcomes of what I assume is the Prism Pentad metaplot needs to be removed/rolled back. Abalach-Re and Tectuktitlay are not removed from power (and not about to be, either; not in any official/canon capacity at least) to just mention two factoids.
2) the old 2e assumptions need to be revised. Again, just a short example: not all "common goblinoids" are eradicated from the surface of Athas. There are Gnoll raiders outside Tyr, for instance.
3) ... (there's sure to be more differences. I'm not an expert, though)
Feel free to split off something like a "Differences in former edition (AD&D Dark Sun)" section (or even page) if you like, but the main article should reference the current edition first and foremost, and so let's keep the "outdated" template until this is done. CapnZapp ( talk) 14:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
I haven't read any of the new novels, but I personally hate what I've seen, the whole thing with Tharizdun (Athas has no gods) So, what's going on for 4th edition. Is Wizards retconning everything back to just after Kalak was killed in the first novel, and nothing after that in the Pentad or anything else ever happened? 66.189.38.183 (talk) 05:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.189.38.183 ( talk)
its silly to just want to delete the 2nd edition information, second edition is the heart of the campaign and until they actually change the storyline (which they havent) you cannot just assume that the information is incorrect. Syrric ( talk • contribs) 23:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I think the content removal went a bit too far, but I could see possibly either trimming down some of the information, splitting it off to some sub-articles, like geography of Dark Sun for example, or both. The source book information should definitely stay though. Some of the external links are bit spammy, however, and I'm going to pull a few. — Torchiest talk edits 15:02, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
i support a clean up but i am against the wholesale deletions like was attempted. darksun is very different than the more standard campign settings and the article should reflect those differences, the lists of city states and how different each one is culturally is signifigant to the flavor and the article. -- ~Syrric ( talk) 21:42, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
This article still needs to be reviewed and properly cited in a number of places, and I'll try to mark those places as best I can.
I don't have access to any Dark Sun sourcebooks myself at the moment, but there are a number of references in the current article that are not brought up again and could probably be elaborated upon. I've made a list of a few of those areas where more information could be helpful: the Cerulean Storm, the Dark Lens, the Shipfloaters, the Mind Lords, Death and the afterlife, and a greatly expanded section on Psionics.
Also, the entries for each city in the Geography section are inconsistent in what sort of information is provided. I don't know that this information is available for each location, but a list of standardized entries for each city might be something like: Relative location, Ecology & trade, History & politics.
I'll be picking up some sourcebooks pretty soon, but if anyone can fill in the missing information in the meantime, it's much appreciated. I also feel that any elaboration of the mechanics of the game should be avoided. Zamarren ( talk) 15:46, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Here is what I would expect to see for the parts where we are saying "region X from Dark Sun is like country X from Earth". Either we want to see "Game designer Smith said in an interview that he was reading about Ancient Greece when he thought of Blah" or "Game designer Smith said that he based Blah on Rome", or even "In a review of the Dark Sun campaign book, Reviewer Jones says that Blah reminds him of Thailand". Otherwise, if we random Wikipedians just say we think this is like this, and that is like that, then we are committing original research, which is not allowed; if we can't find sources like what I suggest above, then these lines need to be removed. 129.33.19.254 ( talk) 18:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
I decided to have a go at this page as I've recently take an interest in the setting. I've largely been citing from the Revised and Expanded source book (1995), Dark Sun 3, and Dark Sun 4e. Because the metaplot advances between the 1991 and 1995 releases I included those changes. I plan to add in the Paizo version as well as that bridges the gap between the 1995 release and Dark Sun 3. The 4e book was an attempt to return the spirit of the 1991 source book and leaves it up to the players to decide how to advance the metaplot. Much of the "fat" was cut from the 4e book but in my estimation they stayed true to the original source material. Given that the fans have differing opinions about the metaplot at any given point I included the advanced metaplot from the original releases first and then noted how 4e changed those things. The major differences seem to be the omission of some of the minor or already deceased sorcerer-kings/Champions and the shift from the Great Wheel cosmology, which Athas only marginally participated in, to the World Axis cosmology which is fully participates in. I also created a Dark Sun characters list page which needs expanding. The source material list should also probably get its own page at some point and needs more clean up. I removed the world details and gave them their own page to separate the detailed in-game summary of the world versus the actual development of the setting and what sets it apart mechanically from its contemporaries.
Here's a list of stuff the page needs. Feel free to add it. If I can I'll get to it.
I don't know who tagged the page as containing inappropriate video game information. I altered the section heading to be in line with what was done on the Dragonlance page and changed the working to match how it is done there. Can someone from the video game group have a look at this and let me know what needs to be addressed here? Otherwise I'm going to remove the tag as there is very little information about DS video games on the page. Sugarcoma ( talk) 14:51, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Dark Sun. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:33, 4 September 2017 (UTC)