Another alternate Drakov

[thekristhomas]

He never saw the "big picture" because he never had to and that carried into his rule in Ravenloft.

That right there is how I've always interpreted Drakov's curse, he cannot and will not see the world for how it is, "big picture" wise, and therefore is ignorant of the DPs, DLs, borders etc, which is a far greater problem for him (IMHO) than the actual border closures themselves. I'd like to think that we've shown on the War in the Core thread that war is not only fightable, it is potentially winnable if the right circumstances exist, but Drakov could never see the "mumbo-jumbo" planar mechanics as anything other than nonsense.

[jamesfirecat]

Drakov has a Ministry of Arcane, and that is canon; The Tower Radiant means arcanists; I play Pathfinder, no XP needed for magic items; My Drakov has also a local branch of the Lawgiver faith which act as state sanctioned priests.
So, he has the resource of mystical power;
My Falkovnia has XVIII Century developement, so no mass production on a Fordian scale, but on lesser scale (of course, no magical items).
The Lesser Evil, as I told you my Drakov is a great general who thinks to logistics too; In my own hopinion, what makes my Drakov interesting is that he is very good in what he does, and in spite of that he never get what he wants. That, in my own hopinion is a curse more interesting that being a simple brutal warlord locked beetwen lands he can't conquer because theyr darklords can all overpower him.
However, I insist, Neo-Tiamat described this take on Drakov and Falkovnia very well, I suggest you go and read his article on Qtr 22. That is basically my take on Drakov and on Falkovnia; development, technological level, relashionships, army, I base my Falkovnia and my Drakov on that Falkovnia and of that Drakov. Is not canon, but it suits me more.

We're pretty much talking past one another at this point, or if not exactly talking past each other, at the very least, we're talking maters of taste so I don't think we're likely to change anyone's opinion.

So, before I pack it in/let you get the last word, I'm going to at least sum up all of my thoughts on why I like to depict Darkov the way I do.

Vlad Drakov is the perfect summation of Man's cruelty to man, all the things that are wrong with every day normal humans are present in Vlad Drakov, that is why he is a man with no magical powers at all... and yet manages to be a bigger monster who has fewer redeeming features than even some literal monsters like Strahd, Azalin or Jacqueline Renier.

His first horrible trait is his militarism and how he brings war to a land that otherwise for all its other faults, you could at least normally harvest your crops without worrying that a bunch of guys in armor were going to come and do horrible things to you and your family, you used to be able to trust other human beings (if they were humans and not secretly werewolves/monsters) but then Vlad Drakov came along and now everyone in reach of him is put in danger by the very thing (armed human beings) that they used to rely on to protect them against Ravenloft's "actual" monsters.

His second horrible trait is his racism, (especially as it promptly gives rise to open slavery) adjusted for a D&D setting to be targeted against elves, dwarfs, and so on and so forth rather than against people of different skin color. I don't think any more need to be said on this topic.

His third horrible trait is the fact that Vlad Drakov is "insane" at least by the measure of "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." Because really, most people would have eventually realized that you just can't invade a place where your own dead keep rising up as zombies/skeletons/whatever to attack your still living soldiers, thus creating a never ceasing cycle of the more of you soldiers die the more undead attack your soldiers, and the more undead attack your soldiers, the more of your soldiers die. Vlad has no interest in book learning/learning anything that doesn't have to do with war (and even then only the "glorious" parts of war, making sure your soldiers have boots that fit does not interest or appeal to him) and that refusal to learn is why he keeps launching one doomed attack after another. I suppose it is better to say Vlad is less "insane" and more "stupid" /"ignorant" at this point "willfully deluded" who for example refuses to accept that women can be powerful leaders, even after Jacqueline Renier threw back his armies at least once and possibly twice. Vlad refuses to learn, refuses to educate himself, refuses to show intellectual curiosity. He makes a few vague motions in that general area, but he doesn't have the heart for it, it is obvious that he doesn't want to change his ways. He makes a ministry of the arcane, but it is only about magic swords rather than fireballs on the field of battle which is by far the more effective way to use magic in a D&D setting.

Vlad is all that is wrong with humanity... and that is why it is so rewarding to see every single one of his invasions lead to the military equivalent of a face plant. It is rewarding, in a world that often seems much darker than any other... the eternal failures of Vlad Drakov who is repeatedly undone directly by his own failures to be a good human being (his lack of intellectual curiosity is why his army couldn't win wars even without border closures, his over militarism of Falkovnia has turned it into alternatively a monster in the night or a laughingstock when it could be the most powerful nation in the Core, if only it devoted itself to "conquering" those other nations by economic means rather than martial ones, his racism unites countless bands of people against him and creates foes who harry him at every turn) every time he even thinks about launching an invasion.

Vlad Drakov's failures, give hope to the rest of the world and every person living in Ravenloft, that sooner or later, every darklord will discover themselves just as much a failure as Vlad Drakov. Vlad Drakov being a helpless pathetic whiney brute of a man gives heroes reason to realize that they should stand up and be moral agents in the world, not just because it is right, but because in the end good ultimately is a more effective lifestyle choice than evil.

Vlad Drakov needs to be the bottom of the barrel, the absolute worst of the worst both in terms of his behavior, and in terms of what he achieves, if only so that we can create an effective measuring stick to hold up against other Darklords.

To give Vlad Drakov redeeming features or make him a credible threat removes the point of having him in the first place.

Vlad Drakov may threaten and frightens the nations around him (or at least the every day people of those lands), but this is chiefly because the leaders of those lands find fear of Vlad Drakov a useful threat to help shore up their own internal power bases rather than those leaders themselves fearing invasion.

[jamesfirecat]

That right there is how I've always interpreted Drakov's curse, he cannot and will not see the world for how it is, "big picture" wise, and therefore is ignorant of the DPs, DLs, borders etc, which is a far greater problem for him (IMHO) than the actual border closures themselves. I'd like to think that we've shown on the War in the Core thread that war is not only fightable, it is potentially winnable if the right circumstances exist, but Drakov could never see the "mumbo-jumbo" planar mechanics as anything other than nonsense.

T̶h̶e̶o̶r̶e̶t̶i̶c̶a̶l̶ ̶p̶h̶y̶s̶i̶c̶s̶ Planer Mechanics is a J̶e̶w̶i̶s̶h̶ Vistani S̶c̶i̶e̶n̶c̶e̶ Magic!

Not intended to offend anyone, simply illustrate a tyrant's inability to grasp what tools might grant him greater power because of his own internal biases.

Let me know if this one crosses a line and I will take it down at once.

[ewancummins]

Seems like a valid point if one is going with the Kingfuhrer, Hitler-Stalin take on Drakov.

The Bolsheviks, especially but not only under Stalin, suppressed a number of fields of research for ideological reasons.

My take on Drakov involves very little such ideological stuff.
He's smart enough to adapt, and as the Black Box notes, he holds to no code of chivalry or warrior honor that hinders his campaigning.
Drakov as I read him has no problem using magic, gunpowder, whatever.

It is reasonable to suppose he may be quite leery of clerics who seem politically influential or ambitious, though, given that he hails from Thenol.
(I think it is HumanBing who has written extensive fanfic expanding on this element. )
And as a fightingman, he probably prefers cold steel to sorcery.

[ewancummins]

I don't think an oafish, ignorant Drakov with no admirable traits would work for me, as aDM.



I'd emphasis his courage. He truly is a brave man.
If things turned out differently in his past, if he had made other choices, he might have become a hero instead of a tyrant.
Then there is his strong will, his Drakov-against-the-world refusal to quit, to despair, to knuckle under to fate and the gods.
He also loves his falcons. That is the one place where real human tenderness comes out in him.And while not a genius, he is actually notably above average in intelligence, as the stats and description show.

But I generally like my darklords to have that kernel of heroism or virtue, some fine quality, something to show they could have been other than what they became.
Generally.

I shouldn't need to write a disclaimer , but just in case:

I'm not a one true Ravenloft guy. Other DMs should run things as seems fun and sensible to them.

[brilliantlight]

Drakov has a Ministry of Arcane, and that is canon; The Tower Radiant means arcanists; I play Pathfinder, no XP needed for magic items; My Drakov has also a local branch of the Lawgiver faith which act as state sanctioned priests.
So, he has the resource of mystical power;
My Falkovnia has XVIII Century developement, so no mass production on a Fordian scale, but on lesser scale (of course, no magical items).
The Lesser Evil, as I told you my Drakov is a great general who thinks to logistics too; In my own hopinion, what makes my Drakov interesting is that he is very good in what he does, and in spite of that he never get what he wants. That, in my own hopinion is a curse more interesting that being a simple brutal warlord locked beetwen lands he can't conquer because theyr darklords can all overpower him.
However, I insist, Neo-Tiamat described this take on Drakov and Falkovnia very well, I suggest you go and read his article on Qtr 22. That is basically my take on Drakov and on Falkovnia; development, technological level, relashionships, army, I base my Falkovnia and my Drakov on that Falkovnia and of that Drakov. Is not canon, but it suits me more.

We're pretty much talking past one another at this point, or if not exactly talking past each other, at the very least, we're talking maters of taste so I don't think we're likely to change anyone's opinion.

So, before I pack it in/let you get the last word, I'm going to at least sum up all of my thoughts on why I like to depict Darkov the way I do.

Vlad Drakov is the perfect summation of Man's cruelty to man, all the things that are wrong with every day normal humans are present in Vlad Drakov, that is why he is a man with no magical powers at all... and yet manages to be a bigger monster who has fewer redeeming features than even some literal monsters like Strahd, Azalin or Jacqueline Renier.

His first horrible trait is his militarism and how he brings war to a land that otherwise for all its other faults, you could at least normally harvest your crops without worrying that a bunch of guys in armor were going to come and do horrible things to you and your family, you used to be able to trust other human beings (if they were humans and not secretly werewolves/monsters) but then Vlad Drakov came along and now everyone in reach of him is put in danger by the very thing (armed human beings) that they used to rely on to protect them against Ravenloft's "actual" monsters.

His second horrible trait is his racism, (especially as it promptly gives rise to open slavery) adjusted for a D&D setting to be targeted against elves, dwarfs, and so on and so forth rather than against people of different skin color. I don't think any more need to be said on this topic.

His third horrible trait is the fact that Vlad Drakov is "insane" at least by the measure of "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." Because really, most people would have eventually realized that you just can't invade a place where your own dead keep rising up as zombies/skeletons/whatever to attack your still living soldiers, thus creating a never ceasing cycle of the more of you soldiers die the more undead attack your soldiers, and the more undead attack your soldiers, the more of your soldiers die. Vlad has no interest in book learning/learning anything that doesn't have to do with war (and even then only the "glorious" parts of war, making sure your soldiers have boots that fit does not interest or appeal to him) and that refusal to learn is why he keeps launching one doomed attack after another. I suppose it is better to say Vlad is less "insane" and more "stupid" /"ignorant" at this point "willfully deluded" who for example refuses to accept that women can be powerful leaders, even after Jacqueline Renier threw back his armies at least once and possibly twice. Vlad refuses to learn, refuses to educate himself, refuses to show intellectual curiosity. He makes a few vague motions in that general area, but he doesn't have the heart for it, it is obvious that he doesn't want to change his ways. He makes a ministry of the arcane, but it is only about magic swords rather than fireballs on the field of battle which is by far the more effective way to use magic in a D&D setting.

Vlad is all that is wrong with humanity... and that is why it is so rewarding to see every single one of his invasions lead to the military equivalent of a face plant. It is rewarding, in a world that often seems much darker than any other... the eternal failures of Vlad Drakov who is repeatedly undone directly by his own failures to be a good human being (his lack of intellectual curiosity is why his army couldn't win wars even without border closures, his over militarism of Falkovnia has turned it into alternatively a monster in the night or a laughingstock when it could be the most powerful nation in the Core, if only it devoted itself to "conquering" those other nations by economic means rather than martial ones, his racism unites countless bands of people against him and creates foes who harry him at every turn) every time he even thinks about launching an invasion.

Vlad Drakov's failures, give hope to the rest of the world and every person living in Ravenloft, that sooner or later, every darklord will discover themselves just as much a failure as Vlad Drakov. Vlad Drakov being a helpless pathetic whiney brute of a man gives heroes reason to realize that they should stand up and be moral agents in the world, not just because it is right, but because in the end good ultimately is a more effective lifestyle choice than evil.

Vlad Drakov needs to be the bottom of the barrel, the absolute worst of the worst both in terms of his behavior, and in terms of what he achieves, if only so that we can create an effective measuring stick to hold up against other Darklords.

To give Vlad Drakov redeeming features or make him a credible threat removes the point of having him in the first place.

Vlad Drakov may threaten and frightens the nations around him (or at least the every day people of those lands), but this is chiefly because the leaders of those lands find fear of Vlad Drakov a useful threat to help shore up their own internal power bases rather than those leaders themselves fearing invasion.

Agreed, the only NPC that matches him in evil is the Dukkar and I gave him his own domain for that very reason. He is surrounded by no one but Vistani.

[Mistmaster]

I agree with ewancummins, and I think we can agree that we disagree, the nlesser evil, and brilliantlight; my last word on the argument is that my Drakov represents the evil of humanity not on an individual scale but on a nation -wide scale; thus as an individual he can even be liked, while his evil is evident by the way he rules.

[brilliantlight]

I don't think an oafish, ignorant Drakov with no admirable traits would work for me, as aDM.



I'd emphasis his courage. He truly is a brave man.
If things turned out differently in his past, if he had made other choices, he might have become a hero instead of a tyrant.
Then there is his strong will, his Drakov-against-the-world refusal to quit, to despair, to knuckle under to fate and the gods.
He also loves his falcons. That is the one place where real human tenderness comes out in him.And while not a genius, he is actually notably above average in intelligence, as the stats and description show.

But I generally like my darklords to have that kernel of heroism or virtue, some fine quality, something to show they could have been other than what they became.
Generally.

I shouldn't need to write a disclaimer , but just in case:

I'm not a one true Ravenloft guy. Other DMs should run things as seems fun and sensible to them.

I also have Drakov as pretty honorable. He expects nothing more from his men than he expects from himself and he keeps his word. That said I think he should, at best, win temporary, Pyrrhic victories.

[The Lesser Evil]

Drakov has a Ministry of Arcane, and that is canon; The Tower Radiant means arcanists; I play Pathfinder, no XP needed for magic items; My Drakov has also a local branch of the Lawgiver faith which act as state sanctioned priests.
So, he has the resource of mystical power;
My Falkovnia has XVIII Century developement, so no mass production on a Fordian scale, but on lesser scale (of course, no magical items).
The Lesser Evil, as I told you my Drakov is a great general who thinks to logistics too; In my own hopinion, what makes my Drakov interesting is that he is very good in what he does, and in spite of that he never get what he wants. That, in my own hopinion is a curse more interesting that being a simple brutal warlord locked beetwen lands he can't conquer because theyr darklords can all overpower him.
However, I insist, Neo-Tiamat described this take on Drakov and Falkovnia very well, I suggest you go and read his article on Qtr 22. That is basically my take on Drakov and on Falkovnia; development, technological level, relashionships, army, I base my Falkovnia and my Drakov on that Falkovnia and of that Drakov. Is not canon, but it suits me more.

That's perfectly fine that you have your own Drakov. However, you need to specify that so we can know any assumptions you might have for the basis of the conversation. Otherwise we don't know where/how you are deviating from the norm.

[Mistmaster]

You are right, the lesser evil, that's the reason I kept quoting that Qtr article; It's my primary source.

[brilliantlight]

The problem I have with it is that it he changed Drakov so much he isn't Drakov. He is merely a mercenary with the same name. It is like taking away Darth Vader's tendency to kill people who fail him, his hatred of the Jedi and his skill with a lightsaber. He is no longer Darth Vader but someone with the same name.

[ewancummins]

The problem I have with it is that it he changed Drakov so much he isn't Drakov. He is merely a mercenary with the same name. It is like taking away Darth Vader's tendency to kill people who fail him, his hatred of the Jedi and his skill with a lightsaber. He is no longer Darth Vader but someone with the same name.

It does change him.

But he changed in the TSR and S&S books, too.

When we first see him, he is a caged tiger. Very nasty mercenary turned warlord, who fights without any constraining code. The source(Black Box) notes his skillful tactics and cunning use of terrain, IIRC.

In later 2E materials, he acquires a Ministry of the Arcane and a Ministry of Science, making his realm seem more developed and formidable, with special weapons and mad-science enhanced troops.

He started off as a ruler who had fought Darkon and lost, but kept fighting.
Canon history made him a loser against basically everybody within marching distance. The defeats piled up, which does not change Drakov but may change the way we see him. And the way his in-game neighbors see him.

Then in 3E he is made into the Kingfuhrer. Elements of Hitler and Stalin, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, are introduced into the Falkovnian mix.
The clever, flexible mercenary fighter becomes a hidebound bully who is not smart enough to see the potential of gunpowder or battle mages.
And although Drakov as first presented encourages his population to mix with demihumans , despite their prejudice against such unions, he is now a "racist."

(The Black Box notes halfbreeds are property of the State, iirc. But it offers nothing specific about Drakov hating demihumans. Rather, Falkovnians are repelled by breeding with them. I had the impression the lord's reasons were more pragmatic)

[The Lesser Evil]

It does change him.

But he changed in the TSR and S&S books, too.

When we first see him, he is a caged tiger. Very nasty mercenary turned warlord, who fights without any constraining code. The source(Black Box) notes his skillful tactics and cunning use of terrain, IIRC

Perhaps a good use of tactics, but from what we see he's probably not so hot with logistics, running Falknovia into the ground with a minimum impalement per night merely to satisfy his own base desires. And on special occasions, 40+. That's probably significantly more than 365 deaths per year, enough to depopulate whole villages.

He started off as a ruler who had fought Darkon and lost, but kept fighting.
Canon history made him a loser against basically everybody within marching distance. The defeats piled up, which does not change Drakov but may change the way we see him. And the way his in-game neighbors see him.

Incorrect. It's always been there from the very beginning. Later sources just went into more detail.
"Drakov also has tried to conquer other domains bordering Falkovnia: Lamordia, Dementlieu, Richemulot, Borca, Dorvinia, and G’Henna. Again, he has failed each time."- RoT p. 96

In the Black Box, he was considered more of a loser than ever. Written below, the other lords didn't even consider him a credible threat.

Before Ravenloft, Drakov was just a henchman, hired who looked down upon “his kind.” Their insults burned him. He, too, aspired to rule. Ravenloft gave him what he sought, but not what he truly desired-the respect of other rulers and the strength to instill fear and awe in other lords. His former masters are no longer present appreciate his position. The lich Azalin is so powerful that he looks down on Drakov just as former employers did. None of the other lords give him much thought.- RoT p. 96

Then in 3E he is made into the Kingfuhrer. Elements of Hitler and Stalin, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, are introduced into the Falkovnian mix.
The clever, flexible mercenary fighter becomes a hidebound bully who is not smart enough to see the potential of gunpowder or battle mages.
And although Drakov as first presented encourages his population to mix with demihumans , despite their prejudice against such unions, he is now a "racist."

(The Black Box notes halfbreeds are property of the State, iirc. But it offers nothing specific about Drakov hating demihumans. Rather, Falkovnians are repelled by breeding with them. I had the impression the lord's reasons were more pragmatic)

He's always been a bully. His entire regime is based upon fear. He orders the death of people who leave no questions asked. He's always been racist. Check p. 70- all demihumans are state chattel. Opportunism does not rule out racism, as racism is bread and butter ideological rational for slavery.

Vlad has always despised magic and spellcasters, with the concession of using magic items. See the beginning of page 97 in RoT

[ewancummins]

Actually, racism and slavery don't usually have a strong connection, in history.

Or were you thinking only of the Early Modern colonial West?

[ewancummins]

Anyway, good point on the defeats.


Weaker point on "bully."
Unless most darklords who rule domains are "bullies."

Rule by fear is pretty common for darklords who are also political leaders. The Devil Strahd.
Azalin's let them hate so long as they fear attitude, and his use of the Katgat.

I disagree entirely with your argument about chattel. I mentioned that. What does enslaving halfbreeds or any demihumans necessarilly have to do with racism on Drakov's part? It could be entirely pragmatic. maybe he wants troops with infravision, superior mining skills, etc. It may be demihuman advantages and superior traits he is after. He would only be racist if he thought they were inferior to humans.
(If that word even applies to different species, which I think is a stretch.)

I disagree about impalements.
Who says he depopulates whole villages? Is that in the text?

How do you know he isn't sending raiding parties to collect foreign prisoners for impalement?

The impalemnts may also be like the large wolf populations in some rather small domains. If you do the math, it does not add up. That many wolves would need much more territory. Yet there it is.
I suspect you like to justify such anomalies, though. I do.
Depopulation is one way.
I think raids is better, though. It seems more in character. All the more frustrating that he cannot lead the crossborder raids himself!