The Phantom Lover and the Gentleman Caller

[Brandi]

I wasn't sure this fit the recent 'who are the children of the GC?' thread, and doing a search for both names here didn't turn up the kind of thread I was wondering about: namely, has anyone ever speculated that the Phantom Lover is *also* a child of the GC? Has anyone ever run their game with that assumption, and if so how'd it work?

[cure]

Never saw that before.

That would make the mother a Vistani or a half-Vistani.

Recently I was reading the description of a Vorlog and that invited the thought that such might make for an interesting recasting of the Phantom Lover's past, or does he even have a canon past to recast?

The Phantom Lover might also predate the arrival of the GC in Ravenloft. Not sure if we have a first date for the former or not. Although a fling with someone of the Zarovich tribe might take care of any timeline problem.

[HuManBing]

Woah, that explains a lot.

I got the Phantom Lover and the Gentleman Caller mixed up. I thought they were the same being.

Whatever happened to the PL, anyway? Didn't he sort of get subsumed to the Gentleman Caller?

[Sylaire]

I'd like to vote against the Phantom Lover being one of the children of the Gentleman Caller, simply because the Gentleman Caller is an original (more or less) Ravenloft-mythos creation, while the Phantom Lover is based on real-world fairy-tale legends (in "reality," he has a goose's foot instead of a dragon's...that's pretty much the only difference).

As for one being subsumed into the other, while similar, they have largely different M.O.s, other than the inclusion of "seduction" as a motif. The Caller seduces women in order to bring children into the world (apparently in furtherance of some unknown evil scheme), while the Phantom Lover appears to grieving lovers to take them off to the grave with him. So I don't really see the one as replacing the other; the P.L. is more of a one-shot enemy without a greater scheme while the G.C. is a campaign-long Ultimate Adversary (or background color, if you prefer. ).

[Rotipher of the FoS]

The Phantom Lover was tentatively classified as a ghost by Van Richten in 2E, but at present he's probably best treated as a Mists creature (perhaps a unique vampire-variant, now one of the Fugued). There doesn't seem to be anything specifically "demonic" about him, nor half-demonic either.

[Brandi]

Recently I was reading the description of a Vorlog and that invited the thought that such might make for an interesting recasting of the Phantom Lover's past, or does he even have a canon past to recast?

Nope, the writeup of him in Darklords was always very vague.

I'm also inclined to agree with Rotipher about treating him as a Mists creature; he never really fit the darklord paradigm (similarly, I consider the House of Lament to be a strong and nasty phantasmagora-- they just had to slot it into the domain category back in the day).

Truth be told, I'm not sure I'd consider the Lover a child of the GC; I just wondered if anyone else had and thought I'd see what discussion came of it.

[HuManBing]

Both of them seem like doomed souls condemned to forever travel the lands, hoping to avoid child support...

[Rotipher of the FoS]

OTOH, the Lover's lovers tend never to survive long enough for child support to become an issue.