What do you expect from 4E?

[Zoria]

Round 5

Let’s go dealing about Darklords. Figures of great charm, backbone of the whole setting. The lords of Ravenloft, however, suffer from a certain predictability, and like any good storyteller knows, there's no better way to weaken a character than making it predictable. This predictability constists mainly in two equations: “1 Darklord = 1 domain" and "1 ruler = 1 Darklord".
From here, the following requirements:

- Evil does not rule. Except for some of them (Lord Godfrey, Dr. Mordenheim ...), most of the Darklords are also the rulers of the domain they infest. This means that each of them can be easily traced back simply asking a passerby: "I'm sorry, who's in charge here?". It should be better to introduce a greater number of Darklords operating separately from political power, villains who act like mysterious entities beyond the immediate consciousness of the player.

- Movable wickedness. The Darklords are too sedentary, and in most cases are confined between the walls of a specific building. This allows players to easily avoid them whenever they want, simply avoiding his home. The permanence of the Darklords is sometimes fascinating, and we could not imagine Strahd detached from the austere walls of his castle. On the other hand, it allows players to exercise a strict control over the villain: returning to the example of Barovia, any person who goes through the realm knows very unlikely to meet Strahd in Zeidenburg or Teufeldorf, as the range of the vampire is limited to the Village of Barovia and the surrounding areas. Who crosses Keening perfectly knows that he can evoid Tristessa simply bypassing Mount Lament, as the creature never comes down from her mountain refuge.

This implies that in the vast majority of cases in which players encounter a Darklord, it occurs because they have WILLINGLY chosen to do that, and this results paradoxically in giving them a power of choice over the Darklord himself.
Currently, the only domain where the Darklord has a relative mobility and unpredictability is Verbrek, and this is also why goin’ through this forest is one of the most frightening experience for any Ravenloft player: they cannot control the evil and it can always come to them at any time.

In forthcoming Ravenloft, it would be proper that many more Darklords enjoy the same mobility and unpredictability of Timothy: a Darklord that ranges over the entire surface of his land like a looming menace could make his domain a place of much greater terror, restlessness and anxiety for the players.

- Cut ties with the land: I will talk about this next time. I do not want to become too verbose...

[ewancummins]

Round 5

Let’s go dealing about Darklords. Figures of great charm, backbone of the whole setting. The lords of Ravenloft, however, suffer from a certain predictability, and like any good storyteller knows, there's no better way to weaken a character than making it predictable. This predictability constists mainly in two equations: “1 Darklord = 1 domain" and "1 ruler = 1 Darklord".
From here, the following requirements:

- Evil does not rule. Except for some of them (Lord Godfrey, Dr. Mordenheim ...), most of the Darklords are also the rulers of the domain they infest. This means that each of them can be easily traced back simply asking a passerby: "I'm sorry, who's in charge here?". It should be better to introduce a greater number of Darklords operating separately from political power, villains who act like mysterious entities beyond the immediate consciousness of the player.

- Movable wickedness. The Darklords are too sedentary, and in most cases are confined between the walls of a specific building. This allows players to easily avoid them whenever they want, simply avoiding his home. The permanence of the Darklords is sometimes fascinating, and we could not imagine Strahd detached from the austere walls of his castle. On the other hand, it allows players to exercise a strict control over the villain: returning to the example of Barovia, any person who goes through the realm knows very unlikely to meet Strahd in Zeidenburg or Teufeldorf, as the range of the vampire is limited to the Village of Barovia and the surrounding areas. Who crosses Keening perfectly knows that he can evoid Tristessa simply bypassing Mount Lament, as the creature never comes down from her mountain refuge.

This implies that in the vast majority of cases in which players encounter a Darklord, it occurs because they have WILLINGLY chosen to do that, and this results paradoxically in giving them a power of choice over the Darklord himself.
Currently, the only domain where the Darklord has a relative mobility and unpredictability is Verbrek, and this is also why goin’ through this forest is one of the most frightening experience for any Ravenloft player: they cannot control the evil and it can always come to them at any time.

In forthcoming Ravenloft, it would be proper that many more Darklords enjoy the same mobility and unpredictability of Timothy: a Darklord that ranges over the entire surface of his land like a looming menace could make his domain a place of much greater terror, restlessness and anxiety for the players.

- Cut ties with the land: I will talk about this next time. I do not want to become too verbose...

One: There are already a lot of canon darklords that aren't rulers, though. Examples:

Misroi
Marikith Queen
Sodo
The Hags
D'Honaire(he is a power behind the throne- not the open ruler)
Ebonbane (no political structure whatever in its domain)
The Headless Horseman (a mobile domain, too!)
The wereshark guy in Saragoss,
etc, etc.

I wouldn't mind seeing more new Darklords who act from behind the scenes, or are not involved in politics at all.

Two- aren't you are assuming that players will abuse player knowledge about the darklords? My players don't do this.

Three- don't forget about conjunctions. The Grand Conjuction was not the only one, as we know.

Four- fiends taking people across borders may be a possibility.

Five: Why assume that adventures are mainly about darklords, anyway? Evil in RL isn't confined to the darklords, and it can come at the PCs in a variety of forms, from grotesque to subtle, and in any place or at any time.

Six- Cut ties to the land? I hope that's not severing the close link between a darklord and his domain. That would uproot the basic structure of the setting: Ravenloft is a world formed of multiple domains , each serving as the prison-realm of a cursed and damned villain-the darklord. The lands reflect their lords' personalities, powers, and curses.

[Rotipher of the FoS]

The permanence of the Darklords is sometimes fascinating, and we could not imagine Strahd detached from the austere walls of his castle. On the other hand, it allows players to exercise a strict control over the villain: returning to the example of Barovia, any person who goes through the realm knows very unlikely to meet Strahd in Zeidenburg or Teufeldorf, as the range of the vampire is limited to the Village of Barovia and the surrounding areas.

Strahd, confined to his castle and its environs? Not unless you're playing I6 or its updates, he's not. This is a darklord who, in recent years, has literally scoured every square yard of his domain for signs of Tatyana's missing incarnation, and personally come to Zeidenburg to inspect his conquests and smack down his troublemaking niece, among other business. True, Barovia's lord may not always be a visible presence in the wider domain's far corners, but even when he's not visiting in person, his influence should be felt: just you try asking his agent, Vasili von Holtz, whether Strahd'll ever get off his lazy butt and make the rounds!

[alhoon]

Strahd defines Barovia. His mood is Barovia's weather.

[Zoria]

Round 5 1/2

- Cut ties with the land. Sensitive topic. The link of a darklord with his domain is simultaneously one of the strengths and weaknesses of Ravenloft.

The flaws of this link can be summarized in three fundamental points:

1) The inability to leave the domain, resulting in the well-known political deadlock that we have mentioned several times before.

2) An annoying “videogame-like effect”, that’s expressed by the equation "level1=boss1, level2=boss2, ect...", in some unlikely effects of closing border (deadly storm of blades around the country?), and in a too sudden and immediate shift from a atmosphere to another completely different, as if the various domains were cut with an ax and there was not between them the right amalgam. In fact, since the darklords are very different, their respective domains tend to differ accordingly; but if it is normal that two adjacent individuals are profoundly dissimilar, it is unlikely that this same diversity is reflected and reported on two neighboring areas. A good example of what I say is given by the Moon River, which after having walked several miles in Barovian land, suddenly become poisonous in the first run of the border with Borca.

3) The feeling that the world is evil. I did not say “dominated by evil”, but evil in his innermost nature. Which is a problem. Indeed, if a world dominated by evil is a world for which it’s worth fighting for, a world that is inherently evil is beyond any possibility of affection by the players. The close relationship between darklords and their domains tends unfortunately to suggest that there is a moral connection between them, that the earth is not simply corrupted by the presence of an external evil entity, eliminating which it can flourish again, but that it is a real incarnation of evil entity himself. In Domains of Dread is even said that the killing of a Dark Lord may lead to the loss and destruction of the proper land, as if the domain and his darklord was the same thing. Then not only the player is led to wonder what good is fighting a darklord if its destruction lead to the dead of thousands of innocents (at this point is better to live under the tyranny of the darklord instead of being sucked in oblivion), but he is induced to feel antipathy towards a world perceived as hostile, when it should be perceived like the victim of the same evil from which the player suffers. In other words, the current formulation: “world+Darklord (executioners) vs. player (victim)”, should be replaced by “world+player (victims) vs. Darklords (executioners)".

That said, what the possible solutions?

Assuming that a degree of integration between the Darklord and the kingdom he lives in is necessary to preserve the beauty of the setting, I'd suggest to consider the darklords at the same way as fiends, giving them a reality wrinkle that has on the ground a degrading\increasing effect in relation to its proximity to the epicenter of power.

This solution would offer some advantages:

1) Aesthetic correspondence between darklords and their land would be preserved in its romantic beauty, as the reality wrinkle continues to alter things around the darklord accordingly to the quality of his soul. Therefore, around Ivana Boritsi, plants, flowers and water sources continue to be poisonous; around Adam a deadly cold continues to be radiated; around Strahd things and places continue to suffer from his evil, appearing misty, gloomy and decadent. This could also be a good narrative tool in the hands of the DM, which could use the sudden change of the surroundings (fog that suddenly become more dense and dark) as a bogeyman for the suggested approach of a darklord.

2) The murder of a Darklord would not mean the disappearance of a domain , because, just like demons, between the land and the evil being that lives in there would be a relation of mutual conditioning, but not one of effective and cosmic incarnation. This would also allow the player to finally feel the land in which he move victim of the evil "along with him” and not "in contrast to him”, as currently perceived.

3) Darklords could finally attempt sorties outside their borders , and freed from the constraint that forces them within the boundaries of a single realm. Just like demons, they will continue to be prisoners of the Demi-Plane, but with a more comprehensive scope for action. So Vlad Drakov could finally attempt assault to Darkon at the head of his mercenary troops, Azalin riding Ebb could be seen crossing the skies of Falkovnia throwing some dark curses, and Dominic D'Honaire could directly participate in diplomatic meetings of Heather House in Mordent, weaving his own plans with his hands, rather than commit them to less effective ambassador delegates.

4) Breaking down the scheme (by now too predictable) "1 domain = 1 darklord". The severing of the cosmic link between darklords and their domains would allow the presence within the same territory of two or more entities of extreme wickedness. This would deprive players of their certainties and put them in a state of unconsciousness, could lead to conflict two or more evil forces that occupy the same area, and create original aesthetic overlap of powers where two darklords are nearby (for example, if Ivana Boritsi were housed in Lamordia, we could imagine an overlap of its reality wrinkle with that of Adam, assuming the precipitation of a strange green and poisonous snow...).

5) A more consistent contiguity between the domains, which, behind the “custom” corruption impressed them by the various darklords, could enjoy a own coherent geography, indipendent of the metaphysical chains that bind them to the villains, and therefore showing a greater likelihood and harmony with each another. Returning to the example of Borca, the Moon River would not be poisoned just crossed the border of Barovia, but it could be more or less poisoned by the proximity of Ivana and her reality wrinkle. Perhaps, the closeness of Ivana to the Barovian border could lead her reality wrinkle to cross over into the land of Strahd, with the subsequent irritation of the vampire.

Of course, these are guidelines, and each of you has the freedom to integrate them with your own proposals.

[Strahdsbuddy]

I like what HMB has to say (as usual) in particular about allowing darklords to move about, although I would limit this; instead of travelling in a little bubble of their own domain, I would see their power greatly diminished by crossing their borders, with similar odd occurances in their home domain during their absence. This would help explain why it happens so seldom. In fact, the capability to cross physical borders (not the Misty Border) could have existed since the appearance of Forlorn, despite what it says in IS2. It may take a little research on the part of the darklord to find out how he can travel, perhaps Strahd COULD have crossed that border if he left something symbolic of his power behind; the bloodstone brooch perhaps.

Dominc may be fully capable of visiting his childhood home in Mordent, but at the risk of his network of Obedients deteriorating, or worse, falling under the sway of his nemesis, the Brain. Also, his mind control powers are probably muted if not outright nerfed in another domain.

Ivana, as a co-darklord, may have more freedom to move aorund, which I think is actually an advantage, giving her the ability to be the Black Lily at court in places other than Borca. She may even make a biannual trip to the posh beaches of Ghastria. Her touch may still be poison (wouldn't want her to be able to get lucky just because she was sleeping in some other domain) but she would not have the ability to TURN things poison except in her own domain. A darklord's salient abilities should be domain-dependant, but their curse should travel with them.

The domain itself could suffer from the lack of the darklord's presence. If Strahd is in Nova Vaasa threatening Prince Othmar, Barovia itself may seem eerily empty. Maybe birds stop singing, or fish stop biting a fisherman's line. He IS the land, and its been shown that that means something. THere should be a way to KNOW that something is not right.

As for domains disappearing upon a darklord's death, along with all the innocent people that live there, that sounds like some brilliant propaganda from the darklords or the Vistani. Gundarak proved this to be untrue in at least one case. Which domains proved it to be true?

[HuManBing]

I like what HMB has to say (as usual) in particular about allowing darklords to move about

I think that's Zoria's idea (?)

Obviously I'm flattered to receive praise any time, but if it's somebody else's good work, the ethicist in me requires that I pass the praise to where it's due.

[Zoria]

As for domains disappearing upon a darklord's death... which domains proved it to be true?

Rokushima Taiyoo and the Burning Peaks seam to suggest a similar end.

I like what HMB has to say (as usual) in particular about allowing darklords to move about

I think that's Zoria's idea (?)

Obviously I'm flattered to receive praise any time, but if it's somebody else's good work, the ethicist in me requires that I pass the praise to where it's due.

I've yet taken my share of praise with the publication of my works (http://mystlands.altervista.org/)

[Strahdsbuddy]

I think it was a lot of people's idea. As I was typing, i felt like I'd read it someplace before. Didn't stop me of course because I'm an idiot, but I think the whole weakened Darklord in foreign lands is Jester's idea from way way back. Sorry, Jester! I do like the idea though.

The thread has gotten away from its intended purpose (more apologies, this time to Zoria) and has become a justification for the things that make Ravenloft Ravenloft. Here is my attempt to provide what i HOPE 4e looks like:

An advancement of the timeline is vital. Who has died? What are the big movers and shakers planning? Even if i set a campaign in 735, it is a helpful guideline to know what is coming down the pipe; it allows me to plant those seeds in the history of the campaign and make them more memorable when they happen.

Also, while i do not expect a deferment to the material that was written under different publishers, it would be foolish for Wizards to flat out ignore information that was published outside their offices. For one thing, that is a lot of work they wouldn't have to do. Secondly, even if they are trying to attract new gamers, they would have to understand that a lot of the current players consider that stuff to be canon. I expect nothing to contradict 3.5 writings, and more likely there will be a wink by the writers as we carry on knowing what happened.

The last thing I expect is something that has happened on this board over and over again: we will use what we want and ignore the rest. For a lot of us, the first thing we will ignore is the ruleset. HMB plays GURPS now, and I don't play anything--that sounds like the extremes in both directions! It is no different than the Requiem; it didn't work for all of us, so some of us ignored it. As ewancummings likes to say, this is OUR game, we can run it the way we want.

And one final expectation unrelated to the products themselves: I expect this forum to continue to be the place where Ravenloft has meaning and where the setting is given life. Let them publish all the skeletons they want, our alchemists will add the meat!

[Rotipher of the FoS]

As for domains disappearing upon a darklord's death, along with all the innocent people that live there, that sounds like some brilliant propaganda from the darklords or the Vistani. Gundarak proved this to be untrue in at least one case. Which domains proved it to be true?

It's what happened to Daglan from Feast of Goblyns, at least according to canon. Some people brought it back as an IoT in their home games.

[alhoon]

The domains that disappear IMO return to their home plane. If there's no home plane, they either change hands or they are given to nearby domains.

So what that leaves us with? If you're in a domain that the darklord tortures and kills one innocent/day and you're next to a couple of domains where the darklords torture and kill 10 innocents/day... don't kill your darklord or you'll be worse off. Protect him and go kill the next door guy.
That sounds like propaganda too. "Resistance is futile! The people of the domains will always suffer under someone!"

You know what I think? Someone should make sure to kill every darklord except Adam, so that the whole core is under him.
Godefroy could also be seen us "uncaring" Darklord but he started taking interest in recent years. Off with him too.
Oh, and darklord slayers; start with Drakov. He's the worst for his people.

[ewancummins]

You know what I think? Someone should make sure to kill every darklord except Adam, so that the whole core is under him.
Godefroy could also be seen us "uncaring" Darklord but he started taking interest in recent years. Off with him too.
Oh, and darklord slayers; start with Drakov. He's the worst for his people.

Doesn't all of this preume that the PCs know what a 'darklord' is, and what 'domains' are? What the players know shouldn't come into it- that's using player knowledge.

I've always run it so that such things are mysterious or unknown. The world IS. The Mists ARE. No one but kooky old philosphers talks of 'dark powers.'
Sometimes the Mists pull back to reveal a stetch of heretofore unknown country, or the passage to a new land. Sometimes the gray tide creeps over a land, cutting it off from commerce. Mistways slowly shift over time. New mistways may be discovered. This is seen as natural, or the will of the gods- if there is any difference between those two things.
Kings, princes, etc are mortal men and women, of course. What nation would submit to the rule of a monster? Oh, a superstitious Barovian peasant might believe such foolish things, but most civilized people know better.



Many darklords, in canon, do not rule countries as political figures, or rule from behind the scenes. The one who do rule often attempt to conceal their monstrous nature.