Why is Victor Mordenhiem a woman now?

[DenilCartel]

Mordenhiem was originally a man and there was a novel on him too. Now the character is a woman and honestly the story given in VGR was worse imo. I liked it better that he was a man of science and denied the existence of magic and the gods and it so it seemed his creation being brought to life was a punishment. Also, didn't something happen to his wife and he was trying to keep her alive? There was a child too I believe? The creature's name was Adam.

[alhoon]

Welcome to the FoS. Yes, originally Mordenheim was a man with the background you describe. The novel you refer to has been declared non-canonical, I think.
I also prefer the old version of Victor Mordenheim and this is the one I will keep. There is nothing stopping you from using the old material which, at least in my opinion, works better in some cases.

From the new darklords, I like some and I don't like some. There are issues where I like both the old and the new version so... I will keep them both. I will change the name and a few details here and there on the old darklord (or the new darklord) and put them in separate domains.
The issue I face now is... there are some cases that I don't like either the old darklord or the new darklord.
Hazlik simply doesn't work for me for example in either incarnation. Elena of Toyalis though... that one I prefer. Or Ivan Disilniya. Somehow, his treacherous ancestor seems bigger-than-Ivan (old or new). Yagno Petrovna was also very "meh" IMO same as Timothy (I think that's the name, the cleric werewolf that cannot shapechange).
I preferred Tiyet from Ankhepot although I don't dislike Ank.

[brothersale]

The novel is canon, only the novels The Enemy Within & Lord of the Necropolis have been ordained as non-Canon, wayback by the Kargat. The Desmond LaRouche entry in the Ravenloft Monstrous Compendium Appendix II is also non-canon, Malken has had real problem with canon.

[Mephisto of the FoS]

Timothy (I think that's the name, the cleric werewolf that cannot shapechange).

Nathan (Alfred's father, captain f the Virago)
Alfred (Nathan's son, priest of the Wolf God)

[onmyoji]

To answer the question of "why?" it seems that WotC is trying to do their best to be more sensitive and inclusive while also attempting to fix aspects of Ravenloft that were problematic (though, to be fair, everything is based off classic 19th/20th century novels—how could any of those be completely unproblematic in this time??). Part of this includes the fact that there should be more darklords that aren't white cis-men. Apparently it was decided at WotC that Mordenheim should be rebranded as female in an attempt to fix this.

The issue that I personally have with this is that we have a female Mordenheim now, sure. But without a firm backing in the narrative, it strikes me as nothing more than pandering. They made him female "because reasons," and that's all there is to it.

In about 5 minutes of discussing this, Mephisto and I quite accidentally created the perfect rationale for Mordernheim as a trans male-to-female darklord, which works far better than the lack of background WotC composed on Viiktra and avoids the whole pandering thing and adds a trans darklord/lady, which the new guide does not to my knowledge contain. (Our combined idea was that Mordenheim decides that *he* has come to the absolute limits of creation that he can with his own body, and thus decides to progressively alter his body to that of a female so that *she* could then use the proper female facilities for creating a new being in addition to the previous research thus far.)

But WotC wasn't interested in anything creative like that, imho. They were interested in making just enough surface edits so that they can be lauded as "brave" and "forward-thinking" and "progressive" and so on. Harkon and Akriel Lukas were similarly turned black with no rationale or background changes.

Again, if I were WotC, what I would have done is just given each domain the paragraph write-up (except maybe Barovia since CoS already altered a bunch), and then used the extra space to just CREATE a bunch of new domains with female, gay, trans, minority, etc. darklords from scratch. Now THAT would have been a brave decision for sure.

Sorry to keep hating on the new guide, but I'm calling it like I see it.

— onmyoji

[Drinnik Shoehorn]

Onmyoji has hit the nail on the head: WotC is more concerned about looking good than it is about doing the work to actually be good.

[Hanbaoge]

I agree with the above - after reading on DnDBeyond, 5e Ravenloft actually feels gutted to me, mostly due to all these changes, and with no explanation, development, just as the man said, "because reasons".

One example: Gay couples? Sure, no problems there, why not, it's a real thing. But why make Alanik Ray and Arthur Sedgwick a gay couple? Nothing in the text leads us there, or sets up the idea. Just suddenly, "Oh by the way, they're gay and married, look how inclusive we are." How hard would it have been to write the backstory to show the development of that relationship and give a good story why it happened, instead of just springing it on the reader? Speaking as a bisexual non-binary(ish), I actually find the way it was done pandering and insulting.

Not to mention the sanctimonious (in my view) reminders about being inclusive and sensitive when running Ravenloft.

Point being - the changes are not the problem, it's the way they were done. "Looking good" doesn't help us fix these problems.

[Jester of the FoS]

To be clear, there probably wasn't some corporate mandate to add more women. The CEO or head of D&D didn't set a hard number of visible people of colour.
It was the people writing the book who decided to add more women. Or the head designer on the product who was co-writing might have encouraged freelancers . It was what they wanted to write.

There was a decided lack of people of colour and women as darklords (minimum cultural standard of representation has changed in the past 25 years). There were two ways to fix that:
1) Add new darklords who are women
or
2) Race/gender-flip a few darklords

Option 1) just doesn't work as well. The existing domains are the most iconic tropes. Any new domain will feel inferiour and superfluous. Which makes the female characters feel superflous. (It's like the new 4th Edition domains everyone forgot existed.)
They opted to update the setting like a Marvel movie updating a comic story from the '70s. Do now what the creators might have done then if they were more aware of representation and negative stereotypes.

There is a third option, which is to advance the timeline and replace darklords in the story rather than retcon. Which I would have preferred. But this is much harder for new players and often leads to a weaker product, as you're spending as much time explaining how things were and changed as you spend telling people how they are now.

[onmyoji]

Any new domain will feel inferiour and superfluous. Which makes the female characters feel superflous.

I don't completely agree, especially given the amount of time the authors of that book spent discussing how to create one's own domains and what tools are needed. That was arguably one of the main foci of the book as a whole. Further, as others have said, Ravenloft is unique in being probably the single setting ever created that invites new domains constantly and consistently. Being well aware of the domain's biggest strength while simultaneously not utilizing it for their own benefit is kind of strange, no?

I definitely know for sure that if WotC had spent enough time creating a bunch of new domains with narratively strong darklords that are female/LGBTQ/minority/etc., I certainly would've had a far more constructive time with the new guide.

And re: 4th edition domains that everyone forgot existed — You definitely have a point, but I'd argue that there's a difference between domains that come out in Dragon articles during 4E's time and those appearing in the first hardcover sourcebook to Ravenloft since 3rd edition. Had 4E issued a Ravenloft sourcebook and tried to jump-start the setting, I'm pretty sure nothing therein that was completely new would be ignored.

There's also a large number of gamers whose only experience with Ravenloft is Curse of Strahd, and now Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft. I personally think that tailoring no new-from-scratch domains for that clientele will always have been a terrible mistake—or at the very least, a huge missed opportunity. It would've also been great for old players, as there's no need to quibble over lore changes and whatnot if a domain literally just got invented. Would've been a fantastic way to bridge the gap if you ask me.

— onmyoji

[Hanbaoge]

To be clear, there probably wasn't some corporate mandate to add more women. The CEO or head of D&D didn't set a hard number of visible people of colour.
It was the people writing the book who decided to add more women. Or the head designer on the product who was co-writing might have encouraged freelancers . It was what they wanted to write.

I totally realize this, and more power to them.

I applaud the sentiment that led to the changes, but wish they'd done a better job making the changes, is all I'm saying.

[High Priest Mikhal]

Considering how "woke" Wizards of the Coast has become, I'm surprised they didn't try and gender-swap more darklords. And given how this sort of thing has gone over with fans in every other media I can think of, it's going to be quietly reversed in due time because no one wants such revisionism.

[Mephisto of the FoS]

Any new domain will feel inferiour and superfluous. Which makes the female characters feel superflous.

And re: 4th edition domains that everyone forgot existed — You definitely have a point, but I'd argue that there's a difference between domains that come out in Dragon articles during 4E's time and those appearing in the first hardcover sourcebook to Ravenloft since 3rd edition. Had 4E issued a Ravenloft sourcebook and tried to jump-start the setting, I'm pretty sure nothing therein that was completely new would be ignored.

I agree although I have downloaded all 4e domains I haven't bothered to read them properly, the only normal reading being The Endless Road to see the changes made, which I personally prefer than the 2e Headless Horseman. Timberforge is almost useless to me since there was already Blackroot in Tepest for the haunted living forest theme and Silvermaw's feud with the werewolves is not really inspired in my opinion. But I believe the 4e domain unpopularity is mostly because they were uninspired and most of them not having a great concept or good tragic characters. If they had brainstormed to create new domains for 5e I believe they could have created some really good new domains. It is always about the effort you make to create quality. For instance there are so many horror themed books and movied to be inspired from. Also they could have developed the not so much developed domains like Nidala, or the Phantom Lover and his tower (maybe the Phantom Lover could have been bisexual instead of "the Caller" also to counter the damsel in distress problematic concept of 2e). They preferred to rewrite I'Cath (which I never liked before, but have info on the new one from posts in this forum) and didn't even bother with Rokushima Táiyoo which could have had also many non-European gothic horror themes that could have been inspired by Japanese myth horrors, existing terrifying settings as the Aokigahara (Suicide Forest) close to Mt. Fuji in Japan and the writings Izumi Kyoka. There could also be more development on characters as Nostalia Romaine who could easily be a tragic figure, for instance she could be a lesbian who can't use her deadly kiss to women even if she craves for it because she is haunted by the memory of Camille Dilisnya.

In about 5 minutes of discussing this, Mephisto and I quite accidentally created the perfect rationale for Mordernheim as a trans male-to-female darklord, which works far better than the lack of background WotC composed on Viiktra and avoids the whole pandering thing and adds a trans darklord/lady, which the new guide does not to my knowledge contain. (Our combined idea was that Mordenheim decides that *he* has come to the absolute limits of creation that he can with his own body, and thus decides to progressively alter his body to that of a female so that *she* could then use the proper female facilities for creating a new being in addition to the previous research thus far.)

I personally don't like the Viktra idea but yes we actually made a really fast reboot of Mordenheim. But I have to say that I believe there would be people who would not like the Mordenheim trans-gender version, because it would be to closely associated with Frankenstein, a a person who defies nature and God to create life, and could be problematic (though in my defence my idea came from the Swarchenegger movie Junior were Arnold is a cis-male scientist who takes hormones and becomes pregnant). On the other hand the Viktra Mordenheim concept could be based on the horrors of plastic surgery and people who are addicted to these operations.

[Mephisto of the FoS]

Considering how "woke" Wizards of the Coast has become, I'm surprised they didn't try and gender-swap more darklords. And given how this sort of thing has gone over with fans in every other media I can think of, it's going to be quietly reversed in due time because no one wants such revisionism.

Why? what is the talk-of-the-town in other media?

[alhoon]

Some of the new domains are very good. Like Saidra and her domain. Because that's actually a new domain with an old name.

[tomokaicho]

One example: Gay couples? Sure, no problems there, why not, it's a real thing. But why make Alanik Ray and Arthur Sedgwick a gay couple? Nothing in the text leads us there, or sets up the idea. Just suddenly, "Oh by the way, they're gay and married, look how inclusive we are." How hard would it have been to write the backstory to show the development of that relationship and give a good story why it happened, instead of just springing it on the reader? Speaking as a bisexual non-binary(ish), I actually find the way it was done pandering and insulting.

This. Take Hazlik for example. In the 3E version of Ravenloft, Hazlik was made gay, and it made the narrative make more sense. Turning Hazlik homosexual actually corrected an issue with the narrative. Here is a partial description of Hazlik's history.

In his rise to power, he became an enemy of the necromancer Thantosya. Hazlik coveted her lover, Orliab, but this was the start of his downfall. Orliab, under orders from Thantosya, suggested to Hazlik that they go off somewhere secluded and have a tryst. Having succumbed to his passion for her, Thantosya and his other enemies accused him of having assaulted her. For his crimes the court ordered his head and chest be marked with tattoos with designs considered feminine, the latter making him a pariah among his fellow Red Wizards.

In 2E, Hazlik's 'offenses' were vague. We never learn why feminine tattoos were forced upon Hazlik. In the 3E version, Hazlik is falsely accused of sexual assault of another man with whom he was having a consensual tryst, and he is thus forced to bear feminine tattoos as punishment. Turning Hazlik gay solved a problem in the original narrative. So the question must be asked: what problem do the changes in the 5E version of Ravenloft solve? From what I can see, none.