1) What the heck does Dark Sun have to do with either Wasteland or Fallout?? 2) Why are people feeding the troll? 3) What is a "feti schism?" Urbandictionary defines "feti" as a teenager who is overly obsessed with trivial/material things, like celebrities, fashion, gossip, etc. So this is what, two girls arguing about Beyoncé's baby names?
1) What the heck does Dark Sun have to do with either Wasteland or Fallout??
You mean other than having a post-apocalyptic setting, being hot as hell and dry as Keldorn's marriage, as well as having lots of mangey guys with mohawks trying to kill you?
3) What is a "feti schism?" Urbandictionary defines "feti" as a teenager who is overly obsessed with trivial/material things, like celebrities, fashion, gossip, etc. So this is what, two girls arguing about Beyoncé's baby names?
I could answer this in detail. But then I would probably get banned.
For what's worth, Wasteland (1988) predates both Dark Sun (1991) and Fallout (1997). So it's possible that one or two things were used by Gygax & Co. for their post-apocalyptic setting. But that should go even more for The Burning World (1964) and Mad Max (1979).
Dark Sun owes at least as much to John Carter, Gor and Conan - all of which are pretty deserty.
For what's worth, Wasteland (1988) predates both Dark Sun (1991) and Fallout (1997). So it's possible that one or two things were used by Gygax & Co. for their post-apocalyptic setting. But that should go even more for The Burning World (1964) and Mad Max (1979).
Dark Sun owes at least as much to John Carter, Gor and Conan - all of which are pretty deserty.
Probably owes a lot more to Conan than to the others, considering one of the biggest features of Conan was that magic was typically a feared/evil thing in that setting. Dark Sun also had arcane magic as a feared/evil thing, to most of the populace. There were no mages guilds in Conan or in Dark Sun.
Etc. etc. etc. These games/setting are completely dissimilar... except for several similarities. The same could be said of any two settings. The guy only put them together to be contentious and told people up. It's as silly as the idea that all of this stuff began with Tolkien. It's not worth taking seriously.
Err... the idea that Tolkien inspired the Forgotten Realms is not worth taking seriously!!?
Anyway, all I wanted to say is that DnD is not the second coming of Jesus. It is not the be it all and end it all of roleplaying. But after seeing how much rage this opionon stirred, I will leave it at that.
Etc. etc. etc. These games/setting are completely dissimilar... except for several similarities. The same could be said of any two settings. The guy only put them together to be contentious and told people up. It's as silly as the idea that all of this stuff began with Tolkien. It's not worth taking seriously.
Err... the idea that Tolkien inspired the Forgotten Realms is not worth taking seriously!!?
Anyway, all I wanted to say is that DnD is not the second coming of Jesus. It is not the be it all and end it all of roleplaying. But after seeing how much rage this opionon stirred, I will leave it at that.
What rage? You entered the thread, insulted everyone in the discussion, and made some easily demonstrable incorrect statements. Then, you got corrected. No one insulted you for thinking Kult came out before Ravenloft. It's not rage to point out that Dark Sun can't be a "ripoff" of Fallout, since it was published years before Fallout was released.
D&D is popular because it is a good game. It was also the first commercially published RPG, which certainly gave it an advantage. No one has ever claimed it was written on stone tablets by Ao herself.
I'm sure many forumites here have played multiple game systems. I've played West End Games D6 system, GURPS, Savage Worlds, TSR's Marvel Superheroes, and, of course, various editions of D&D/AD&D/d20-based systems (not counting CRPGs here). I like most of them, to varying degrees, but D&D is the one I've played the most (and it was the first one I played, so I suppose there is a special fondness there).
Anyway, all I wanted to say is that DnD is not the second coming of Jesus. It is not the be it all and end it all of roleplaying. But after seeing how much rage this opionon stirred, I will leave it at that.
No, D&D isn't. In fact, I said time and time again - in the All you wanted to know about the next Beamdog's project thread - that I wish Beamdog wouldn't even use D&D for their next game. I don't like 5th Edition, except as a gaming system; I hate the lore issues it has and I hate the way WotC keeps marketing it (in a way that makes me, as a consumer, annoyed). But I love the way 5E plays in a homebrew setting.
BUT I'm not sure how you figured arguing over whether D&D was good or not would be a good idea. That's like going to a coffee shop and telling everyone you hate coffee.
That said, lately, I'm way more inclined to prefer Starfinder OR Savage Worlds to D&D 5E. /shrug
That was more tongue-in-cheek than anything else, but you're correct. The whole wizard's being feared always gave me the impression that mage guilds were more hidden enclaves than groups like the Sorcere or the Hosttower of the Arcane.
For what's worth, Wasteland (1988) predates both Dark Sun (1991) and Fallout (1997). So it's possible that one or two things were used by Gygax & Co. for their post-apocalyptic setting. But that should go even more for The Burning World (1964) and Mad Max (1979).
Dark Sun owes at least as much to John Carter, Gor and Conan - all of which are pretty deserty.
I think the reason D&D has lasted when other systems have come and gone has more to do with the format than the actual rules. You can always fall back on tunnels-room-monster-treasure to pad out the plot. Other game systems tend to require much more work as a GM.
But I also have a fondness for Star Wars d6, FASA Star Trek RPG, and Golden Heroes. I used to play a lot of Traveller, but I never really liked the rules, just the setting. I prefer SF - especially space opera - to fantasy.
While not really an video game on its own, there's also NWN the Dark Sun in the works. Some probably already saw their stuff over at nwnvault. But either way this project of them should prove to be quite an interesting PW once completed. The saddled crodlu looks especially nice.
Kult (1991) on the other hand is a completely different beast than Ravenloft. Given it is contemporary horror rather than Ravenloft's gothic horror theme. If anything, I'd say it's more similar to World of Darkness (2004).
World of Darkness came out in 1991. Same year as Kult, though Kult did not get an English release until '93. They both have pretty different atmospheres, though, with WoD focusing a lot more on the dramatic and Kult on the mystical. Granted, my view of Kult is from second hand accounts only, so it may be warped by that.
Some of Fallout takes place in desert areas in Utah and California, but not all of it. A fair amount of the various Fallout games take place in non-desert areas.
All the Fallouty Fallout games take place in desert areas (or desertified in case of California). The other games take place in areas that weren't desert before but now are only because the devs were lazy and thought "It's not fallout unless it's desert"
Kult (1991) on the other hand is a completely different beast than Ravenloft. Given it is contemporary horror rather than Ravenloft's gothic horror theme. If anything, I'd say it's more similar to World of Darkness (2004).
World of Darkness came out in 1991. Same year as Kult, though Kult did not get an English release until '93. They both have pretty different atmospheres, though, with WoD focusing a lot more on the dramatic and Kult on the mystical. Granted, my view of Kult is from second hand accounts only, so it may be warped by that.
Some of Fallout takes place in desert areas in Utah and California, but not all of it. A fair amount of the various Fallout games take place in non-desert areas.
All the Fallouty Fallout games take place in desert areas (or desertified in case of California). The other games take place in areas that weren't desert before but now are only because the devs were lazy and thought "It's not fallout unless it's desert"
200 years in the future and It looks like the bombs dropped a few years before.
All the Fallouty Fallout games take place in desert areas (or desertified in case of California). The other games take place in areas that weren't desert before but now are only because the devs were lazy and thought "It's not fallout unless it's desert"
Seriously, this paragraph contradicts itself 3 times. Please state this in a manner which is more clear.
It is actually a wasteland, so it looks like a desert, since if no plants grow, well, then the soil will not be soil but sand. Also, since they just had a nuclear war, there is particles from burning buildings etc that land everywhere and looks like... sand. Well, at least ashes. Which is what you have in Fallout 3.
The reason no plants grow is because an all out war with nuclear weapons will put so much dust in the stratosphere it actually blocks out the sun light, possible for as long as 2 years, which will kill all but the most hardy of plants, and yes, even most seeds, if they attempt to bloom rather than lying dormant. But that is only the start of problems!!! After the nuclear winter, what follows is, ironically, a nuclear summer. The world wide forest and city fires will release so much carbon dioxide it will exacerbate the global warming we already have, so it will be incredibly, incredibly hot. So, the hardy plants that somehow managed to survive the nuclear winter must now survive a nuclear summer. Basically, this will lead to around 10 years of no or very little plants, thus also all animals die of starvation (those that did not already die from radiation, that is), thus also most humans will die of starvation. An all out nuclear war is therefore similar to the dinosaur extinction event.
With that said, Fallout still got it wrong. Since there have been 70 to 200 years since the war, the plants that did survive, or pockets of plants for some reason were unaffected (like an automated greenhouse run on a power source with 10 years longevity, such as, say, nuclear cells), will quickly repopulate the planet following the extinction event. Especially since there are very few animals around to forage, and the ashes are rich in plant nutrients. The "oh but the water is radioactive" lore in Fallout 3 is bull, see link below.
All the Fallouty Fallout games take place in desert areas (or desertified in case of California). The other games take place in areas that weren't desert before but now are only because the devs were lazy and thought "It's not fallout unless it's desert"
I'm confused. Didn't you imply the bit you seem critical of, one sentence earlier?
Not at all. California is much drier than the east coast and right next to several deserts to begin with, it becoming desertified isn't a big stretch. Washington DC is, if I remember correctly, basically a marsh. It becoming desertified is ridiculous and was done just because the devs was lazy.
It is actually a wasteland, so it looks like a desert, since if no plants grow, well, then the soil will not be soil but sand. Also, since they just had a nuclear war, there is particles from burning buildings etc that land everywhere and looks like... sand. Well, at least ashes. Which is what you have in Fallout 3.
The reason no plants grow is because an all out war with nuclear weapons will put so much dust in the stratosphere it actually blocks out the sun light, possible for as long as 2 years, which will kill all but the most hardy of plants, and yes, even most seeds, if they attempt to bloom rather than lying dormant. But that is only the start of problems!!! After the nuclear winter, what follows is, ironically, a nuclear summer. The world wide forest and city fires will release so much carbon dioxide it will exacerbate the global warming we already have, so it will be incredibly, incredibly hot. So, the hardy plants that somehow managed to survive the nuclear winter must now survive a nuclear summer. Basically, this will lead to around 10 years of no or very little plants, thus also all animals die of starvation (those that did not already die from radiation, that is), thus also most humans will die of starvation. An all out nuclear war is therefore similar to the dinosaur extinction event.
With that said, Fallout still got it wrong. Since there have been 70 to 200 years since the war, the plants that did survive, or pockets of plants for some reason were unaffected (like an automated greenhouse run on a power source with 10 years longevity, such as, say, nuclear cells), will quickly repopulate the planet following the extinction event. Especially since there are very few animals around to forage, and the ashes are rich in plant nutrients. The "oh but the water is radioactive" lore in Fallout 3 is bull, see link below.
Eh, i don't like movies that Can cause darkness Induced audience apathy, but i do agree that FO3 is filled with continuity and lore errors like a Brian Bendis comic book.
It is actually a wasteland, so it looks like a desert, since if no plants grow, well, then the soil will not be soil but sand. Also, since they just had a nuclear war, there is particles from burning buildings etc that land everywhere and looks like... sand. Well, at least ashes. Which is what you have in Fallout 3.
The reason no plants grow is because an all out war with nuclear weapons will put so much dust in the stratosphere it actually blocks out the sun light, possible for as long as 2 years, which will kill all but the most hardy of plants, and yes, even most seeds, if they attempt to bloom rather than lying dormant. But that is only the start of problems!!! After the nuclear winter, what follows is, ironically, a nuclear summer. The world wide forest and city fires will release so much carbon dioxide it will exacerbate the global warming we already have, so it will be incredibly, incredibly hot. So, the hardy plants that somehow managed to survive the nuclear winter must now survive a nuclear summer. Basically, this will lead to around 10 years of no or very little plants, thus also all animals die of starvation (those that did not already die from radiation, that is), thus also most humans will die of starvation. An all out nuclear war is therefore similar to the dinosaur extinction event.
With that said, Fallout still got it wrong. Since there have been 70 to 200 years since the war, the plants that did survive, or pockets of plants for some reason were unaffected (like an automated greenhouse run on a power source with 10 years longevity, such as, say, nuclear cells), will quickly repopulate the planet following the extinction event. Especially since there are very few animals around to forage, and the ashes are rich in plant nutrients. The "oh but the water is radioactive" lore in Fallout 3 is bull, see link below.
It is actually a wasteland, so it looks like a desert, since if no plants grow, well, then the soil will not be soil but sand. Also, since they just had a nuclear war, there is particles from burning buildings etc that land everywhere and looks like... sand. Well, at least ashes. Which is what you have in Fallout 3.
The reason no plants grow is because an all out war with nuclear weapons will put so much dust in the stratosphere it actually blocks out the sun light, possible for as long as 2 years, which will kill all but the most hardy of plants, and yes, even most seeds, if they attempt to bloom rather than lying dormant. But that is only the start of problems!!! After the nuclear winter, what follows is, ironically, a nuclear summer. The world wide forest and city fires will release so much carbon dioxide it will exacerbate the global warming we already have, so it will be incredibly, incredibly hot. So, the hardy plants that somehow managed to survive the nuclear winter must now survive a nuclear summer. Basically, this will lead to around 10 years of no or very little plants, thus also all animals die of starvation (those that did not already die from radiation, that is), thus also most humans will die of starvation. An all out nuclear war is therefore similar to the dinosaur extinction event.
With that said, Fallout still got it wrong. Since there have been 70 to 200 years since the war, the plants that did survive, or pockets of plants for some reason were unaffected (like an automated greenhouse run on a power source with 10 years longevity, such as, say, nuclear cells), will quickly repopulate the planet following the extinction event. Especially since there are very few animals around to forage, and the ashes are rich in plant nutrients. The "oh but the water is radioactive" lore in Fallout 3 is bull, see link below.
It is actually a wasteland, so it looks like a desert, since if no plants grow, well, then the soil will not be soil but sand. Also, since they just had a nuclear war, there is particles from burning buildings etc that land everywhere and looks like... sand. Well, at least ashes. Which is what you have in Fallout 3.
The reason no plants grow is because an all out war with nuclear weapons will put so much dust in the stratosphere it actually blocks out the sun light, possible for as long as 2 years, which will kill all but the most hardy of plants, and yes, even most seeds, if they attempt to bloom rather than lying dormant. But that is only the start of problems!!! After the nuclear winter, what follows is, ironically, a nuclear summer. The world wide forest and city fires will release so much carbon dioxide it will exacerbate the global warming we already have, so it will be incredibly, incredibly hot. So, the hardy plants that somehow managed to survive the nuclear winter must now survive a nuclear summer. Basically, this will lead to around 10 years of no or very little plants, thus also all animals die of starvation (those that did not already die from radiation, that is), thus also most humans will die of starvation. An all out nuclear war is therefore similar to the dinosaur extinction event.
With that said, Fallout still got it wrong. Since there have been 70 to 200 years since the war, the plants that did survive, or pockets of plants for some reason were unaffected (like an automated greenhouse run on a power source with 10 years longevity, such as, say, nuclear cells), will quickly repopulate the planet following the extinction event. Especially since there are very few animals around to forage, and the ashes are rich in plant nutrients. The "oh but the water is radioactive" lore in Fallout 3 is bull, see link below.
No i really want a Dark Sun videogame. Are the two old ones for DOS good?
Yeah, they're both quite good. Athas is a fun and interesting setting in comparison to the countless Sword Coast Adventures™ we've had. DS2 in particular let's you see some interesting parts of that setting like the Wild Halfling Villages and the Veiled Alliance.
Comments
Not much, probably. Because of boredom, mostly. And nostalgia of course. But still mostly boredom involved. I could answer this in detail. But then I would probably get banned.
Anyway, all I wanted to say is that DnD is not the second coming of Jesus. It is not the be it all and end it all of roleplaying. But after seeing how much rage this opionon stirred, I will leave it at that.
D&D is popular because it is a good game. It was also the first commercially published RPG, which certainly gave it an advantage. No one has ever claimed it was written on stone tablets by Ao herself.
I'm sure many forumites here have played multiple game systems. I've played West End Games D6 system, GURPS, Savage Worlds, TSR's Marvel Superheroes, and, of course, various editions of D&D/AD&D/d20-based systems (not counting CRPGs here). I like most of them, to varying degrees, but D&D is the one I've played the most (and it was the first one I played, so I suppose there is a special fondness there).
BUT I'm not sure how you figured arguing over whether D&D was good or not would be a good idea. That's like going to a coffee shop and telling everyone you hate coffee.
That said, lately, I'm way more inclined to prefer Starfinder OR Savage Worlds to D&D 5E. /shrug
But I also have a fondness for Star Wars d6, FASA Star Trek RPG, and Golden Heroes. I used to play a lot of Traveller, but I never really liked the rules, just the setting. I prefer SF - especially space opera - to fantasy.
I'm not good at retro graphics myself though.
All the Fallouty Fallout games take place in desert areas (or desertified in case of California). The other games take place in areas that weren't desert before but now are only because the devs were lazy and thought "It's not fallout unless it's desert"
Seriously, this paragraph contradicts itself 3 times. Please state this in a manner which is more clear.
The reason no plants grow is because an all out war with nuclear weapons will put so much dust in the stratosphere it actually blocks out the sun light, possible for as long as 2 years, which will kill all but the most hardy of plants, and yes, even most seeds, if they attempt to bloom rather than lying dormant. But that is only the start of problems!!! After the nuclear winter, what follows is, ironically, a nuclear summer. The world wide forest and city fires will release so much carbon dioxide it will exacerbate the global warming we already have, so it will be incredibly, incredibly hot. So, the hardy plants that somehow managed to survive the nuclear winter must now survive a nuclear summer. Basically, this will lead to around 10 years of no or very little plants, thus also all animals die of starvation (those that did not already die from radiation, that is), thus also most humans will die of starvation. An all out nuclear war is therefore similar to the dinosaur extinction event.
With that said, Fallout still got it wrong. Since there have been 70 to 200 years since the war, the plants that did survive, or pockets of plants for some reason were unaffected (like an automated greenhouse run on a power source with 10 years longevity, such as, say, nuclear cells), will quickly repopulate the planet following the extinction event. Especially since there are very few animals around to forage, and the ashes are rich in plant nutrients. The "oh but the water is radioactive" lore in Fallout 3 is bull, see link below.
https://www.sciencealert.com/watch-here-s-what-chernobyl-looks-like-today
Edit: Here are more realistic representations of nuclear war aftermath:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_(2009_film)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threads