Café de Nuit

Posted: **Sat Oct 25, 2025 11:54 am**

Hi. I'm concepting my first Ravenloft campaign, and thought about setting the first arc in Hazlan: The party, a bunch of local teens, sneaking into The Red Academy in order to save their friend from being used in a magical experiment. It sounds scary enough to introduce the 'horror rpg' format, but simple enough to not straight-up traumatize my players on the first session. I'm about to start planning the dungeon.
But I have one problem with Hazlan: Hazlik.
Like, the more I read about his lore, the more it sounds like gay/transfem demonization. To be clear, I don't think every villainous LGBTQ+ character is misrepresentation - I love Viktra (To those unaware, in VRGtR They turned Viktor Mordenheim into a sociopathic lesbian girl who stole and used corpses in order to create a device called The Unbreakable Heart and save her dying girlfriend.) - but with Hazlik it just feels like they'd turned his queerness into part of the horror, like it's used to present him as unnatural and monstrous.
On the other hand, I don't know. I'm new to the fandom, and I don't know that much about queer history. Maybe other folks in the community don't view him as problematic. Maybe he was written out of good intentions.
So - and I'm only asking queer players familiar with Hazlik lore - How should I approach it? Do you think it's okay to use that part of his backstory as it is? Should I use the less-cringy 5e version? Just not make it part of the arc? And if it depends on the rest of the party, how do I ask them without spoilling?

Posted: **Sat Oct 25, 2025 1:33 pm**

TheArcaneWeirdo wrote: Sat Oct 25, 2025 11:54 am Hi. I'm concepting my first Ravenloft campaign, and thought about setting the first arc in Hazlan: The party, a bunch of local teens, sneaking into The Red Academy in order to save their friend from being used in a magical experiment. It sounds scary enough to introduce the 'horror rpg' format, but simple enough to not straight-up traumatize my players on the first session. I'm about to start planning the dungeon.
But I have one problem with Hazlan: Hazlik.
Like, the more I read about his lore, the more it sounds like gay/transfem demonization. To be clear, I don't think every villainous LGBTQ+ character is misrepresentation - I love Viktra (To those unaware, in VRGtR They turned Viktor Mordenheim into a sociopathic lesbian girl who stole and used corpses in order to create a device called The Unbreakable Heart and save her dying girlfriend.) - but with Hazlik it just feels like they'd turned his queerness into part of the horror, like it's used to present him as unnatural and monstrous.
On the other hand, I don't know. I'm new to the fandom, and I don't know that much about queer history. Maybe other folks in the community don't view him as problematic. Maybe he was written out of good intentions.
So - and I'm only asking queer players familiar with Hazlik lore - How should I approach it? Do you think it's okay to use that part of his backstory as it is? Should I use the less-cringy 5e version? Just not make it part of the arc? And if it depends on the rest of the party, how do I ask them without spoilling?

Are you looking at 2e or 3e lore? I am not very familiar with 2e lore, only 3e, which is some of the most celebrated for the setting and is what this site was based on when it was created. The 3e stuff was done by White Wolf/S&S which (despite a few seriously bad apples and) was the RPG scene in the 90s and early 2000s frequented by goths, queers, anarchists, metalheads, theatre kids and the like. So there is decent representation of people like us in their products. However, opinions on how representation is best done has changed (both for better and worse imo) drastically since the 90s and it is important that we know our history if you want to be able to read between the lines and understand wehre people were coming from, and if you beleive that intent matters (I do).

For example, in the 3rd edition campaign setting Scarred Lands by White Wolf/S&S, there is a city that essentially hates homosexuals. It can be awkward read in 2025, especially for a younger person with little context as to how these conversations evolved. However, it turns out that that section of the setting was written by a gay man and his intent was to 1) Put a controversial setting piece in which would get people talking about the issue and 2) give players a reason to go and smash the homophobes. I'm all for it. And this was a big deal at the time, almost 25 years ago.

Briefly looking over the 3e books mentioning Hazlik, I am not seeing what you are seeing, but will give them a better read through when I can. Perhaps you can point to some page references and sentences that you feel are troublesome?

Is it being presented as the writer using his horror to set him up as monstrous for being gay, or is there another force in the setting that views him this way (a church, perhaps)? If the latter, I would presume the goal is to smash that force in the setting as player characters if you disagree with it. It is my opinion that if there are people who dissent from mainstream culture, will always be people wanting to paint them as monsters, and that kind of conflict is worth having in campaign settings. Whether or not it is handled well doesn't really matter to me, I don't expect everyone to be able to articulate such complexities perfectly in their writing, nor do I think we are a monolith who will all agree on how to handle x or y. As long as the intent shows me "Alright, this isn't the writer of the products opinion, rather the writer is trying to say that there is of course some sort of force or widely held opinion in this setting that x or y person is monstrous beacuse of their way of life, and that this is shitty, so PCs should tear that down in game if they care."

Posted: **Sat Oct 25, 2025 3:22 pm**

moonglum wrote: Sat Oct 25, 2025 1:33 pm
TheArcaneWeirdo wrote: Sat Oct 25, 2025 11:54 am Hi. I'm concepting my first Ravenloft campaign, and thought about setting the first arc in Hazlan: The party, a bunch of local teens, sneaking into The Red Academy in order to save their friend from being used in a magical experiment. It sounds scary enough to introduce the 'horror rpg' format, but simple enough to not straight-up traumatize my players on the first session. I'm about to start planning the dungeon.
But I have one problem with Hazlan: Hazlik.
Like, the more I read about his lore, the more it sounds like gay/transfem demonization. To be clear, I don't think every villainous LGBTQ+ character is misrepresentation - I love Viktra (To those unaware, in VRGtR They turned Viktor Mordenheim into a sociopathic lesbian girl who stole and used corpses in order to create a device called The Unbreakable Heart and save her dying girlfriend.) - but with Hazlik it just feels like they'd turned his queerness into part of the horror, like it's used to present him as unnatural and monstrous.
On the other hand, I don't know. I'm new to the fandom, and I don't know that much about queer history. Maybe other folks in the community don't view him as problematic. Maybe he was written out of good intentions.
So - and I'm only asking queer players familiar with Hazlik lore - How should I approach it? Do you think it's okay to use that part of his backstory as it is? Should I use the less-cringy 5e version? Just not make it part of the arc? And if it depends on the rest of the party, how do I ask them without spoilling?

Are you looking at 2e or 3e lore? I am not very familiar with 2e lore, only 3e, which is some of the most celebrated for the setting and is what this site was based on when it was created. The 3e stuff was done by White Wolf/S&S which (despite a few seriously bad apples and) was the RPG scene in the 90s and early 2000s frequented by goths, queers, anarchists, metalheads, theatre kids and the like. So there is decent representation of people like us in their products. However, opinions on how representation is best done has changed (both for better and worse imo) drastically since the 90s and it is important that we know our history if you want to be able to read between the lines and understand wehre people were coming from, and if you beleive that intent matters (I do).

For example, in the 3rd edition campaign setting Scarred Lands by White Wolf/S&S, there is a city that essentially hates homosexuals. It can be awkward read in 2025, especially for a younger person with little context as to how these conversations evolved. However, it turns out that that section of the setting was written by a gay man and his intent was to 1) Put a controversial setting piece in which would get people talking about the issue and 2) give players a reason to go and smash the homophobes. I'm all for it. And this was a big deal at the time, almost 25 years ago.

Briefly looking over the 3e books mentioning Hazlik, I am not seeing what you are seeing, but will give them a better read through when I can. Perhaps you can point to some page references and sentences that you feel are troublesome?

Is it being presented as the writer using his horror to set him up as monstrous for being gay, or is there another force in the setting that views him this way (a church, perhaps)? If the latter, I would presume the goal is to smash that force in the setting as player characters if you disagree with it. It is my opinion that if there are people who dissent from mainstream culture, will always be people wanting to paint them as monsters, and that kind of conflict is worth having in campaign settings. Whether or not it is handled well doesn't really matter to me, I don't expect everyone to be able to articulate such complexities perfectly in their writing, nor do I think we are a monolith who will all agree on how to handle x or y. As long as the intent shows me "Alright, this isn't the writer of the products opinion, rather the writer is trying to say that there is of course some sort of force or widely held opinion in this setting that x or y person is monstrous beacuse of their way of life, and that this is shitty, so PCs should tear that down in game if they care."

I'm looking at the Mistipedia articles for Hazlan and for Hazlik, who's primary source seems to be 'Ravenloft Gazetteer Volume I'.
I'm critical about 2 things:
1) Hazlik's Act of Ultimate Darkness is literally just striking back at the bullies who kidnapped and tortured him because of his identity. Did he have to kill them? No. Was it okay? Up for debate. But those that make him irredeemable?! Do the Dark Powers act like a crappy teacher?!

2) The part about Eleni. Quote from the Hazlan article: "He plans to steal for himself the Rashemani body of his young female apprentice, neatly addressing in the process the matter of his advanced age and of his sexual preferences."
It sounds like something that was originally a plot point in a specific adventure which I hadn't read, so I can't properly judge, but it sounds in the article like it turns gender dysphoria into a body horror element. (Also sounds like the author can't decide or doesn't know the difference between a gay man and a trans woman, which is generally a red flag IMHO.)

Posted: **Sun Oct 26, 2025 8:46 am**

I'll start by saying I admire the 'let's reconcile the differences between editions' goal.

I would add though, that the Mistipedia articles include the author's conclusions. It is essentially the same thing as a fellow DM saying 'well, at my table ...'

The quote you cited for observation #2 is the conclusion of the author of the Mistipedia article. They took the canon information presented in the gazetteers and then filled in the blanks, as it were.

Paraphrased from the Gaz writeup on Hazlik: Hazlik intends on completing a genocidal ritual that will eliminate all Mulan. (reminder: Hazlik is Mulan, Eleni is not). Hazlik, not wanting to die after the ritual is completed, intends to transfer his soul to Eleni's body.

^^ That's it. That's the extent of the canon info regarding the proposed S&S soul transfer.

Prior to the S&S material, the TSR campaign setting had a similar soul-swap mechanic for Hazlik (although it was not tied specifically to Eleni, as this NPC had not been introduced yet). In the admittedly brief 2nd edition writeup, Hazlik possessed a yellow gemstone into which his soul would retreat if he were ever killed. The soul-containing-gemstone essentially became a cursed object, and anyone touching the stone risked falling under its sway and the character might eventually — if the curse was allowed to run its full course — die and have their body transformed into a revived Hazlik.

Would such a transformation proposed in the 2nd edition Black Box occur in the S&S 3rd edition's Hazlik-Eleni swap? Perhaps. Perhaps not. The S&S version is silent on the matter.

So right from the start, looking all the way back to Ravenloft's first box set, Hazlik has always had some sort of 'if I die, here is my plan to return' plan. He is an evil wizard, after all.

Does the S&S version (the one that involved the killing of all the mulani peoples and Hazlik's soul transferring to Eleni's body) involve neatly addressing his "sexual preferences"? Well ... that is not ever mentioned. That particular turn of phrase comes only from the Mistipedia article.

In other words, the author of the Mistipedia article took the source info and extrapolated a bit, and in the course of doing so, arrived at that conclusion.

But it is not canon.

I guess what I am saying is ... at least some of the material that has given you pause is not published anywhere except as the opinion of an FoS member / Mistipedia author (which to me is essentially is the same thing as another DM saying 'Well, in my campaign ...").

Posted: **Sun Oct 26, 2025 10:12 am**

Black Box Hazlik was a lot more ambiguous with regards to background. He just "made enemies" somehow (a common thing in Thay according to its Forgotten Realms write-ups, since the Red Wizards tend to be paranoid about underlings and ambitious to overthrow superiors). They had him tattooed, including the top of his head which was humiliating because in Thay only women tattoo their scalps. While he was searching for ingredients to get his revenge, the Mists took him. The Red Box changes it slightly to the tattoos being "designs only women wear," which isn't specific but implies it's the design rather than their location that was the problem. Domains of Dread retcons the story to say that he slew his rival and her lover before being taken by the Mists (and makes the rival drink the lover's blood before killing her). All of the descriptions make sure to mention the yellow gemstone and Hazlik's ability to take over the body of anyone who touches it.

Hazlik's sexuality is entirely unmentioned in the 2e materials, and none of the other characters in his backstory are named. If one really wanted to, they could discount the 3e material as being what "S" believed she had learned, but (as her patron is quick to point out) she's not always correct. That does remove a queer character from Ravenloft, but it's buried so deep in his back story that it's not particularly relevant to who he is as a Ravenloft character or how PCs are likely to interact with him, so I personally don't see its removal as significant for my version of Ravenloft.

The harder part to reconcile is the split between the two boxed sets having Hazlik vanish while looking for ingredients, while DoD has it happen after a murder. Out-of-universe, I suspect this happened because there was becoming more emphasis on Darklords being taken because of past evil acts rather than inner propensities toward evil. As with his sexuality, though, I'm not sure it really matters much to PCs whether Hazlik was taken while plotting his revenge or after getting it. That's more of a thing for DMs to argue about the underlying metaphysics of the plane.

Posted: **Sun Oct 26, 2025 2:53 pm**

Okay.
Now I learned two things:
1) Hazlik's character is not homophobic.
2) Hazlik's character is absolutely cringe and disgusting and I'm not going to show him 'on screen' in my campaign or reveal to my players anything about his backstory other than 'creepy evil wizard who does horrible magical experiments on people for fun'.

Posted: **Sun Oct 26, 2025 3:14 pm**

I think the unrequited love angle is formative. It’s what turns him from generic evil wizard to someone with a need to see the world burn.

Even if it does not show up ‘on screen’ as it were … incorporating the big bad’s motivation into the how and why of his actions can be good for the tale.

Posted: **Mon Oct 27, 2025 12:45 am**

Hazlik being gay is irrelevant to him being evil in past editions. I agree though that creating magical runes to make him possess Eleni's body, after his Mulan exterminating plan works, is complicating things, confusing his sexuality with Hazlik's gender. Him being ridiculed back in Thay because of him being gay and marked with feminine tattoos, sounds more "appropriate" (in game terms) as I believe that if Hazlik was transgender then she would proudly wear these tattoos identifying her as a woman. Since the pronoun in all editions used is he, I believe it is about Hazlik's sexuality and not gender.I don't see any demonisation in past editions, portraying Hazlik as evil because of that NPC's sexuality or gender, I don't exactly remember how Hazlik is portrayed in 5e, except the incorporation of elements from 2e, 3e Azalin to this darklord.

On the other hand Hazlik's story has some similarities with Von Kharkov's, if the wizard who transformed Urik wasn't named in "Von Kharkov" from Tales of Ravenloft as Morphayas, I would have speculated that Hazlik was the wizard who had transformed the panther into Urik.

Posted: **Mon Oct 27, 2025 8:49 am**

TheArcaneWeirdo wrote: Sun Oct 26, 2025 2:53 pm Okay.
Now I learned two things:
1) Hazlik's character is not homophobic.
2) Hazlik's character is absolutely cringe and disgusting and I'm not going to show him 'on screen' in my campaign or reveal to my players anything about his backstory other than 'creepy evil wizard who does horrible magical experiments on people for fun'.

I would add 3) It is always best to seek out the original source material. It’s a safer way to form opinions and also the best way to engage with something you’re a fan of and want to be able to discuss deeply. I didn’t think to look at the wiki article for reasons mentioned in this thread and because they are usually missing context.

Posted: **Mon Oct 27, 2025 9:30 am**

moonglum wrote: Mon Oct 27, 2025 8:49 am
TheArcaneWeirdo wrote: Sun Oct 26, 2025 2:53 pm Okay.
Now I learned two things:
1) Hazlik's character is not homophobic.
2) Hazlik's character is absolutely cringe and disgusting and I'm not going to show him 'on screen' in my campaign or reveal to my players anything about his backstory other than 'creepy evil wizard who does horrible magical experiments on people for fun'.
I would add 3) It is always best to seek out the original source material. It’s a safer way to form opinions and also the best way to engage with something you’re a fan of and want to be able to discuss deeply. I didn’t think to look at the wiki article for reasons mentioned in this thread and because they are usually missing context.

I know. The problem is that the original source material costs money...

Posted: **Mon Oct 27, 2025 10:00 am**

As a crowd sourced wiki, it can be just as prone to garbage in / garbage out ... but the good folks at TVTropes have a decent section dedicated to the darklords.

Most entries are: A quick write up, and then a handful of the tropes that they embody.

(and, like Mistipedia, it is free)

Posted: **Tue Oct 28, 2025 1:24 pm**

SkiBird wrote: Mon Oct 27, 2025 10:00 am As a crowd sourced wiki, it can be just as prone to garbage in / garbage out ... but the good folks at TVTropes have a decent section dedicated to the darklords.

Most entries are: A quick write up, and then a handful of the tropes that they embody.

(and, like Mistipedia, it is free)

As someone who had not nosed around this much, unaware of how deep it dove into Ravenloft lore, I have to second SkiBird's suggestion to look through TVTropes, as it is just about as good as having the sourcebooks. Still, a little DriveThruRPG shopping can get you the Black Box PDF for $10, and a physical copy for twice that...worth the investment for anyone with as much curiosity of the setting as the OP!

Posted: **Tue Oct 28, 2025 4:15 pm**

I'd be tempted to go with the slightly more expensive (currently $10.34 for a PDF) Domains of Dread instead of the Black Box. It doesn't have the nice handouts and poster maps of the Black Box, but the poster maps tend to be really inconvenient to use in the DM's Guild format. Even if you buy the physical book, the poster maps are chopped up into page-size chunks that are pages in the book, rather than a separate item.

For contents, the Black Box only has 15 Darklords and a handful of other NPCs (Gondegal, Dr. Mordenheim, Tara, Ratik, van Richten, Natalia Vhoriskova, and George Weathermay). A number of the domains in the Black Box only had their Darklords detailed in Darklords. Domains of Dread has closer to 40 Darklords and has the Darklord for every domain that gets a writeup in the book, although it does have fewer non-Darklord NPCs. It's also the layout of the Core that survived into 3e, after the Grand Conjunction rearranged its geography between the two boxed sets, while the Black Box is the old geography.

Darklords in the Black Box not in Domains of Dread:
Azalin (at the time of Domains, he was dissipated by the Doomsday Device and Darkon was temporarily Necropolis instead)
Nathan Timothy (the Grand Conjunction merged his domain with Alfred Timothy's and Nathan was freed)

Darklords in Domains of Dread not in the Black Box:
Tristessa, The Three Hags, Urik von Kharkov, Lord Soth, Tristen ApBlanc, Tristen Hiregaard/Malken, Captain Pieter van Riese, Meredoth, Easan the Mad, God-Brain, Tsien Chiang, Thakok-An, Malus Sceleris, Maligno, Anton Misroi, Gregor Zolnik, Anktepot, Tiyet, Vecna, Kas the Destroyer, Sodo, Hive Queen, Davion the Mad, House of Lament, Lemot Sediam Juste

Posted: **Thu Oct 30, 2025 8:22 am**

SkiBird wrote: Mon Oct 27, 2025 10:00 am As a crowd sourced wiki, it can be just as prone to garbage in / garbage out ... but the good folks at TVTropes have a decent section dedicated to the darklords.

Most entries are: A quick write up, and then a handful of the tropes that they embody.

(and, like Mistipedia, it is free)

Wow, this is an incredible advice!
Like, I wasn't expecting too much from a website dedicated to something else, but now when I'm browsing it I see that because of the trope-centered writing they actually give more about the narrative (in contrast to the bare, contextless facts of Mistipedia) and the thematic meaning of stuff.

Posted: **Fri Oct 31, 2025 3:44 am**

And on a slightly different topic, speaking of queer rep in Ravenloft:

Was Alathur (Alanik Ray and Arthur Sedgwick) a common ship before 5e canonized it, or were Mr. Dungeons and Mr. Dragons just like 'oh, we need more diversity! How about - " -pointing at two very confused detectives- " - You!"
Cause I know 5e made some wild changes that were obviously for the sake of diversity (And I don't think it's bad. It often gave place for more creative storytelling. And it's a TTRPG - if you prefer the older versions you can still use them at your table.), but I also know how fans' brain works.

Café de Nuit

What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?

Re: What do my fellow rainbows in the mist think about Hazlik?