Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Discussing all things Ravenloft
Five
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 886
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 9:59 am

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by Five »

Gonzoron of the FoS wrote:
Five wrote:To be fair, dropping the mod while you're in the mix is a ***** move.
You're welcome to your opinion, but we're a small board here, with not a lot of posters. The chances of one of the mods being involved involved in a discussion is high. Sometimes we will have to moderate something we're involved in, it's the nature of the beast. And "please be respectful" isn't a particularly difficult request to abide by, it's a basic expectation of anyone posting here.
For sure. I'm a poster that may need a friendly reminder from time to time, what with my pighead and all. And I respect you mods for the role you play and the manner and patience with which you carry.

Yet respect is a two-way street.

Just as somebody upthread mentioned, table sensitivity is a thing now, whether we like it or not. And as each DM Guide, rulebook, whatever, has to assume that its reader is new to the game it needs to be addressed. Fair enough. But then there are those of us who see things from a different perspective. We never had such a thing when we started (and at a younger age I do belueve) and we (everybody I know of personally) never turned into bigoted, sadistic monsters that had people running from our tables in tears. Exceptions to that rule no doubt exist, but the game grew to what it is today so it can't be a bad thing, an error in judgement, or a moral or ethical wrong. Can it?

To allow one side of that argument and not the other is disrespectful to the whole.

It can't hurt to include those things if that's the current trend, but how much is too much? How much is too little? How did the old hands get on without it? These, and of course other questions, are the things that should be up front in frank conversation.
"A very piteous thing it was to see such a quantity of dead bodies, and such an outpouring of blood - that is, if they had not been enemies of the Christian faith."

- Jean Pierre Sarrasin, "The Memoirs of the Lord of Joinville"
User avatar
Joël of the FoS
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6708
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2003 1:24 pm
Gender: Male
Location: St-Damien, Québec

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by Joël of the FoS »

Mephisto wrote:I mean for Dementlieu ghouls with fine clothes where is the Gothic Horror in that, it sound superficial.
To be fair, I think this was an outsider's review comment, not an author's comment.

Do not forget that so far, we have very few info on the product, just blurbs. We'll see!
"A full set of (game) rules is so massively complicated that the only time they were all bound together in a single volume, they underwent gravitational collapse and became a black hole" (Adams)
User avatar
Jester of the FoS
Jester of the Dark Comedy
Jester of the Dark Comedy
Posts: 4536
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:19 am
Location: A Canadian from Canadia

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by Jester of the FoS »

Gonzoron of the FoS wrote:On the subject of "why remake the existing domains into something completely different," I get that, and can absolutely see the perspective. But on the other hand, why rehash the same stuff we've seen for 30 years? The ideal would be to build on what was there and move it forward, but as mentioned, that has the continuity quagmire issue. If I had to choose, I'd rather see a completely different take on Falkovnia and Dementlieu (two of my favorite domains, by the way) than read a rewording of the same stuff we've gotten so many times before.

Everyone's going to have their favorites and their less favorites. Valachan never clicked with me, so I don't really care if it gets remade or not. Dementlieu is more central to Ravenloft than Barovia for me, so it's going to be weird to see ghouls and fey there, but I'll give it a chance.
That's fair. And I'm onboard with new stuff and changes... but I just wish they'd tie into the past. Expand on continuity rather than revising.

If this is 780 BC and the Time of Unparalleled Darkness killed a bunch of darklords and shook the Core. That's totally cool.

If it's still 735 BC like in Curse of Strahd and those darklords have been erased from canon, that rubs me the wrong way.
Because while a zombie apocalypse domain sounds cool (and was one of the domains I attempted a while back) it doesn't need to be Falkovnia. Nothing is added by using the existing map. And it doesn't need to be in the middle of the Core: it works better as an Island of Terror.

(I'm honestly tempted to write a ToUD adventure now where the climax is time is reversed and fate is rewritten just to make this fit. A Crisis on Infinite Domain if you will...)
User avatar
Gonzoron of the FoS
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 7576
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 8:02 pm
Gender: Male
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by Gonzoron of the FoS »

Jester of the FoS wrote:That's fair. And I'm onboard with new stuff and changes... but I just wish they'd tie into the past. Expand on continuity rather than revising.
Oh, make no mistake, I wish it too. I wish it very much. But I've accepted that my wishes may not be what makes for a successful product.
"We're realistic heroes. We're not here to save the world, just nudge the world into a better place."
Five
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 886
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 9:59 am

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by Five »

Jester of the FoS wrote:
Five wrote:Getting back to VRGtR, I'm still scratching my head about the whole paying more, a lot more, for less pages. What's up with that?
$49.95 is the standard price they charge for books. And 256-pages is close to the norm: that's the same size as Ravnica and Theros.
Could be an Amazon jack then...?

Either way, I'm stoked to see what will come of it. Just sayin' cos I just noticed.
"A very piteous thing it was to see such a quantity of dead bodies, and such an outpouring of blood - that is, if they had not been enemies of the Christian faith."

- Jean Pierre Sarrasin, "The Memoirs of the Lord of Joinville"
User avatar
Jester of the FoS
Jester of the Dark Comedy
Jester of the Dark Comedy
Posts: 4536
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:19 am
Location: A Canadian from Canadia

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by Jester of the FoS »

Five wrote:
Gonzoron of the FoS wrote:
Five wrote:To be fair, dropping the mod while you're in the mix is a ***** move.
You're welcome to your opinion, but we're a small board here, with not a lot of posters. The chances of one of the mods being involved involved in a discussion is high. Sometimes we will have to moderate something we're involved in, it's the nature of the beast. And "please be respectful" isn't a particularly difficult request to abide by, it's a basic expectation of anyone posting here.
For sure. I'm a poster that may need a friendly reminder from time to time, what with my pighead and all. And I respect you mods for the role you play and the manner and patience with which you carry.

Yet respect is a two-way street.
A respectful reminder was my intent. The poster had made a comment that wasn't discussing the subject and was instead making light of the idea of people having trauma at the table. As someone who has gamed with people with PTSD and former troops, this felt like a bad take and a friendly unofficial warning was needed. Opposed to hit the formal "warning" button.
A "that was the line. Please don't cross that."

When he responded, I didn't reply, ban, or warn and instead forwarded things to another mod to take action because I had been engaging. I gave my opinion and let them decide.
Five wrote:Just as somebody upthread mentioned, table sensitivity is a thing now, whether we like it or not. And as each DM Guide, rulebook, whatever, has to assume that its reader is new to the game it needs to be addressed. Fair enough. But then there are those of us who see things from a different perspective. We never had such a thing when we started (and at a younger age I do belueve) and we (everybody I know of personally) never turned into bigoted, sadistic monsters that had people running from our tables in tears. Exceptions to that rule no doubt exist, but the game grew to what it is today so it can't be a bad thing, an error in judgement, or a moral or ethical wrong. Can it?

To allow one side of that argument and not the other is disrespectful to the whole.

It can't hurt to include those things if that's the current trend, but how much is too much? How much is too little? How did the old hands get on without it? These, and of course other questions, are the things that should be up front in frank conversation.
A comedian I like, Jim Jefferies, did a bit on his latest Netflix special about how the current generation is the most tolerant and enlightened generation in history. Having replaced the previous generation, who was the most tolerant and enlightened generation in history before.
Because that's how it works. The line is always shifting and changing. What is and is not acceptable moves over time. Stuff my parents found acceptable I find horribly offensive. And stuff I find acceptable will be horribly offensive in a decade or two.

Calling out a sentence:
But then there are those of us who see things from a different perspective. We never had such a thing when we started (and at a younger age I do believe) and we (everybody I know of personally) never turned into bigoted, sadistic monsters that had people running from our tables in tears.
Emphasis added. This could apply to so much. Seat belts. Helmets while biking. I never wore a helmet as a kid. Never had a booster seat in the car. And I turned out fine.
But so many kids didn't.

We don't remember the people who tried gaming and left because lines were crossed. Because they left the game and likely didn't say why. We forget the times we were super uncomfortable at the table, because the good times are happier.
If you look, the internet is full of horror stories of bad DMs. (Especially bad DMs to women players.)

95% of the time, a session zero and discussing table rules and boundaries is unnecessary. But you do it for that 5% of the time. It's the seat belt. 95% of the time you're not going to be in a crash. But when you are, you're glad for the seatbelt.
That way when a player says "oh, by the way, I was in a burning building when I was 5 and still have bad dreams of that." You can scrap the adventure where the inn catches fire. Or run it past them.

It's not even just about triggers and trauma. But just dealbreaker behaviour. Touching someone else's dice. Being on a phone. Body contact. Eating peanut butter in a room with someone with a nut allergy. Whatever.
I had a game semi-derailed and almost collapse because there was too much off-turn wisecracking during other character's spotlight time. Everyone was trying to get the laugh too often when one player was trying to have a quick moment. So we had a discussion and set-up a new rule and the game went on.
User avatar
Jester of the FoS
Jester of the Dark Comedy
Jester of the Dark Comedy
Posts: 4536
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:19 am
Location: A Canadian from Canadia

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by Jester of the FoS »

Five wrote:
Jester of the FoS wrote:
Five wrote:Getting back to VRGtR, I'm still scratching my head about the whole paying more, a lot more, for less pages. What's up with that?
$49.95 is the standard price they charge for books. And 256-pages is close to the norm: that's the same size as Ravnica and Theros.
Could be an Amazon jack then...?

Either way, I'm stoked to see what will come of it. Just sayin' cos I just noticed.
It just went on Amazon today. Their standard 10-15% off discounts haven't kicked in yet. Guaranteed between now and release it will drop to $40.

(And if you preorder, when it does release, you get locked in to the lowest price it hits between when you preordered and when it released.)
FiranDarcalus
Agent of the Fraternity
Agent of the Fraternity
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2020 8:55 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by FiranDarcalus »

Gonzoron of the FoS wrote:
Jester of the FoS wrote:That's fair. And I'm onboard with new stuff and changes... but I just wish they'd tie into the past. Expand on continuity rather than revising.
Oh, make no mistake, I wish it too. I wish it very much. But I've accepted that my wishes may not be what makes for a successful product.

I think it could still be successful if it made mention of the past works. I think it would not harm new fans' interest & vets like us would love that at least they were respecting the tradition of the world & trying to build on it. It honestly more feels like they just wanted to ignore what came before for their own vision. Like you, I loooove Dementlieu. It's disappointing that they are just ignoring all the lore. Could have been cool to play up that maybe Dominic & the brain completely destroyed Dementlieu & some dark forces picked up the pieces to start it over. They could have even referenced the ToUD to explain all the changes, just like they had s story for all the changes with Forgotten Realms 4th edition.

Just kinda disappointing. I'm sure there's still going to be lots of great stuff though. I'm interested to see what their take will be on Nova Vaasa, Kartakass, Richemulot & Borca.
User avatar
Joël of the FoS
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6708
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2003 1:24 pm
Gender: Male
Location: St-Damien, Québec

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by Joël of the FoS »

Indeed I'm also for continuity, but it could be seen as limiting the reset possibilities, or needing too much word count to expain and ensure that continuity.

I feel that's a job for us - a cool collective work, or an article making the links between 5e and old stuff. ;)
"A full set of (game) rules is so massively complicated that the only time they were all bound together in a single volume, they underwent gravitational collapse and became a black hole" (Adams)
onmyoji
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2021 2:28 am
Gender: Male

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by onmyoji »

Joël of the FoS wrote:Indeed I'm also for continuity, but it could be seen as limiting the reset possibilities, or needing too much word count to expain and ensure that continuity.
I wonder just how many people got turned on to the old Ravenloft lore just from Curse of Strahd. I know I'm one of them. CoS was (unfortunately) my first entry into Ravenloft, though by all rights I should've been into D&D long ago. Either way, I enjoyed CoS so much that I've been working on reading all the old modules and working on a campaign over the last two years. It's finally starting now.

I wonder how many were like me—how many took up an interest in the old lore based on the new material.

— onmyoji

P.S. — I agree it's probably "our" (quotations because despite lurking here, I only joined this week) job to forge the links between the new and the old for those like me who this guide might bring to FoS.
Five
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 886
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 9:59 am

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by Five »

[quote="Jester of the FoS"]The line is always shifting and changing. What is and is not acceptable moves over time. Stuff my parents found acceptable I find horribly offensive. And stuff I find acceptable will be horribly offensive in a decade or two.[\quote]

I'm not offended at past generations' mentalities because they're not mine. I'll shake my head when I encounter such oddities (like some of the crap Lovecraft and Howard carried in their writings, old ignorant cartoons, movies, news clips, history docs, etc), but I don't subscribe to such ways of thinking so I can gloss over it. Things were different then, normal for them, and that's that. We learn to better ourselves from old normals, so I don't see a point in fearing bullets already fired.

As for the rest, you bring up good points.

I don't buy in to the idea that hordes of people walked away from Dungeons and Dragons, old school or new, because of personal trauma and the inability of the rulebook to educate DMs in how to cater to said trauma. I'd say the geek association, geek tag, did more damage than everything combined, especially if the group was socially isolated from other groups (cliques). I played hockey and rugby, so I guess I was fortunate in that regard. Nobody would say boo (to my face anyway). Where's the published advice for that?

But like I said earlier I can see the want for such guidelines to be included with the game. Especially if it is to target, even if in a fictional way, (modern) human sensitivities. If people want it, if Wizards feels the need to cater to that want and/or elevate themselves above the competition, then do it. No harm in it. I just hope that they make an appropriate commitment to it.
"A very piteous thing it was to see such a quantity of dead bodies, and such an outpouring of blood - that is, if they had not been enemies of the Christian faith."

- Jean Pierre Sarrasin, "The Memoirs of the Lord of Joinville"
onmyoji
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2021 2:28 am
Gender: Male

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by onmyoji »

Five wrote:If people want it, if Wizards feels the need to cater to that want and/or elevate themselves above the competition, then do it. No harm in it. I just hope that they make an appropriate commitment to it.
I said it earlier, but it might've gotten lost in others' posts. I agree completely with this, but at the same time worry that putting such content ONLY in a Ravenloft guide implies that such things are really only necessary in a Ravenloft campaign. We all know that a campaign doesn't have to be set in Ravenloft to potentially invoke trauma or discomfort in a player.

"Appropriate commitment" to me suggests that content regarding player consent/comfort should be added straight to the PHB/DMG, not put into an optional supplement that not everyone who plays 5E will even look at.

Just my two copper though.

— onmyoji
Five
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 886
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 9:59 am

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by Five »

onmyoji wrote:
Five wrote:If people want it, if Wizards feels the need to cater to that want and/or elevate themselves above the competition, then do it. No harm in it. I just hope that they make an appropriate commitment to it.
I said it earlier, but it might've gotten lost in others' posts. I agree completely with this, but at the same time worry that putting such content ONLY in a Ravenloft guide implies that such things are really only necessary in a Ravenloft campaign. We all know that a campaign doesn't have to be set in Ravenloft to potentially invoke trauma or discomfort in a player.

"Appropriate commitment" to me suggests that content regarding player consent/comfort should be added straight to the PHB/DMG, not put into an optional supplement that not everyone who plays 5E will even look at.

Just my two copper though.

— onmyoji
Excellent points. Reprints if they're all-in. Player's Handbook for how to bring your concern(s) to the table, and Dungeon Master's Guide for how to handle/manage said concern(s)...
"A very piteous thing it was to see such a quantity of dead bodies, and such an outpouring of blood - that is, if they had not been enemies of the Christian faith."

- Jean Pierre Sarrasin, "The Memoirs of the Lord of Joinville"
User avatar
Leliel
Arch-villain
Arch-villain
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:23 pm
Location: In a shadow of a shadow

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by Leliel »

onmyoji wrote:
Five wrote:If people want it, if Wizards feels the need to cater to that want and/or elevate themselves above the competition, then do it. No harm in it. I just hope that they make an appropriate commitment to it.
I said it earlier, but it might've gotten lost in others' posts. I agree completely with this, but at the same time worry that putting such content ONLY in a Ravenloft guide implies that such things are really only necessary in a Ravenloft campaign. We all know that a campaign doesn't have to be set in Ravenloft to potentially invoke trauma or discomfort in a player.

"Appropriate commitment" to me suggests that content regarding player consent/comfort should be added straight to the PHB/DMG, not put into an optional supplement that not everyone who plays 5E will even look at.

Just my two copper though.

— onmyoji
I feel it might be best to reprint that sentiment in Ravenloft, though. Because horror is especially fraught. I'm not being sarcastic, horror is something it's easy to go from exploring what scares people to invoking actual trauma really easily. So, best to have a X card about.

Also, reading that press release... holy **** this is the apogee of what Falkovnia was supposed to be.

Think about it. What's the running theme of zombie apocalypses, that has nothing to do with the zombies? That's right, how savage the living will become when pressed, and how "restoring order" is often code for "using the crisis to grab power." A zombie apocalypse is also a military horror; boxed in on all sides by a relentless, overwhelming force, with commanders who don't care a whit and a supply line running low.

Quite simply, Vlad Drakov has a setting where he seems like the option of survival. He can be ported as is even without the buff into the Immortal Vampire Kaiser-General, and he would make sense. If he can protect anyone at all from the horde, he'll get followers. Often, very sympathetic followers. I, for example, look forward to Jaeger-Fuher HUNK.

Besides, Darkon is a much better "horrors of fascism" domain anyway (its darklord is a one-lich Ministry of Truth, and his domain provokes forced assimilation), so, I'm more than fine with this.
Last edited by Gonzoron of the FoS on Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: edited for language. "grandma rule"
I am The Archangel of Night.
I am the Guardian of Shadow
I am the Vindicator of the Unknown
I am..Leliel.
onmyoji
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 252
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2021 2:28 am
Gender: Male

Re: Ravenloft is back in 5e?

Post by onmyoji »

Leliel wrote:
I feel it might be best to reprint that sentiment in Ravenloft, though. Because horror is especially fraught. I'm not being sarcastic, horror is something it's easy to go from exploring what scares people to invoking actual trauma really easily. So, best to have a X card about.

Also, reading that press release... holy shit this is the apogee of what Falkovnia was supposed to be.

Think about it. What's the running theme of zombie apocalypses, that has nothing to do with the zombies? That's right, how savage the living will become when pressed, and how "restoring order" is often code for "using the crisis to grab power." A zombie apocalypse is also a military horror; boxed in on all sides by a relentless, overwhelming force, with commanders who don't care a whit and a supply line running low.

Quite simply, Vlad Drakov has a setting where he seems like the option of survival. He can be ported as is even without the buff into the Immortal Vampire Kaiser-General, and he would make sense. If he can protect anyone at all from the horde, he'll get followers. Often, very sympathetic followers. I, for example, look forward to Jaeger-Fuher HUNK.

Besides, Darkon is a much better "horrors of fascism" domain anyway (its darklord is a one-lich Ministry of Truth, and his domain provokes forced assimilation), so, I'm more than fine with this.
I should perhaps clarify. I'm not saying that an updated campaign setting for Ravenloft shouldn't have such materials. My point is that if WotC is serious about player consent and comfort, then this isn't the only place it should appear. Of course, consent and comfort is especially important in a Ravenloft setting. But if this writeup is only printed in the VR Guide, then the inferred motivation would be to sanitize the setting and make it more "PG-13" or more "user-friendly," as others have already noted in this thread.

This also comes from my new mindset, having switched happily from 5E to Pathfinder 2E. The Core Rulebook (PHB equivalent) already addresses consent, player comfort, and ways to deal with that. It mentions X Cards and other ways of dealing with sensitive material. Granted, that book was published August 2019—very recently, and five years after the PHB was first printed. Part of me thinks it's obvious why there won't be drastic changes to any PHB printing. Then the other part of me looks at the also-recent CoS: Revamped, which (or so I've heard) only changed a few sentences here and there.

Had it been me, I'd have made a PHB 2.0 which could then cover all the material deemed problematic as of late, could have a corrective note on how to handle the Vistani if you play CoS, and release it online for free for those who already bought the PHB. Further, it could easily be referred to in this upcoming VR Guide, with a note saying something to the tune of "If you run a Ravenloft campaign, it is especially important to read the new PHB writeup on consent/player comfort. They could sum it up in the VR guide, but either way, that would excuse any need for a "lengthy" writeup, and allow a book like this to do what it's supposed to—delve into Ravenloft.

My guess is they didn't have enough actual material for a Ravenloft guide by their deadline (despite all the extant lore), so that consent/comfort writeup got expanded to "lengthy" to help cover some of the word count. Just a guess, of course, but I can't pretend I don't perceive a clear dwindling quality of content for 5E in recent times.

— onmyoji
Post Reply