First Look at Van Richten's

[verbatim]

a content creator by the name of fry minis got what I assume is permission from Wizards to do a livestream (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45y8CeDuyVo) that involved pointing the camera at his early copy of the upcoming book "Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft".

They mention not being allowed to show certain pages of the book so I assume that means that they have permission from WotC to do this, if it turns out to not have been approved I will be sure to delete the thread posthaste. Formatting will be prettied up when finished.

Sidenote: Artists are now credited on the page where their art appears near the spine of the page.

Races:


examples are given for each option of what domains of dread they are commonly found in.


+1/+1/+1 is added as an option for the Gothic Lineages in addition to the standard +2/+1.


Retaining (some) old Racial Features: "If you replace a race with this lineage, you can keep the following elements of that race: any skill proficiencies you gained from it and any climbing, flying, or swimming speed you gained from it. If you don't keep any of those elements or you choose this lineage at character creation you gain proficiency in two skills of your choice."


Darkvision adds the limitation that you can only discern colors in darkness as shades of gray.



Dhampir:
- Creature Type = Just Humanoid
- New Racial Feature: Deathless Nature: You don't need to breathe.
- Vampiric Bite: both options now only count the piercing damage of the bite for their secondary effect, whereas previously stuff like smite would have added to the total.


Fey:
- Creature Type = Just Fey
- You end the Trance feature of the Magic Token (renamed Eerie Token) early if you use a voluntary free action to dismiss it or if you become incapacitated.


Reborn:
- Creature Type: Just Humanoid



Dark Gifts:
- was not in UA. Looks kind of like feats that the DM awards, the introduction to the chapter was not shown. Several options were not on screen enough to describe in full, including one about shadows, one about the mists, one about something watching you. I'll be covering the gifts that were on screen enough to summarize.



Echoing Soul: your soul was swapped or connected with a different body or life.
- Channel Prowess: gain two skill proficiencies.
- Inherent Tongue: speak/read/write one new language.
- Intrusive Echoes: When you roll a 1 on the d20 on an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw, roll on the Intrusive Echo Table to determine the effect you suffer (once per short or long rest, not optional):
1. you are charmed by a creature you can see of the DM's choice for one minute or until it damages you.
2. see 1., but frightened
3. You are blinded to your surroundings until the end of your next turn.
4. Your speed is halved until the end of your next turn.
5. You are incapacitated until the start of your next turn.
6. You can (optional) reroll the ability check/attack roll/saving throw you just failed.




Gathered Whispers: haunted by spirits.
- Spirit Whispers: learn message cantrip ((if you don't already know it) that does not require components and delivers the message in the spirit's voice instead of your own.
- Sudden Cacophony: When an attack roll hits you you can use your reaction to add your proficiency bonus to your AC if the opponent isn't deafened. Once it makes a hit miss you can't use it again until after a long rest.
- Voices from Beyond: When you roll a 1 on the d20 on an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw, roll on the Voices from Beyond table to determine the effect you suffer (once per short or long rest, not optional):
1. Disadvantage on the next attack roll, ability check, or saving throw.
2. Deafened for 1 minute.
3. Frightened of the creature closest to you, other than yourself, until the end of your next turn. DM breaks ties, does not require you to see the creature RAW.
4. Within the next 10 minutes you can ask your spirits about something you want to do in the next half hour, simulating the Augury spell, except only you can observe the effect.



Living Shadow:
- Grasping Shadow: learn Mage Hand (if you don't already know it) that does not require components.
- Shadow Strike: When you make a melee attack roll you can extend the range by 10 feet prof bonus # of times per long rest. Wording might imply that you have to spend the resource before seeing if your attack roll hits.
- Ominous Will: after you make an attack roll/ability check/saving throw and get a 1 on the d10, the next time you or a creature within 30 feet of you that you can see makes an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw, roll a d4. If the d4 is odd reduce the result by the die total, if the d4 is even increase the total. Once per short or long rest. Not optional.



Mist Walker: you learn how to navigate the Mists, if you remain in one area for too long the Mists will come for your life force (flavor text).
- Misty Step: gain Misty Step once per Long Rest even if you already have it, can be used more times with 2nd level or higher spell slots.
- Mist Traveler: You can enter a specific domain within the Mists as though you possess the correct Mist talisman for the specific domain so long as you know the name of it and so long as the Darklord has not closed the boarders.
- Poisoned Roots: At the end of each long rest you can remain within 10 miles of the spot you woke up in for a number of weeks = to your Constitution modifier (min 1 week). Afterwards you make a DC 15 CON save vs level of exhaustion each time you Long Rest in the area. (cannot remove levels of exhaustion gained this way without leaving the area)


Second Skin: Revolves around having a second form. Recommendations include angelic, demonic, werewolf, aberrant, fey, slime, construct.
- Transformation: "You can cast the alter self spell to appear in your second form. When you do so, you gain the effects of that spell's Change Appearance option and cannot end it to gain the benefits of a different option. Casting alter self in this way requires no spell slot, and you must finish a long rest before you can cast it this way again. Your spellcasting ability for this spell is Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma (your choice when you gain this Dark Gift). If you have spell slots of 2nd level or higher, you can cast this spell with them. When you cast alter self using this feature, some cosmic aspect of your second form remains after the spell ends. This visibly marks you unless you actively hide or disguise it. The mark is a perceptible change such as scaly skin, stunted wings, eyes without pupils, or horns. The mark fades after you finish a long rest."

- Involuntary Change: "Certain circumstances can activate your Dark Gift. After you experience this catalyst, at the start of your next turn you must succeed on a DC 15 Charisma saving throw or use your action to cast alter self as described in the Transformation trait, even if you have already used it." A table of Catalysts is provided, involving the moon, sounds, and interacting with certain objects or individuals.



Symbiotic Nature: basically venom.
- Entwined Existence: "Your symbiote is a separate entity with its own physical form bound to yours. It isn't a separate creature and relies on you to survive. It has Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores. The DM sets the symbiote's abilities or determines them randomly (roll 4d6 for each score, ignoring the lowest roll and totaling the rest). The symbiote can see and hear using your senses.
The symbiote speaks, reads, and understands two languages, one that you speak, as well as one appropriate to its nature. Choose one of the following skills: Arcana, Deception, History, Intimidation, Insight, Investigation, Nature, Religion, Perception, or Persuasion. You gain proficiency in that skill if you don't already have it, representing the symbiote's counsel and guidance. If you die, so does your symbiote. If you are subsequently returned to life, your symbiote revives as well."

- Sustained Symbiosis: When you fail a save you can have your symbiote spend one of your hit die and add the rolled hit die total to the save. If you do this on a death saving throw you regain 1 hp regardless of whether or not you pass the save (assuming you don't die ig...?). Once per long rest.

- Symbiotic Agenda: if you pass up an opportunity to advance the symbiote's agenda you must succeed on a CHA save (DC 12 + symbiote's Charisma modifier) or be charmed by them for 1d12 hours, being bound to follow their commands for the duration, redoing the save if you take damage that is not self inflicted.



Death Touch:
- You can use an action to make an Unarmed Strike (which implies it doesn't work with extra attack?) deals an extra 1d10 necrotic damage, increases to 2d10 at level 5, 3d10 at level 11, and 4d10 at level 17.
- Inescapable Death: Attack rolls that hit and deal necrotic damage ignore necrotic resistance on the target you hit.
- Withering Contact: when you start your turn grappling or being grappled by a creature they take 1d10 necrotic damage.



Watchers[\B]: something is following you.
- Borrowed Eyes: gain advantage on investigation and perception checks and immunity to blinded for an hour. Once per long rest.
- Dread Presence: You have disadvantage on Deception, Performance, and Persuasion checks (but not Animal Handling) made against creatures that can see the watchers. You can temporarily hide the watchers with 1 minute of work and a successful DC 15 Animal Handling check that deactivates both features for 1 hour (once per long rest).

Subclasses:


[B]College of Spirits:
- Spirit Tales are very different with new names:
1. Tale of the Clever Animal: For the next 10 minutes when the target makes a Int/Wis/Cha check they can roll a die of the same type as your bard die and add it to the total.
2. Tale of the Renowned Duelist: make a melee spell attack against the target. On a hit it deals force damage = to 2 rolls of your bard die + CHA mod.
3. Tale of the Beloved Friends: the target and a creature of their choice within 5 feet that it can see gain temp hp = to roll of your bard die + CHA mod.
4. Tale of The Runaway: Target can use their reaction to teleport up to 30 feet to an unoccupied space they can see. It can give this to your CHA mod (min 0) creatures it can see within 30 feet of it (also costs a reaction for them).
5. Tale of the Avenger: for 1 minute any creature that hits the target with a melee attack takes force damage = to a roll of your bard die.
6. Tale of the Traveler: target gains temp hp = to roll of your bard die + bard level. While it has these temp hp their walking speed increases by 10 and it gains a +1 bonus to AC.
7. Tale of the Beguilder: target must succeed on a Wisdom save or take psychic damage = to 2 rolls of your bard tie and be incapacitated until the end of its next turn.
8. Tale of the Phantom: target becomes invisible until the end of its next turn or until it hits a creature with an attack (meaning you can miss and keep it). If the target hits a creature with an attack during this invisibility the creature it hits takes necrotic damage = to a roll of your bard die and is frightened of the target until the end of the frightened creature's next turn.
9. Tale of the Brute: Each creature of the target's choice it can see within 30 feet of it must make a Strength saving throw. On a fail they take thunder damage = to 3 rolls of your bard die and are knocked prone. Half damage and no prone on a pass.
10. Tale of the Dragon. The target spews fire in a 30 foot cone. Creatures in the area make a dex save, taking 4 rolls of your bard die in fire damage on a fail or half on a pass.
11. Tale of the Angel: The target regains hp = to 2 rolls of your bard die + CHA mod and you can end one of blind/deaf/paralyzed/petrified/poisoned on it.
12. Tale of the Mind Bender: The target must make an Int save or suffer 3 rolls of your bard die in psychic damage and be stunned until the end of its next turn. No effect on a pass.

Target makes Int Save vs 3 rolls of bard die in psychic damage and stunned until the end of its next turn


Undead Warlock:
- they fixed Grave Touched so that you can only turn ONE bolt of Eldritch Blast into necrotic and double the damage die.
- 10th level feature renamed Necrotic Husk. It now costs a reaction and drops you to 1 hp instead of 0, everything else is the same.
- The last bullet point of Spirit Projection was not displayed.


New Backgrounds
- not show in great enough detail to list specifics.
- new backgrounds include: Trauma Survivor, Traveler
- advice for repurposing old backgrounds including Inheritor, investigator, and haunted.

New Trinkets
- not shown in great enough detail to list specifics.

Bestiary
- statblocks display the monster's proficiency bonus now!!!

[Lavaeolus]

Retaining (some) old Racial Features: "If you replace a race with this lineage, you can keep the following elements of that race: any skill proficiencies you gained from it and any climbing, flying, or swimming speed you gained from it. If you don't keep any of those elements or you choose this lineage at character creation you gain proficiency in two skills of your choice.

I find this one a little interesting. I think the UA lineages pretty much eliminated your original race; all you kept were your languages.

Now, this otherwise makes more sense from a flavour perspective (I'm assuming the Languages bit is still in there and just not covered under 'Ancestral Legacy'). But it does mean that, say, a tabaxi-turned-Hexblood is just objectively stronger than a halfling-turned-one.

Of course, that might be why turning a race into a lineage seems like it's written as a "could happen in a campaign" thing rather than a choice you can make at character creation. But you know. Aarakocra <whatever> could be strong if your DM gives you free rein.

[Dork_Forge]

I find this one a little interesting. I think the UA lineages pretty much eliminated your original race; all you kept were your languages.

Now, this otherwise makes more sense from a flavour perspective (I'm assuming the Languages bit is still in there and just not covered under 'Ancestral Legacy'). But it does mean that, say, a tabaxi-turned-Hexblood is just objectively stronger than a halfling-turned-one.

Of course, that might be why turning a race into a lineage seems like it's written as a "could happen in a campaign" thing rather than a choice you can make at character creation. But you know. Aarakocra <whatever> could be strong if your DM gives you free rein.

Building on this, it's just bizarre: If you were a race with natural weapons, they are... what suddenly too frail to be used as such? That seems problematic for a large number of reasons.

[ftafp]

Building on this, it's just bizarre: If you were a race with natural weapons, they are... what suddenly too frail to be used as such? That seems problematic for a large number of reasons.

Eh, it makes sense for the options provided. the dhampir and reborn are corpses that are slowly falling apart and the hexblood's teeth and nails are detachable. You're not going to do much clawing or biting like that

[Dork_Forge]

Eh, it makes sense for the options provided. the dhampir and reborn are corpses that are slowly falling apart and the hexblood's teeth and nails are detachable. You're not going to do much clawing or biting like that

dhampir are half vampires, vampires aren't typically depicted as rotting away, nor does anything in the fluff from the UA indicate that.

Beyond that, the Tabaxi would still retain their climb speed, which is presumably justified by their claws, but they're too frail to slash flesh with?

Centaurs can sprint and march around, but suddenly their hoove have become so fragile they can't withstand the kick they could do before?

It just feels like this should have been a DM facing template, like DMG content, to add onto a race and just skirt the whole half and half nonesense to begin with.

[MrStabby]

Well the Spirit Tales still seem very cool and very bad. At least assuming they are still rolled for at random.

Between some roles that are sufficiently niche that they might do nothing (clever animal) and the split between those that work better early in combat and those that work better later and those that require specific positioning of allies or enemies this all looks really frustrating. Very, very cool when it works and there are abilities here that are powerful for a use of a bardic inspiration, if you happen to get lucky and roll the outcome at a time when it is useful. I don't mind the idea of randomness here, I just don't like so many results that might be very frustrating.

I would be interested to know if they fixed any of the other issues with the subclass - such a cool idea but the UA version had a lot of issues.

[Unoriginal]

Well the Spirit Tales still seem very cool and very bad. At least assuming they are still rolled for at random.

Between some roles that are sufficiently niche that they might do nothing (clever animal) and the split between those that work better early in combat and those that work better later and those that require specific positioning of allies or enemies this all looks really frustrating. Very, very cool when it works and there are abilities here that are powerful for a use of a bardic inspiration, if you happen to get lucky and roll the outcome at a time when it is useful. I don't mind the idea of randomness here, I just don't like so many results that might be very frustrating.

I would be interested to know if they fixed any of the other issues with the subclass - such a cool idea but the UA version had a lot of issues.

It's still random, but apparently you can hold onto the one you've rolled until the next time you roll, you don't have to use it immediately. So even if it's not useful right now it can be later.

[MrStabby]

It's still random, but apparently you can hold onto the one you've rolled until the next time you roll, you don't have to use it immediately. So even if it's not useful right now it can be later.

Hmm. OK. I can see that being a lot better. Whilst I don't think it entirely solves the problem I may at make it a lot less of an issue.

I guess I need to wait to judge the subclass as a whole as well.

[jojosskul]

Glad they got rid of the dual types. I kind of wish they'd left reborn as option of either Undead or Construct, but making certain PCs not able to receive healing spells is probably a can of worms they didn't want to open, so keeping them as humanoid makes sense. Honestly the DnD touchstone for me that's the closest thing to a reborn is The Nameless One and he didn't look great but was still humanoid...ish.

I also like that they gave guidance on how to apply these to characters AFTER character creation, and letting them retain a little of their old selves if someone wants to. The Fairy PC in my campaign who just died and who we'd planned to bring back as Reborn will be very happy he gets to keep his wings, even if he's losing his Fey nature. Not perfect, but I think all the lineage changes from the UA were for the better. Nice to know they listen to playtest feedback.

[Warder]

No Sithicus, no sale! :smallwink:

[Unoriginal]

Among the monsters shown are the Jianshi, the Loup Garou, the Relentless Slayer, the Nosferatu and the Greater Star Pawn Emissary.

[RogueJK]

Darkvision adds the limitation that you can only discern colors in darkness as shades of gray.

That's always been a standard part of Darkvision in 5E, since the beginning.

There's at least one PC race (Fire Genasi) that modifies Darkvision slightly, seeing in shades of red in darkness instead of gray, but they still can't discern colors. No PC can see in color in darkness with standard Darkvision, even underground races with "superior Darkvision" which only changes the distance.

(Yes, Devil's Sight allows you to "see normally" in darkness, so a Warlock with that Invocation could see in color, but that's not Darkvision.)

This is why there are times that it's still handy to have a light source option available, even if everyone in the party has Darkvision. Imagine searching for a mottled gray object on the mottled gray ground...

[quindraco]

Dhampir:
- Creature Type = Just Humanoid
- New Racial Feature: Deathless Nature: You don't need to breathe.
- Vampiric Bite: both options now only count the piercing damage of the bite for their secondary effect, whereas previously stuff like smite would have added to the total.


Do Dhampirs retain their wording letting them add both STR and CON to the bite?

[Millstone85]

Among the monsters shown are the Jianshi, the Loup Garou, the Relentless Slayer, the Nosferatu and the Greater Star Pawn Emissary.The loup garou? Isn't that the same as le werewolf?

[Warder]

The loup garou? Isn't that the same as le werewolf?

In D&D, loup garou are "greater" werewolves.

[Lavaeolus]

Do Dhampirs retain their wording letting them add both STR and CON to the bite?

Explicitly no. New wording: "You add your Constitution modifier, instead of your Strength modifier, to the attack and damage rolls when you attack with this bite."

Note that unlike a lot of modifier wording, this isn't a "you can..." thing, so if you're planning on playing a tanky Barbarian, note that you can read it as Constitution or bust.

I guess maybe that has some impact with Monk's Martial Arts' first bullet? "You can use Dexterity instead of Strength..." That might be a bit literal of me, though, and in any case it's still a Monk weapon for other purposes.


Building on this, it's just bizarre: If you were a race with natural weapons, they are... what suddenly too frail to be used as such? That seems problematic for a large number of reasons.

Other fun thing I noticed later: for whatever reason, size is not inherited. It's chosen "when you gain this lineage". Thus, RAW, your Goliath can be bitten by a vampire and, bam, you could suddenly decide they're Small. Which is a little silly.

[Amnestic]

Other fun thing I noticed later: for whatever reason, size is not inherited. It's chosen "when you gain this lineage". Thus, RAW, your Goliath can be bitten by a vampire and, bam, you could suddenly decide they're Small. Which is a little silly.

All the blood draining made them shrink, clearly.

[KorvinStarmast]

Glad they got rid of the dual types. Likewise.
The loup garou? Isn't that the same as le werewolf? Yes, but D&D does odd stuff with monster names. Like the Gorgon, which is a metallic bull ... so in D&D it's a special kind of werewolf.

[Warder]

Yes, but D&D does odd stuff with monster names. Like the Gorgon, which is a metallic bull ...

That's not a D&D-ism, though. A lot of people go "lol D&D gets its monsters wrong, Gary Gygax didn't know what he was talking about", but that's not really the case. D&D just took its inspiration from other sources, like in the case of the Gorgon it came from a manuscript from 1607 called "The Historie of Foure-footed Beasts". Here's a link for reference:

https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-secret-historie-of-the-gorgon-lamia-and-su-monster.667485/

[Evaar]

Dhampir:
- Creature Type = Just Humanoid
- New Racial Feature: Deathless Nature: You don't need to breathe.
- Vampiric Bite: both options now only count the piercing damage of the bite for their secondary effect, whereas previously stuff like smite would have added to the total.


Did the Dhampir retain the hands-free spider climbing racial ability?

[Corsair14]

No Sithicus, no sale! :smallwink:

Oh wow, you are right. Its the only realm where there is any "real" population of elves(or demi-humans in general even) and a "major" trading partner with neighboring Invidia, Kartacas and Verbrek. Wonder how they are going to explain that one. Sad that we already have to homebrew one of the most interesting lands before the book even comes out.

Wonder what else they are going to try and sneak or leave out.

Edit: Oh crap, I wonder how badly they are going to screw up Souragne. I liked the Little Dark New Orleans realm.

[Lavaeolus]

Did the Dhampir retain the hands-free spider climbing racial ability?

Yep, identical to what it was in the UA. Start with a climbing speed, and at level 3 you can start moving up/down/across vertical surfaces with your hands free. Potentially fun, if a little environment-dependent.

I don't think the general rules for climbing ever explicitly call out the need for hands, but I have the beginning of an idea for a CON-heavy grappler who can take advantage of being able to race people up a tree, DM dependent.

[RogueJK]

I don't think the general rules for climbing ever explicitly call out the need for hands

It doesn't, explicitly. But it can be mostly inferred through other sources. Like the Spider Climb spell, which specifically notes that it doesn't require the use of hands to climb, much like this Dhampir ability. (So one can assume that's intended to be a bonus over traditional climbing). And there's a NPC from the Dragon Heist adventure who has only one hand and is noted as having Disadvantage on climbing-related checks.

[verbatim]

That's always been a standard part of Darkvision in 5E, since the beginning.

It was missing in the UA version so it qualified under the context of "changes from UA to publication".

[Unoriginal]

The loup garou? Isn't that the same as le werewolf?

It's the French for "werewolf", yes.

Always found that in term of folklore the werewolf had much more impact in France, it could be because of that.

According to the livestream the Loup Garou is an even more contagious werewolf.

[PhoenixPhyre]

That's not a D&D-ism, though. A lot of people go "lol D&D gets its monsters wrong, Gary Gygax didn't know what he was talking about", but that's not really the case. D&D just took its inspiration from other sources, like in the case of the Gorgon it came from a manuscript from 1607 called "The Historie of Foure-footed Beasts". Here's a link for reference:

https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-secret-historie-of-the-gorgon-lamia-and-su-monster.667485/

Yeah. We like to put things in nice clear, unique boxes. That hasn't always been that way. Names were often used to refer to many different things from many different traditions without any disambiguation. CF weapons, where we make lots of distinctions that historically boiled down to "that's a sword. That other one's a sword as well. That? Sword." Except with more names.

[RogueJK]

It was missing in the UA version so it qualified under the context of "changes from UA to publication".

Most definitely. My post was more pointing out that this is how all other Darkvision is handled in 5E, so including that text so that it tracks with everyone else's Darkvision was not a surprise. Leaving it out of the UA was likely an error or just a cut corner, not any attempt to consider making their Darkvision better than standard Darkvision.

[Evaar]

Yep, identical to what it was in the UA. Start with a climbing speed, and at level 3 you can start moving up/down/across vertical surfaces with your hands free. Potentially fun, if a little environment-dependent.

I don't think the general rules for climbing ever explicitly call out the need for hands, but I have the beginning of an idea for a CON-heavy grappler who can take advantage of being able to race people up a tree, DM dependent.

It's one of those "exception that proves the rule" kinds of things that exists in 5e. You'd normally presume climbing requires hands, but it doesn't state that. Some forms of climbing, however, state they DON'T require hands. So those are the exception proving that the rule "climbing typically requires hands" exists, even if it's not otherwise spelled out in the text.

(The actual correct meaning of the phrase "the exception that proves the rule," as opposed to the common use "this example contradicts a rule, but I want to disregard that by calling it the exception that proves the rule.")

[quindraco]

Explicitly no. New wording: "You add your Constitution modifier, instead of your Strength modifier, to the attack and damage rolls when you attack with this bite."

Note that unlike a lot of modifier wording, this isn't a "you can..." thing, so if you're planning on playing a tanky Barbarian, note that you can read it as Constitution or bust.

I guess maybe that has some impact with Monk's Martial Arts' first bullet? "You can use Dexterity instead of Strength..." That might be a bit literal of me, though, and in any case it's still a Monk weapon for other purposes.



Other fun thing I noticed later: for whatever reason, size is not inherited. It's chosen "when you gain this lineage". Thus, RAW, your Goliath can be bitten by a vampire and, bam, you could suddenly decide they're Small. Which is a little silly.

Thank goodness, the old wording was unmitigated nonsense. New wording does make it a Constitution-only monk weapon, assuming they kept the simple melee thing.

[Mitchellnotes]

I like the idea of being able to make a Con heavy rune knight. Any idea on how to make your bite bypass resistence to non-magical weapon resistance? The tasha's tattoos would be the ideal way i suppose, but hard to tattoo one's teeth...

[Lavaeolus]

I like the idea of being able to make a Con heavy rune knight. Any idea on how to make your bite bypass resistence to non-magical weapon resistance? The tasha's tattoos would be the ideal way i suppose, but hard to tattoo one's teeth...

I'm a little loathe to rely on magic items that very well might not be in your campaign, but the Insignia of Claws from Hoard of the Dragon Queen, an uncommon wondrous item, fits the bill:

While wearing the insignia, you gain a +1 bonus to the attack rolls and the damage rolls you make with unarmed strikes and natural weapons. Such attacks are considered to be magical.
Certainly a flexible option, and one that's just going to be a general benefit if you're doing a natural-weapon-focused character and can grab it.

Most races with natural weapons are said to be used for 'unarmed strikes', but the Dhampir's bite is written as being a 'simple melee weapon'. A Monk's usual Ki-Empowered Strikes might not affect them, then, but a Kensei Monk will pick up this at the same level:

Magic Kensei Weapons. Your attacks with your kensei weapons count as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.

It might seem a bit of a waste to pick a monk weapon as a kensei weapon, but it theoretically fits the criteria: "any simple or martial weapon that lacks the heavy and special properties". And, of course, Monk 6 is a hefty investment on a build regardless.

Beast Barbarian 6 has a clause about certain natural weapons becoming magical, but in my reading it wouldn't work; it's limited to "the natural weapons of your Form of the Beast".

[Amnestic]

I like the idea of being able to make a Con heavy rune knight. Any idea on how to make your bite bypass resistence to non-magical weapon resistance? The tasha's tattoos would be the ideal way i suppose, but hard to tattoo one's teeth...

Eldritch Claw tattoo wouldn't actually work with the dhampir bite, if the wording is unchanged from the UA.


Your fanged bite is a natural weapon, which counts as a simple melee weapon with which you are proficient.

Eldritch Claw Tattoo:



Magical Strikes. While the tattoo is on your skin, your unarmed strikes are considered magical for the purpose of overcoming immunity and resistance to nonmagical attacks, and you gain a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls with unarmed strikes.

Insignia of Claws, as mentioned, does work though.

[verbatim]

Fry put up a second video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpaiH81lxCM) showing what I think are all of the Dark Gifts and I have edited the OP accordingly.


Edit: he put up a third (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PDX34OSTaM) and fourth (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwqjcuko5Dc) video for the two subclasses and I was able to complete the list of subclass changes in the OP as a result.

[quindraco]

I like the idea of being able to make a Con heavy rune knight. Any idea on how to make your bite bypass resistence to non-magical weapon resistance? The tasha's tattoos would be the ideal way i suppose, but hard to tattoo one's teeth...

For the same reason monks can't render them magical, anyone who can render a weapon magical can do it to the Dhampir teeth - for example, an artificer could infuse the teeth, and the spells magic weapon and elemental weapon should work on it.

[quindraco]

Fry put up a second video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpaiH81lxCM) showing what I think are all of the Dark Gifts and I have edited the OP accordingly.


Edit: he put up a third (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PDX34OSTaM) and fourth (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwqjcuko5Dc) video for the two subclasses and I was able to complete the list of subclass changes in the OP as a result.

For the shadowy reach thing - adding reach to an OA wouldn't do anything, since you won't have it at the time the OA is triggered, which is what matters. So if the OA is triggered, the target is within reach, and adding reach won't help you or anything.

Is Death Touch missing details? It's the only one with no downsides.

[verbatim]

Is Death Touch missing details? It's the only one with no downsides.
The flavor text indicates that your touch would be poisonous to everyone you come into contact with, but the mechanics do not bear this out in significant fashion. I suppose that RAW if you were downed and a teammate wanted to grapple your body and drag you to safety they would be taking that damage every turn, but otherwise I can't see any other mechanical downsides.


For the shadowy reach thing - adding reach to an OA wouldn't do anything, since you won't have it at the time the OA is triggered, which is what matters. So if the OA is triggered, the target is within reach, and adding reach won't help you or anything.

Noted, I have removed the mention of OA's from the OP.

The exact text is:

"When you make a melee attack roll, you can increase your reach for that attack by 10 feet. Your shadow stretches and delivers the attack as if it were you."

Which now has me wondering:

can you make a melee attack roll on a target that is 10 feet too far away to hit?
do you initiate the process of making a melee attack roll (and thus be eligible to use this feature) before picking a target and then doing the actual roll itself?

[Evaar]

The flavor text indicates that your touch would be poisonous to everyone you come into contact with, but the mechanics do not bear this out in significant fashion. I suppose that RAW if you were downed and a teammate wanted to grapple your body and drag you to safety they would be taking that damage every turn, but otherwise I can't see any other mechanical downsides.



Noted, I have removed the mention of OA's from the OP.

The exact text is:

"When you make a melee attack roll, you can increase your reach for that attack by 10 feet. Your shadow stretches and delivers the attack as if it were you."

Which now has me wondering:

can you make a melee attack roll on a target that is 10 feet too far away to hit?
do you initiate the process of making a melee attack roll (and thus be eligible to use this feature) before picking a target and then doing the actual roll itself?


If the question is "does this feature do nothing or something" then the presumption should be the feature does something.

Naturally if you can't "make a melee attack roll" against a target outside of your reach, but then this feature increases your reach anyway even though you could only target something in your normal reach, then it isn't doing anything.

[quindraco]

The flavor text indicates that your touch would be poisonous to everyone you come into contact with, but the mechanics do not bear this out in significant fashion. I suppose that RAW if you were downed and a teammate wanted to grapple your body and drag you to safety they would be taking that damage every turn, but otherwise I can't see any other mechanical downsides.



Noted, I have removed the mention of OA's from the OP.

The exact text is:

"When you make a melee attack roll, you can increase your reach for that attack by 10 feet. Your shadow stretches and delivers the attack as if it were you."

Which now has me wondering:

can you make a melee attack roll on a target that is 10 feet too far away to hit?
do you initiate the process of making a melee attack roll (and thus be eligible to use this feature) before picking a target and then doing the actual roll itself?



No, you can't. Attack resolution is divided into three steps (it's actually a lot more than that, but RAW it's in three steps and almost everything you do for an attack is in step 3), and you make the roll in step 3 but choose a target in range in step 1. You can't target something out of range.

Steps are from PHB p194:

Pick a target in range.
Determine all modifiers to attack roll.
Make the attack roll and do everything else - resolve on hit effects, roll damage, resolve on damage effects, etc.


So the only way that would be useful would be if you had an attack for which too much reach was helpful somehow. For example, if you had a melee attack that said "targets within half of your reach suffer 1d6 additional damage" or something.

[jaappleton]

snip

As the resident 'comb through the internet for any and all leaks and early preview content and post them to this forum' guy....

You have made me very proud.

You done good. Thank you for taking the time to do this.

I'd have done it myself, but a newborn and house hunting has taken up all my time over the last few weeks. :smallbiggrin:

[micahaphone]

As the resident 'comb through the internet for any and all leaks and early preview content and post them to this forum' guy....

You have made me very proud.

You done good. Thank you for taking the time to do this.

I'd have done it myself, but a newborn and house hunting has taken up all my time over the last few weeks. :smallbiggrin:

Does the baby have any previews of the rumored dragonlance setting book?

Congrats on the new minion!

[verbatim]

As the resident 'comb through the internet for any and all leaks and early preview content and post them to this forum' guy....

You have made me very proud.

You done good. Thank you for taking the time to do this.

I'd have done it myself, but a newborn and house hunting has taken up all my time over the last few weeks. :smallbiggrin:
:redface:

Might just be that I'm getting old (or that I grew up with gamefaqs) but I really am not into video as a form of presenting information. That being said fry seems like a good guy and I hope his youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHZnVxVND4LXp6fObt0wFaw/videos) gets a lot of traffic out of this.

[Hael]

Ancestral lineage is silly power creep. Why be a Tabaxi or Aaracokra at this point.

On the negative side, I don’t like that they nerfed the undead warlocks EB blast to one per attack (caving to misconceptions by the community). The UA version was mathematically less good than Hexblades curse. The current version isn’t even close. So the king of blastlocks remains the class with medium armor and a shield. The other decent blastlock (dao genie with spike growth) is also a strong second and well beyond this class.

I was hoping to see a mechanical option that would shake up that annoying state of affairs.

This class does look like perfect dip material for conquest paladins..

[jaappleton]

Does the baby have any previews of the rumored dragonlance setting book?

Congrats on the new minion!

<blue text> Well, his name is Raistlin. <blue text>

But the movie has started filming so I would think it would be safe to say the new novels and settings should coincide roughly with the release date of the film.

Playtest material for books, like the Feywild book code named Hourglass, has been in the hands of certain play testers for about three years.

So some people have some Dragonlance content, and I’m not referring to the recent UA on alternate Dragonborn.

[Warder]

<blue text> Well, his name is Raistlin. <blue text>

But the movie has started filming so I would think it would be safe to say the new novels and settings should coincide roughly with the release date of the film.

Playtest material for books, like the Feywild book code named Hourglass, has been in the hands of certain play testers for about three years.

So some people have some Dragonlance content, and I’m not referring to the recent UA on alternate Dragonborn.

Yet they didn't include "the Dragonlance domain" in the new Ravenloft book. I can't even begin to guess what goes on at WotC these days.

[P. G. Macer]

Ancestral lineage is silly power creep. Why be a Tabaxi or Aaracokra at this point.

On the negative side, I don’t like that they nerfed the undead warlocks EB blast to one per attack (caving to misconceptions by the community). The UA version was mathematically less good than Hexblades curse. The current version isn’t even close. So the king of blastlocks remains the class with medium armor and a shield. The other decent blastlock (dao genie with spike growth) is also a strong second and well beyond this class.

I was hoping to see a mechanical option that would shake up that annoying state of affairs.

This class does look like perfect dip material for conquest paladins..

I don’t think “Same power level of the Hexblade” is a good benchmark for whether something is balanced.

(Yes, I’m aware that Mearls or Crawford commented that they want all new Patrons to be around HB’s power level, but I still don’t think that’s a good idea).


Yet they didn't include "the Dragonlance domain" in the new Ravenloft book. I can't even begin to guess what goes on at WotC these days.


IIRC, Weis and Hickman hated Lord Soth becoming a Darklord, which is why Lord Soth eventually got out from the Domains of Dread, and judging from the aftermath of the lawsuit, I suspect WotC is trying to stay on their good side.

[follacchioso]

Van Richten is out now, at least on DNDBeyond.

[NRSASD]

I've got a physical copy but I haven't had the chance to open it yet. Still at work. In my brief two second perusal, it seems pretty good so far. Lots of monsters, character options, and Realms.

[NRSASD]

I've got a physical copy but I haven't had the chance to open it yet. Still at work. In my brief two second perusal, it seems pretty good so far. Lots of monsters, character options, and Realms.

[verbatim]

The plot hook tables for the different domains are my favorite thing thus far.

The woman who Strahd keeps stalking reincarnating as a Flesh Golem (or a Male Dragonborn, or a teenage boy???, or twins) who plans on turning their blood into poison right before he catches them is pretty out there.

Personal runner ups for most interesting plot hooks include (no quotes = my phrasing):



The besieged realm of Falkovnia perpetually lives under fear that the next wave of undead will be their last. Desperate, they have begun experimenting with lycanthropy in search of means to stand against the tide.



"Learn who's organizing the local dinner parties before more epicureans die of autophagia."



2d4 sapient, hyperdimensional Staring Cats of Uldun-dar (use regular cat statblock) share reports of how one party member died in multiple parallel dimensions until they finish a long rest.



"The figure hovering before you is deemed acceptable. They're lowered into a pool, where pale, slug-like beings set upon them. You float forward. Why are you deemed unacceptable?"



Lich and Darklord Azalin has escaped Darkon and is convinced that the only way to escape the Domains of Dread is to destroy Barovia.



A statblock for the French version of the werewolf, the CR 13 Loup Garou, who inflicts a form of lycanthropy that can't be cured while they still stand.

[KorvinStarmast]

Did a quick read through last night, and I like the way they laid out the various domains.

No comment in PC options at the mo, too busy with other stuff.

[Dr. Cliché]

The plot hook tables for the different domains are my favorite thing thus far.

The woman who Strahd keeps stalking reincarnating as a Flesh Golem (or a Male Dragonborn, or a teenage boy???, or twins) who plans on turning their blood into poison right before he catches them is pretty out there.

Personal runner ups for most interesting plot hooks include (no quotes = my phrasing):



The besieged realm of Falkovnia perpetually lives under fear that the next wave of undead will be their last. Desperate, they have begun experimenting with lycanthropy in search of means to stand against the tide.



"Learn who's organizing the local dinner parties before more epicureans die of autophagia."



2d4 sapient, hyperdimensional Staring Cats of Uldun-dar (use regular cat statblock) share reports of how one party member died in multiple parallel dimensions until they finish a long rest.



"The figure hovering before you is deemed acceptable. They're lowered into a pool, where pale, slug-like beings set upon them. You float forward. Why are you deemed unacceptable?"



Lich and Darklord Azalin has escaped Darkon and is convinced that the only way to escape the Domains of Dread is to destroy Barovia.



A statblock for the French version of the werewolf, the CR 13 Loup Garou, who inflicts a form of lycanthropy that can't be cured while they still stand.



Looks like this book actually has some pretty nice stuff.

Shame it came after Tasha's and thus failed to escape without being tainted by plague.

[Luccan]

The loup-garrou has me excited for longer lasting mechanical consequences in the game. And yeah, the lineage options should've been more DM facing so they could be better customized

[Unoriginal]

The monsters are well-made, at least. I particularly like the Strigoi, especially the "grotesque but aristocratic monster" version.

Do we all agree that Loup Garous all speak with an exaggerated French accent?

[Waterdeep Merch]

Do we all agree that Loup Garous all speak with an exaggerated French accent?

Only if they howl "HON HON!" at the moon. And pair all their peasants with wine.

[KorvinStarmast]

PC options:

Damhpir: nope, not interested, nor interesting, but I get it that some people want to be vampires. {grumble grumble Twilight nonsense grumble grumble}

Hexblood: not bad, I think we have room for a fey/hagspawn in one of my campaigns. But ... the mandatory horns/things-on-the-head are {censored} stupid. Hags, as illustrated, don't have horns. If we use these, that gets excised.

Reborn: not interested in revanent PCs. Cheap imitation of warforged. Not at my table.

Sub classes: had to stop reading, lunch break got curtailed, back with observations later.

@Unoriginal: yeah, the French accent is a must.

[SunsetWaraxe]

PC options:

Damhpir: nope, not interested, nor interesting, but I get it that some people want to be vampires. {grumble grumble Twilight nonsense grumble grumble}

In the player's handbook we have off brand devils and off brand dragons as playable options. Off brand Vampires fit in quite nicely, IMO. :smallsmile:

[follacchioso]

PC options:

Damhpir: nope, not interested, nor interesting, but I get it that some people want to be vampires. {grumble grumble Twilight nonsense grumble grumble}

Hexblood: not bad, I think we have room for a fey/hagspawn in one of my campaigns. But ... the mandatory horns/things-on-the-head are {censored} stupid. Hags, as illustrated, don't have horns. If we use these, that gets excised.

Reborn: not interested in revanent PCs. Cheap imitation of warforged. Not at my table.

Sub classes: had to stop reading, lunch break got curtailed, back with observations later.

@Unoriginal: yeah, the French accent is a must.
This is the way I've approached it at the beginning.

However, the best part of this book is the description of all the Domains of Dread and the Dark lords. There is some very good stuff for campaigns and adventures. In my opinion this book is more about roleplaying than for creating power builds.

[verbatim]

The loup-garrou has me excited for longer lasting mechanical consequences in the game.


Do we all agree that Loup Garous all speak with an exaggerated French accent?

Absolutely.

Speaking of language, one thing that's caught me off guard is the advanced vocabulary used throughout. Words that I did not know were words from specifically the Domains of Dread section in Van Richten's:


Buboes
Burgomaster
Canopic
Casques Silencieux
Citrine
Jiangshi
Hippodromes
Loup Garou
Luxuriate
Meistersinger
Oceanarium
Orbitoclasts
Phantasmagoric
Sadhu
Schloss
Vihara

[chainer1216]

Anyone else paying attention to the guilty gear strive beta and now want to play a Dhampir Echo Knight?

[KorvinStarmast]

However, the best part of this book is the description of all the Domains of Dread and the Dark lords. There is some very good stuff for campaigns and adventures. In my opinion this book is more about roleplaying than for creating power builds. Very much agree, and as I reviewed the Dark Gifts again, I really like the thematics.

I may fold one or two of those into a current campaign that is not in a Ravenloft nor Domain of Dread setting because the party violated the temple of a god of death/death cult (Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan) and one of them stole a mask that I ended up modding into a homebrew magical (and cursed) item. There are some other residual weird effects looming, and depending on what a couple of the PCs do, a Dark Gift might be a perfect tweak to a couple of the characters.

[Unoriginal]

I haven't read the Curses section of the book in detail yet, but I'm curious about other people's opinions on it.

[Corsair14]

Am I right in assuming there is a players book and a DM's guide like there apparently is online?

The players book will likely be ignored by me as the DM. If I do my job right then the players in both real life and in game wont even know they are in the domains of dread, just some strange foreign land where magic seems to exist and the supernatural apparently aren't just stories to keep the children behaving and from playing in the dark forests where they could get lost.

Hopes since I haven't seen it yet: Always looking for short adventure ideas to add into the overall campaign. Hoping the insanity and terror system out of the book is usable without a lot of rework or just reusing the old system. I already know I will have to homebrew Sithicus back into the world.

- Looking forward to seeing how the players roleplay when their crusader characters run into demi-humans the first time and whether they will realize they are halflings and not just rotund children. Not sure if I will have an Germanic background characters but the idea of them suggesting dwarf tossing(which is an actual sport) in the presence of an actual rare dwarf in game is very humorous to me.

[Unoriginal]

Am I right in assuming there is a players book and a DM's guide like there apparently is online?

No? There's just a chapter with player options.



The players book will likely be ignored by me as the DM. If I do my job right then the players in both real life and in game wont even know they are in the domains of dread

Not sure why you'd consider this "doing your job right". Not knowing for starter, sure, it can work, but it's the kind of things that asks for an awesome and dramatic reveal. If they don't find out, what's the point?


just some strange foreign land where magic seems to exist and the supernatural apparently aren't just stories to keep the children behaving and from playing in the dark forests where they could get lost.

You mean as opposed to the regular Material Plane where magic definitively exist and the supernatural definitively isn't just stories to keep the children behaving?

[Corsair14]

My next campaign has them beginning in the real world the day after the storming of Jerusalem. They will all be crusaders of some flavor and during the first adventure they get to deal with the horrors of the event and an actual something trying to cause them to go mad. During the climatic battle with their former ally who found an evil artifact the mists come and they find themselves on a sea shore which immediately brings them into a short adventure with Adam and "Frankenstein"(cant remember his ravenloft name off the top of my head).

So no, they have no clue about magic for the most part. Limiting any of the few magic using classes allowed to non-visible cantrips only. Priests can use non-visible healing spells if they keep it on the down low, bless and buffs are more like prayers than spells. Wizards are obviously nerfed but I allow them. They just know if they get caught using magic they likely will get burned at the stake for being a witch. Now when they get to ravenloft their full abilities become empowered although wizards will have to find 1st level + spells since they had no knowledge of them before. Their purpose in along with druids is to be advisors to Lords, healers etc. Priests are easy. They are priests.

That said, even the normal gaming worlds of Forgettable Realms, krynn, and greyhawk know little to nothing about Ravenloft. So very few people actually ever escape back to their home worlds that its not even a rumor. Any character brought to the domains of dread should be completely clueless about whats going on.

[Ogun]

Spirit Medium Background:
I would want a Book of Kells style magnifying lens like the Eye of Colm Cille as my divining tool.
A lantern, ear trumpet or mask might be even better.
Any of the above might be used to make ability checks and add your proficiency to them while you are at it.

Regarding the Dark Gifts, who gets them?
Touch of death is clearly the winner in terms of downsides, Symbiotic Being , wow, I love it!

[Yakmala]

Picked up the hardcover today. I was reading through the section on the mists and domains. Very cool stuff! But one thing I was unable to find was any info on how one can ever return from a Domain of Dread to the Prime Material plain permanently. What happens when you re-enter the mists from a domain is random, and none of that randomness gets you home. At best, you can use a mist key to get to a specific domain, but not back to Faerun, Greyhawk or wherever you originally were from. Not even via a wish. Did I miss something?

[chainer1216]

Picked up the hardcover today. I was reading through the section on the mists and domains. Very cool stuff! But one thing I was unable to find was any info on how one can ever return from a Domain of Dread to the Prime Material plain permanently. What happens when you re-enter the mists from a domain is random, and none of that randomness gets you home. At best, you can use a mist key to get to a specific domain, but not back to Faerun, Greyhawk or wherever you originally were from. Not even via a wish. Did I miss something?

The domains of dead are a prison, typically theres no getting out.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

My next campaign has them beginning in the real world the day after the storming of Jerusalem. They will all be crusaders of some flavor and during the first adventure they get to deal with the horrors of the event and an actual something trying to cause them to go mad. During the climatic battle with their former ally who found an evil artifact the mists come and they find themselves on a sea shore which immediately brings them into a short adventure with Adam and "Frankenstein"(cant remember his ravenloft name off the top of my head).

Sounds like a fun game. My wife ran a similar idea with us being from Earth and getting wrapped up in the dealings of the Seelie and Unseelie court after our travels had taken us to Britain.

As a fun aside, you're trying to remember Lamordia and Mordenheim. And Viktra is the Dark Lady of the land. I like the tweaks and changes I've seen on some staple lands. Though I'm surprised there's not a bit more backlash over the changes. (from simple things like Lamordia and Falkovnia having female Darklords to the Elder Brain's entire plot kind of going off rails.)

One thing I love is the addition of new setting stuff even if only in blerbs. I admit I was still pondering how to bring my players into Ravenloft when I get to page 168 and see "Cyre 1313: The Mourning Rail" Ghost train? Thank you please. Specially since I can start my group in Eberron as archaeologists working for any number of places going into the Mournland to investigate something and finding that train... Awesome Pulp Noire, Call of Cthulu like introduction.

[animewatcha]

Can it be hereby declared and made law that all monks gain the Death Touch?

[verbatim]

Can it be hereby declared and made law that all monks gain the Death Touch?

Important to note that Death Touch works like a cantrip, i.e. you can't use it with extra attack.

That being said, since it is an unarmed strike that specific strike would still be monk die + dex + 1d10 and then you would be able to do a follow up bonus action unarmed strike for monk die + dex.

[Laevatein]

I'm finding myself wanting to make a dhampir inspired by Selene from the Underworld movies. Would Fighter/Rogue be best for that?

[KorvinStarmast]

The domains of dead are a prison, typically theres no getting out. Which is part of why I'll never run 5e curse of Strahd. Our groups tend to want to go from adventure to adventure.

Honestly, from a design perspective, it's a stupid restriction; if you can get in, you can get out. Hard? Sure. "you are stuck here forever" is not the game we are interested in playing.

[Unoriginal]

Which is part of why I'll never run 5e curse of Strahd. Our groups tend to want to go from adventure to adventure.

Honestly, from a design perspective, it's a stupid restriction; if you can get in, you can get out. Hard? Sure. "you are stuck here forever" is not the game we are interested in playing.

I mean, Curse of Strahd has the PCs and everyone else get out of Barovia if they succeed.

[animewatcha]

How does curse of strahd deal with things like gate or planar shift? You know things that let you travel the planes?

[Lavaeolus]

How does curse of strahd deal with things like gate or planar shift? You know things that let you travel the planes?

Simply no-sells them:

The land of Barovia resides in its own demiplane, isolated from all other planes, including the Material Plane. No spell—not even wish—allows one to escape from Strahd’s domain. Astral projection, teleport, plane shift, and similar spells cast for the purpose of leaving Barovia simply fail, as do effects that banish a creature to another plane of existence. [...] Magic that allows transit to the Border Ethereal, such as the etherealness spell and the Etherealness feature of incorporeal undead, is the exception to this rule. A creature that enters the Border Ethereal from Strahd’s domain is pulled back into Barovia upon leaving that plane.

Also affects magic items, etc. You can also still cast spells that "allow contact with beings from other planes" -- with the condition that Strahd can essentially hijack the spell and make himself the recepient.

[Waterdeep Merch]

How does curse of strahd deal with things like gate or planar shift? You know things that let you travel the planes?

They're a one way ticket. You can get in easy enough, but they don't let you back out. A nasty surprise for outsiders that get summoned into the Domains.

It's thanks to the Dark Powers, and a good reason why I dislike the interpretation given in this book (it's a bunch of trapped evil beings). In the past they were an enigma, and could release players back whence they came whenever they dealt with the local forces of darkness. It was never really clear whether they were good or evil, and could surprise you sometimes.

Now that they're capital Evil, what excuse could they possibly have for releasing anyone, ever?

That and defining them as a bunch of vestiges is just way too mundane for my tastes. I like them inherently unknowable and alien.

[Warder]

From earlier editions, there's another way to get out as well - the World Serpent Inn (https://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/World_Serpent.pdf), which is definitely not a reliable method - it's basically a MacGuffin in itself, that players (or the Dark Powers) have no control over. I like it as a concept, especially since it's mysterious enough and strong enough to tick off the Dark Powers, but it's perhaps not all that useful in actual play. I've only used ever used it in a background for a character, not in an actual game.

[animewatcha]

Simply no-sells them:


Also affects magic items, etc. You can also still cast spells that "allow contact with beings from other planes" -- with the condition that Strahd can essentially hijack the spell and make himself the recepient.

That kind of thing is 'begging' for people to break it. Like I'm looking at the genie warlock. Extradimensional space. So a 'dimension within the dimension.' So high warlock and (up to 5 willing creatures) party members port out from within it. Really it's restrictions like these that people hate and encourages breaking the game. Someone has got to start doing this on livestream games for WOTC for sole purpose of exposing them and how WOTC can be idiots at times.

[Waterdeep Merch]

That kind of thing is 'begging' for people to break it. Like I'm looking at the genie warlock. Extradimensional space. So a 'dimension within the dimension.' So high warlock and (up to 5 willing creatures) party members port out from within it. Really it's restrictions like these that people hate and encourages breaking the game. Someone has got to start doing this on livestream games for WOTC for sole purpose of exposing them and how WOTC can be idiots at times.

Uhh... this was TSR's doing, not WotC. Being incapable of leaving has been a part of the setting since day one, with 1983's I6 Ravenloft surrounding the whole of Barovia with the deadly Mists to trap players, expounded upon when first introduced in 2e to block planar travel in this manner.

Even back then there were players that don't like the feeling of being trapped. I'd argue those people aren't big fans of horror in general, since that's pretty typical of the genre. Safe to say, you should be careful in choosing to DM or play within the Domains of Dread unless you happen to all be fans of gothic horror.

[Corsair14]

How does curse of strahd deal with things like gate or planar shift? You know things that let you travel the planes?

Traditionally you can port things in like a summons but you cannot port out. Its why summoned elementals and demons and such tend to have a higher chance of not only breaking free but also attacking the summoner for bringing it to this prison in the first place. Familiars are not summoned, the dark powers create them in order to corrupt the summoner over the long term.


As for PCs coming in to do an adventure and then leaving? The Ravenloft setting is its own campaign setting no different than Forgotten Realms or Athas. It has its own adventures and plots and such. Half the point of the setting is strangers in a strange land. You arent supposed to come in and out. Once you are there, barring some amazing discovery, you are stuck there. There are ruins to explore, dungeons etc. But the whole setting has a vibe of being incredibly beautiful but being a facade under which the normal inhabitants typically never see but the PCs do.

[Yakmala]

That kind of thing is 'begging' for people to break it. Like I'm looking at the genie warlock. Extradimensional space. So a 'dimension within the dimension.' So high warlock and (up to 5 willing creatures) party members port out from within it. Really it's restrictions like these that people hate and encourages breaking the game. Someone has got to start doing this on livestream games for WOTC for sole purpose of exposing them and how WOTC can be idiots at times.

Except that if a player were to insist that the interior of their genie vessel was a different extradimensional space from which one could port out to a planar region of their choice, then I as a DM would be forced to smile and remind them that due to the special properties of the Domains of Dread, they are incapable of porting into their genie vessel in the first place.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I know older Ravenloft sources also specifically mentioned that extradimensional spaces were also trapped within the Domains of Dread. Like, they work, but they're anchored to the Domains in such a way that those rules still apply within them. Which means planar teleport spells are still a no-go. Even the Border Ethereal is unique here and obeys Ravenloft laws first (the setting was originally part of the Ethereal Plane, but in 5e it's part of the Shadow Plane).

Has anyone seen mention of a similar rule in 5e around anywhere? I might've just skipped over it since I already knew it.

[MaxWilson]

Which is part of why I'll never run 5e curse of Strahd. Our groups tend to want to go from adventure to adventure.

Honestly, from a design perspective, it's a stupid restriction; if you can get in, you can get out. Hard? Sure. "you are stuck here forever" is not the game we are interested in playing.

If I were going to run a Ravenloft adventure, I'd make it a one-shot where each player is asked as part of their backstory to describe what horrible thing they did in life that makes consignment to Ravenloft an appropriate punishment, and then as DM I'd give each of them an individualized curse.



It's thanks to the Dark Powers, and a good reason why I dislike the interpretation given in this book (it's a bunch of trapped evil beings). In the past they were an enigma, and could release players back whence they came whenever they dealt with the local forces of darkness. It was never really clear whether they were good or evil, and could surprise you sometimes.

Now that they're capital Evil, what excuse could they possibly have for releasing anyone, ever?

That and defining them as a bunch of vestiges is just way too mundane for my tastes. I like them inherently unknowable and alien.

Yeah, that does sound inconsistent and annoying. Sounds like I'll continue to not buy or use this book.

[Segev]

Personally, I would prefer it if the demiplane of dread couldn't boswell high level planar travel magics, but could prevent them from being used for entry. The Dark Powers just don't allow those who could escape trivially to enter in order to prevent comings and goings at such beings' leisure. The Mists are where all planar travel opens into the demiplane, and the Dark Powers just part them into another Plane rather than a Domain.

The exception to those spells working for egress are domain lords. They cannot escape, in no small part because anywhere they go,hey bring this Domain with them. An incursion of the domain of Lord Soth due to his discovery of a Cubic Gate dropped the Mists over the area he tried to shift to, and now part of the world is trapped within them. Heroes can try to navigate their way in to discover the problem and solve it by banishing Lord Soth. This sends his whole Domain away with him.

[animewatcha]

Except that if a player were to insist that the interior of their genie vessel was a different extradimensional space from which one could port out to a planar region of their choice, then I as a DM would be forced to smile and remind them that due to the special properties of the Domains of Dread, they are incapable of porting into their genie vessel in the first place.

Later on I figured on there was more to the wording than what was quoted earlier. It seems that through extra wording in that section of the book (using an anyflip website link), magic item are dealt with in mostly same way as magic. Thing is that particular section is magic, magic, magic. Main weakness looks to be class features and there is few of that may help. A carefully enough worded Divine Intervention could bypass this.
Heck looking at the fog section with the exhaustion rule, etc. It keeps mentioning creature in fog itself, but nothing about say if you were in a little teapot short and stout, hopping your *** on the way on out (finding someway to move the vessel).

-edit- looking around the book more.. perhaps you can go to a town or whatever that doesn't have the fog in it.... and start digging a la underdark. A long enough tunnel to get out of the damn domain and the fog is stuck on the surface. It's stupid sounding...It's idiotic...It's probably how non-human races (elves, dwarves, etc.) escaped the setting without strahd knowing about it or even considering it. Because who the heck would normally think to dig their way out.

[Maan]

It's thanks to the Dark Powers, and a good reason why I dislike the interpretation given in this book (it's a bunch of trapped evil beings). In the past they were an enigma, and could release players back whence they came whenever they dealt with the local forces of darkness. It was never really clear whether they were good or evil, and could surprise you sometimes.

Now that they're capital Evil, what excuse could they possibly have for releasing anyone, ever?
Sorry, from where did you get that idea?

The book explicitly states "The true nature of the Dark Powers is for you to decide", before giving a few ideas about it (one of them being "amoral guardians").
But really, the DM can make them be anything they want them to be.

[Lavaeolus]

I know older Ravenloft sources also specifically mentioned that extradimensional spaces were also trapped within the Domains of Dread. Like, they work, but they're anchored to the Domains in such a way that those rules still apply within them. Which means planar teleport spells are still a no-go. Even the Border Ethereal is unique here and obeys Ravenloft laws first (the setting was originally part of the Ethereal Plane, but in 5e it's part of the Shadow Plane).

Has anyone seen mention of a similar rule in 5e around anywhere? I might've just skipped over it since I already knew it.

To be clear: I didn't quote the section in full, which is three full paragraphs, just the bit concerning plane-spells. But yes, the section also says:

Magic that summons creatures or objects from other planes functions normally in Barovia, as does magic that involves an extradimensional space. Any spells cast within such an extradimensional space (such as that created by Mordenkainen’s magnificent mansion) are subject to the same restrictions as magic cast in Barovia.

[Corsair14]

Personally, I would prefer it if the demiplane of dread couldn't boswell high level planar travel magics, but could prevent them from being used for entry. The Dark Powers just don't allow those who could escape trivially to enter in order to prevent comings and goings at such beings' leisure. The Mists are where all planar travel opens into the demiplane, and the Dark Powers just part them into another Plane rather than a Domain.

The exception to those spells working for egress are domain lords. They cannot escape, in no small part because anywhere they go,hey bring this Domain with them. An incursion of the domain of Lord Soth due to his discovery of a Cubic Gate dropped the Mists over the area he tried to shift to, and now part of the world is trapped within them. Heroes can try to navigate their way in to discover the problem and solve it by banishing Lord Soth. This sends his whole Domain away with him.

Since so few people ever manage to escape Ravenloft no one knows to use spells to try and enter. Even sages don't know about the place and I doubt big names like Eliminster or Mordenkanon even know it exists.

[chainer1216]

Yeah, that does sound inconsistent and annoying. Sounds like I'll continue to not buy or use this book.

Its extremely consistent, anyone who tells you the "Dark Powers" were a morally ambiguous mystery is trying to sell you revisionist bull****.

Ravenloft exists as a prison to torture the Darklords, the fact that innocent people get cought up in it didnt matter at all.

What was a mystery was what exactly were the Dark Powers and what was their motivation? Maybe a cabal of evil deities allowed to do as they please to this little subsection of reality and it's their version of the Truman Show, or maybe they were some lovecraftian elder horrors beyond the reach of the traditional pantheons and we're all just trapped in their dream, who knows, but they were always Evil, and the only way out was for them to let you out, and because they are a mystery with mysterious motivations the reason a few people might get let out from time to time was inscrutable.

I havent looked at the book but even if they decided to list, name, and give motivations to all the Dark Powers it doesnt really change anything because they're still greater than mortal beings with knowledge and perspective that no mortal will ever have.

But a great all purpose reason for PCs getting kicked out is extremely simple: they're PCs, nothing's managed to kill them yet and they're interfering with a darklords torture session too much. Cue them being enveloped by mists and becoming some other realities problem.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Sorry, from where did you get that idea?

The book explicitly states "The true nature of the Dark Powers is for you to decide", before giving a few ideas about it (one of them being "amoral guardians").
But really, the DM can make them be anything they want them to be.
The write up for the Priests of Osybus, which completely ignores that line by making them something of a religious order originally dedicated to the Dark Powers before their founder, Osybus, ascended to being one. They have a penchant for undeath and apparent evil, including Osybus. This is where they draw a distinct connection between Amber Temple and the Dark Powers. And I guess now a regular human can be a Dark Power if they just put in the hours or something.

Nevermind how they ruin Strahd's story by being more responsible for his fall than he was. I like the theme to the Priests, but I despise their lore.


To be clear: I didn't quote the section in full, which is three full paragraphs, just the bit concerning plane-spells. But yes, the section also says:

Thank you, I thought I might've glossed over it! It's one of those things I expected to see and thus paid no mind, I guess.

[Unoriginal]

Funny thing, in 5e, the Raven Queen might be a Dark Power. Or all of them. Or at least be involved in picking up who ends up a Dark Lord.

[Maan]

The write up for the Priests of Osybus, which completely ignores that line by making them something of a religious order originally dedicated to the Dark Powers before their founder, Osybus, ascended to being one. They have a penchant for undeath and apparent evil, including Osybus. This is where they draw a distinct connection between Amber Temple and the Dark Powers. And I guess now a regular human can be a Dark Power if they just put in the hours or something.

Nevermind how they ruin Strahd's story by being more responsible for his fall than he was. I like the theme to the Priests, but I despise their lore.
Oh, I see. I just skimmed through the pages, mostly.

Anyway, it seems the whole book is thought to be something of a toolbox: take what you think is good, or just use it as inspiration to make your own worlds and stories.
They pretty much say so when in the introduction to the realms. I won't see anything in this book like being "canon" or something. More like "here are some ideas of what you could do".

[Waterdeep Merch]

Oh, I see. I just skimmed through the pages, mostly.

Anyway, it seems the whole book is thought to be something of a toolbox: take what you think is good, or just use it as inspiration to make your own worlds and stories.
They pretty much say so when in the introduction to the realms. I won't see anything in this book like being "canon" or something. More like "here are some ideas of what you could do".

That's how I'm trying to approach it. Honestly, I used to do the same thing with the old lore too. There were a lot of stupid parts in 2e-4e Ravenloft as well.

And I do like the basic principle of an insane cult dedicated to the Dark Powers. I just don't like the idea that they have any actual intimate connection with them. Or having absolutely anything to do with Strahd's curse. I'm thinking of running them as a more twisted branch of the Fraternity of Shadows, people who found out their world is a lie and took a different approach to it.

[Temperjoke]

One thing that amused me with this book (I haven't finished yet, taking my time) is that you could use the Reborn lineage (I don't like the term lineage, I don't think it properly describes this) to make a formerly undead character, like a zombie, mummy, or skeleton.

[Segev]

Crack headcanon: the Mists are just a really elaborate Maze and the Dark Powers are just the Lady of Pain in her vacation clothing. (I'm thinking Hawaiian flower shirt.)

[jojosskul]

Crack headcanon: the Mists are just a really elaborate Maze and the Dark Powers are just the Lady of Pain in her vacation clothing. (I'm thinking Hawaiian flower shirt.)

I love it. That'd be one torn up as hell flower shirt. Lady of Pain be spikey.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Huh, I think I'll use that for the backstory I'm building here. My idea is that the Mists, the true form of the Dark Powers, is a natural force that goes back to the dawn of the multiverse, born at the same time as creation. It's the natural entropy of all things, dispersing into infinite chaos until it loses the ability to move anymore and becomes static forever (the heat death of the universe via Newton's Second Law of Thermodynamics). That Mist is what was supposed to come of all things and all souls in the multiverse. When you die, you wander the Mists until eventually becoming one with it. In this story, four overgods knew of what the Mists were and actively wanted to defeat it. They got their chance in the oddest circumstance- Tharizdun and the Shard of Chaos. They ensured he'd get the shard and plant it into the origin of creation, the nexus at the center of the Elemental Chaos, and thus ensured an infinite energy source that could deny the slow march of all things into absolute entropy. Using this energy, the four gods responsible structured the Great Wheel, and homes for themselves and their followers that would now never die.

Except this doesn't really stop entropy, it just ensures that there's always new creation, that most of it is evil in nature, and complete souls rarely enter the Mists anymore (the ones that do become vestiges). This amalgamation isn't exactly sentient, but it isn't entirely aware of itself either. It's power in a way that is hard to fathom now, and lashes out seemingly at random. Time itself has no meaning inside the Mists anymore. It contains the castoffs from an infinite number of worlds, and everything that was ever cast aside. Among them, mortal hopes and regrets.

This is where Count Strahd von Zarovich comes in. In truth, he wasn't much special, but the hopes and regrets he was trying to cast aside leading to Tatyana and Sergei's wedding gave rise to a powerful shade of himself, borne of the Mists, that approached him with a deal to gain his desires. This "Death" or "Vampyr" that he spoke with, the thing that haunts him even now, is his own hopes, regrets, and loathing, given shape from the Mists. If you're trapped in the Mists at all, this is why; it isn't a completely alien force. It's you. Only by truly giving up on your own regrets and moving past your own hopelessness can you defeat it. This is how Lord Soth left, and why someone that seems decent on the whole like Jander Sunstar can never be free.

Those four ancient overgods did try to correct their mistakes. With the Mists becoming more and more sentient in the aftermath of Strahd and the appearance of more Darklords, they will eventually become so overwhelmingly powerful that they could swallow the rest of creation. They entered the Mists once Barovia had appeared within and tried to stop the outflow of entropy from the Abyss from corrupting it. This led to the near absolute corruption of their leader, Mother Night. The Morninglord is still trapped there, his darkness a shadow that never leaves him. The other two escaped, and situating them as Jazirian and Ahriman makes sense, representing the summer/day and fall/evening respectively. Their time amidst absolute entropy and corruption has changed them dramatically, and their echoes across the multiverse have suffered for it. Jazirian is represented as various serpent gods on various worlds, master of both coautl and yuan-ti depending on form. Ahriman is Asmodeus, and is the least effected of the four, but only after he surrendered the better part of his power after losing all hope, becoming a crippled, bitter shell of who he once was before eventually the evil he is now. The Morninglord is the many sun gods of the various worlds, and is still trying desperately to fight the darkness from within. That time Lathander tried to lead a genocide in Forgotten Realms is due to this, and the stories about Pelor the Burning Hate are very real.

So then there's Mother Night, the leader and absolute most corrupted of the four. She's death gods on many worlds, as well as those of darkness and despair. The reason the night is so much more dangerous than the day on D&D worlds is thanks to her corruption. She's also the last thing keeping the multiverse from completely falling into the Mists, the last spark of who she once was adamant on preventing entropy from claiming everything.

Who better then to be the true form of Mother Night than the Lady of Pain? A warden in a cage, preventing the Mists from spreading from Sigil to the rest of the multiverse.

[Trafalgar]

Does Van Richten's include "Dark Power Checks"? That was something that made the original Ravenloft feel so different to me.

[P. G. Macer]

Does Van Richten's include "Dark Power Checks"? That was something that made the original Ravenloft feel so different to me.

It does not.

[Ettina]

I've always imagined the Dark Powers as basically ascended/elder hags - same basic motivation and personality, but far beyond even a grandmother hag in power.

[Corsair14]

Does Van Richten's include "Dark Power Checks"? That was something that made the original Ravenloft feel so different to me.

Something else we will have to use from the old rules.

It also includes some silly seeds of fear thing instead of the old Fear/terror/ madness checks

Now that I have looked through the book, it has some good things but overall its a let down. It gets away from the old Strangers trapped in a strange land that the old system had. They changed many of the lords and their motivations massively to appease political correctness twitter bullies.

Like my favorite realm no longer being a New Orleans domain saturated with voodoo with a deranged but gentile lord/plantation owner who had his enemies fed to alligators and was cursed by his wife just before cruelly killing her and their innocent neighbor and was turned into a powerful zombie lord who learned more magic from the loahs. Now he is simply a prison warden who was sadist to the prisoners who fed him to gators? Yeah no.

A lot of other senseless changes. The Dutch Captain Van Reise whose domain was the sea of sorrows and captained a ghost ship is now a female Davey Jones. USed to be if his ship was corporeal you couldt tell it from any other ship. But if he decided to turn it back into a ghost ship while the living are on board, welcome to the crew. Yawn
Infamous ladies man Lord Hiregaard who was a noble chivilrous knight had the curse of falling in love with women and then at night his alter ego would kill them. Now he is a she for some reason, and instead of being a noble valorous knight is some kind of Mongol tribal lord.

They didnt change the Isle of Ravens but didnt detail it either. I have the article on it though so no big deal.

Those are just a few of the ones I found right off, having an interest in them in a campaign I am writing. There will be a ton of house ruling if I use this book at all. My final review is if you like Ravenloft, this book has some interesting adventure ideas and hooks, but if you already have a plan, just save the money and skip it and use the older material. I skipped all the player stuff since all my characters will be coming from the real world and I am not interested in the stuff mentioned.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

There's the upset over the gender flips. :-)

Honestly, happy to see power checks gone. A mechanic that changes a character's corruption and fight to stay good becoming random luck anytime you cast certain spells was a bit silly.

I still remember being forced to powers check for "lying" because my NG cleric tried to uplift people with things her goddess could do normally but not on Ravenloft (she didn't know she was in Ravenloft)

[P. G. Macer]

Something else we will have to use from the old rules.

It also includes some silly seeds of fear thing instead of the old Fear/terror/ madness checks

Now that I have looked through the book, it has some good things but overall its a let down. It gets away from the old Strangers trapped in a strange land that the old system had. They changed many of the lords and their motivations massively to appease political correctness twitter bullies.

Like my favorite realm no longer being a New Orleans domain saturated with voodoo with a deranged but gentile lord/plantation owner who had his enemies fed to alligators and was cursed by his wife just before cruelly killing her and their innocent neighbor and was turned into a powerful zombie lord who learned more magic from the loahs. Now he is simply a prison warden who was sadist to the prisoners who fed him to gators? Yeah no.

A lot of other senseless changes. The Dutch Captain Van Reise whose domain was the sea of sorrows and captained a ghost ship is now a female Davey Jones. USed to be if his ship was corporeal you couldt tell it from any other ship. But if he decided to turn it back into a ghost ship while the living are on board, welcome to the crew. Yawn
Infamous ladies man Lord Hiregaard who was a noble chivilrous knight had the curse of falling in love with women and then at night his alter ego would kill them. Now he is a she for some reason, and instead of being a noble valorous knight is some kind of Mongol tribal lord.

They didnt change the Isle of Ravens but didnt detail it either. I have the article on it though so no big deal.

Those are just a few of the ones I found right off, having an interest in them in a campaign I am writing. There will be a ton of house ruling if I use this book at all. My final review is if you like Ravenloft, this book has some interesting adventure ideas and hooks, but if you already have a plan, just save the money and skip it and use the older material. I skipped all the player stuff since all my characters will be coming from the real world and I am not interested in the stuff mentioned.

If you’re talking about Souragne as your favorite Domain, I’d guess that sensitivity readers are behind the changes, as from your description of the old version, it used to rely heavily on a certain marginalized and negatively stereotyped real-world religion.

[HappyDaze]

There's the upset over the gender flips. :-)

Honestly, happy to see power checks gone. A mechanic that changes a character's corruption and fight to stay good becoming random luck anytime you cast certain spells was a bit silly.

I still remember being forced to powers check for "lying" because my NG cleric tried to uplift people with things her goddess could do normally but not on Ravenloft (she didn't know she was in Ravenloft)

In 2e, I remember none-too-fondly how our LN (but tending toward LE) necromancer never seemed to fail a powers check no matter what he cast, but our NG cleric failed twice after casting speak with dead. Yeah, random chance was kinda dumb.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

In 2e, I remember none-too-fondly how our LN (but tending toward LE) necromancer never seemed to fail a powers check no matter what he cast, but our NG cleric failed twice after casting speak with dead. Yeah, random chance was kinda dumb.

Don't forget all healing spells were necromancy in 2e. :-D

[jojosskul]

I just had a chance to do fairly exhaustive once over, skipping most of the domains and the included adventure on the off chance I play this rather than DM it (I'll probably end up DMing it, but hey, it happens). I just want to say I'm EXTREMELY pleased with the addition of the Zombie Plague Spreader. Finally having a zombie that actually makes more zombies, even in a limited fashion, is absolutely fantastic and makes the types of storytelling people usually do with zombies a lot easier to do in DnD.

[Segev]

I just had a chance to do fairly exhaustive once over, skipping most of the domains and the included adventure on the off chance I play this rather than DM it (I'll probably end up DMing it, but hey, it happens). I just want to say I'm EXTREMELY pleased with the addition of the Zombie Plague Spreader. Finally having a zombie that actually makes more zombies, even in a limited fashion, is absolutely fantastic and makes the types of storytelling people usually do with zombies a lot easier to do in DnD.

While I understand the enthusiasm for this, it actually bothers me because it means the writers either are not able to see, or not willing to point out, that D&D has always had the "infectious, cannibalistic zombie." It is called a "ghoul."

[Sparky McDibben]

Has anybody else noticed that WotC has started capitalizing creature types, Undead and Humanoid? Why do that?

[Ettina]

While I understand the enthusiasm for this, it actually bothers me because it means the writers either are not able to see, or not willing to point out, that D&D has always had the "infectious, cannibalistic zombie." It is called a "ghoul."

5e ghouls aren't infectious, unlike 3.5e ghouls.

[Segev]

5e ghouls aren't infectious, unlike 3.5e ghouls.

Huh. Now I need to go look them up again. I could've sworn they still were spawners.

[Ekzanimus]

Oh, I see. I just skimmed through the pages, mostly.

Anyway, it seems the whole book is thought to be something of a toolbox: take what you think is good, or just use it as inspiration to make your own worlds and stories.
They pretty much say so when in the introduction to the realms. I won't see anything in this book like being "canon" or something. More like "here are some ideas of what you could do".

This book is full of inconsistencies. They are writing about many options of what exactly are Dark Powers and then they are clearly naming one of them in the description of Priests of Osybus. They are writing about many options of what exactly happened with Azalin Rex and why he is not in the Darkon anymore and suggesting to the DM that it is a mystery for himself to decide. Maybe he escaped to Oerth? Maybe he destroyed himself? Maybe, maybe, maybe... And then they are describing Mist-traveling scholar-archmage Firan Zal'honan who is clearly Azalin in disguise. And so on and so forth. If they were trying to give some ideas without making one of them clearly canonical then why they made one of them clearly canonical in the same book?

Also I am absolutely baffled by their decision to change genders of so many established characters. Viktra Mordenheim. Vladeska Drakov. Pietra van Riese. Domains of Dread are literally borderless. They could've created new domains with new Dark Ladies. But they've chosen to butcher storied and prominent characters. This is a clear sign of creative impotence. Did they have a surplus of Girdles of Masculinity/Femininity?

Also the incarnation of the Strahd's dead Tatyana apparently can travel between Domains and can be reborn in another domain. Poor Strahd. Also there are very interesting options of who exactly can be Tatyana instead of Ireena. For example her soul can be reborn in the body of young dragonborn male. Or in the body of a flesh golem. Or in the twin sisters - yes, in both at once apparently. Poor, poor Strahd.

Ah yes. They've also completely butchered the whole story of van Richten's son. He is now a jolly teenager ghost who accompanies Rudolf and is fond of leaving colourful and amusing ectoplasmic pictures for his friends. And he was not kidnapped by vistani but by a gang of bandits who posed as vistani to prey upon travelers.

[Unoriginal]

Has anybody else noticed that WotC has started capitalizing creature types, Undead and Humanoid? Why do that?

Where have you noticed a difference?

[huttj509]

Has anybody else noticed that WotC has started capitalizing creature types, Undead and Humanoid? Why do that?

They're keywords that some abilities key off of. Those tend to be capitalized.

[quinron]

5e ghouls aren't infectious, unlike 3.5e ghouls.


Huh. Now I need to go look them up again. I could've sworn they still were spawners.

Even then, ghouls are also pretty different from zombies in terms of both mechanics and flavor. Ghouls are assumed to be intelligent enough to speak Common, for one, and their signature attack is their paralyzing claws, which is a big deviation from the typical zombie features. Ghouls are also usually dextrous and often stealthy, which is entirely counter to the shambling plague zombie's MO.

[Segev]

Even then, ghouls are also pretty different from zombies in terms of both mechanics and flavor. Ghouls are assumed to be intelligent enough to speak Common, for one, and their signature attack is their paralyzing claws, which is a big deviation from the typical zombie features. Ghouls are also usually dextrous and often stealthy, which is entirely counter to the shambling plague zombie's MO.

Zombies in "plague zombie" horror tend to be fast and jump-scare prone, and while they don't paralyze, their one-bite-and-you're-doomed nature is similar. The intelligence of the ghoul is a distinction...sometimes. Recently, it seems zombie movies are having strangely intelligent zombies, too.

It's a personal peeve, really, not something that is an objectively bad move on WotC's part to introduce. I prefer using ghouls for the purpose because they serve it well, while making different kinds of zombies muddies the taxonomy. But again, it's not objectively bad, except in my own desire for neat categorization and clean design where monsters actually have somewhat unique niches. I feel that "plague zombies" do not have a unique niche compared to ghouls, at least not in enough distinction to warrant two separate entries. Even "ghoul fever" well-mimics the "one bite and you get sick and die" effect.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

This book is full of inconsistencies. They are writing about many options of what exactly are Dark Powers and then they are clearly naming one of them in the description of Priests of Osybus. They are writing about many options of what exactly happened with Azalin Rex and why he is not in the Darkon anymore and suggesting to the DM that it is a mystery for himself to decide. Maybe he escaped to Oerth? Maybe he destroyed himself? Maybe, maybe, maybe... And then they are describing Mist-traveling scholar-archmage Firan Zal'honan who is clearly Azalin in disguise. And so on and so forth. If they were trying to give some ideas without making one of them clearly canonical then why they made one of them clearly canonical in the same book?

Those inconsistencies are on purpose. That you feel one solution is canonical doesn't mean the book is written that way. I can look at the Eberron 3.5 Campaign setting and find a dozen answers to the Mourning, one of which makes the most sense to me. But the official stance is "Ask your DM what happened in their world." Keith won't even share what his answer is.


Also I am absolutely baffled by their decision to change genders of so many established characters. Viktra Mordenheim. Vladeska Drakov. Pietra van Riese. Domains of Dread are literally borderless. They could've created new domains with new Dark Ladies. But they've chosen to butcher storied and prominent characters. This is a clear sign of creative impotence. Did they have a surplus of Girdles of Masculinity/Femininity?

Exactly how does the gender swap butcher storied characters? None of them show any sign of issue in playing their role, none seem to have been drastically changed at the core. Could you share what you see as Butchering outside of gender?


Also the incarnation of the Strahd's dead Tatyana apparently can travel between Domains and can be reborn in another domain. Poor Strahd. Also there are very interesting options of who exactly can be Tatyana instead of Ireena. For example her soul can be reborn in the body of young dragonborn male. Or in the body of a flesh golem. Or in the twin sisters - yes, in both at once apparently. Poor, poor Strahd.

That's never been fleshed out but always been kind of there. Heck, in Expedition (admittedly not officially Ravenloft, but Officially D&D) it was encouraged to let a PC play Ireena which also means being able to eventually leave.


Ah yes. They've also completely butchered the whole story of van Richten's son. He is now a jolly teenager ghost who accompanies Rudolf and is fond of leaving colourful and amusing ectoplasmic pictures for his friends. And he was not kidnapped by vistani but by a gang of bandits who posed as vistani to prey upon travelers.

Does the Ghost aspect change the original story? Does the group turning out not to be Vistani truly change anything? I'm failing to see the issues.

[Sparky McDibben]

Where have you noticed a difference?

Example on p 140, subheadings "Construct Creation" and "Reborn Maker," respectively:


Dr. Mordenheim can create any Construct or corporeal Undead by working...

...two Medium or Small Humanoids...

Example on p 141, final sentence on page:


...spirits of forgotten tribes, icy Fey spirits, or the Sleeeping Beast...


They're keywords that some abilities key off of. Those tend to be capitalized.

But not in previous adventures. I can't find anything like that in DiA or Ghosts of Saltmarsh, and those are just the ones I checked now. Moreover, they normally aren't capitalized in statblocks, let alone in text passages. It's a distinct change in their house style - I'm just wondering what drove it.

[P. G. Macer]

Exactly how does the gender swap butcher storied characters? None of them show any sign of issue in playing their role, none seem to have been drastically changed at the core. Could you share what you see as Butchering outside of gender?


I can only speak to the case of Lamordia, but Viktor (now Viktra) Mordheim was clearly based off Dr. Victor Frankenstein, from the novel by Mary Shelley and countless adaptations thereof. One of the more poignant of the original novel is that Man acting as a creator in the absence of Woman is doomed to tragedy; by changing the scientist to a woman, the 5e team has demolished a strong feminist classic in the name of superficial pandering.

[Sparky McDibben]

This book is full of inconsistencies. They are writing about many options of what exactly are Dark Powers and then they are clearly naming one of them in the description of Priests of Osybus. They are writing about many options of what exactly happened with Azalin Rex and why he is not in the Darkon anymore and suggesting to the DM that it is a mystery for himself to decide. Maybe he escaped to Oerth? Maybe he destroyed himself? Maybe, maybe, maybe... And then they are describing Mist-traveling scholar-archmage Firan Zal'honan who is clearly Azalin in disguise. And so on and so forth. If they were trying to give some ideas without making one of them clearly canonical then why they made one of them clearly canonical in the same book?

They're not - I did not make any connections between Azalin and Firan, but if you did, that's just one more option.


Also I am absolutely baffled by their decision to change genders of so many established characters. Viktra Mordenheim. Vladeska Drakov. Pietra van Riese. Domains of Dread are literally borderless. They could've created new domains with new Dark Ladies. But they've chosen to butcher storied and prominent characters. This is a clear sign of creative impotence. Did they have a surplus of Girdles of Masculinity/Femininity?

I mean, whenever I worldbuild, I am usually running games for my wife, so I always include female villains, matriarchies, and female NPCs. It's important to me that she be able to see herself in the world. It's probable WotC are looking at their demographics, looking at the (frankly cringy) old 2e material, and taking the chance to update the setting for a broader gaming population. It's not a sign of creative impotence - it's a sign of creative strength. They're changing, growing, and moving forward. Good for them. If you stand still, you die.

[Protolisk]

Example on p 140, subheadings "Construct Creation" and "Reborn Maker," respectively:

[...]

But not in previous adventures. I can't find anything like that in DiA or Ghosts of Saltmarsh, and those are just the ones I checked now. Moreover, they normally aren't capitalized in statblocks, let alone in text passages. It's a distinct change in their house style - I'm just wondering what drove it.

I am all for actually using keywords as actual keywords in this edition. As much as the game tries to revolve around "rulings, not rules", it sure has its cranium up its hindquarters in this regard. I'm sure anyone who has tried to parse that "melee weapon attacks" are not exactly "attacks with a melee weapon" can attest to that.

I didn't notice it that much, but the capitalized Undead and lowercase undead both show up throughout the Domains of Ravenloft chapter. I am not particularly sure the rhyme or reason behind using one version over the other. Some things say "undead messenger" (not a creature stat block, I guess?) and usually indicates an Undead is a creature with a capital like with skeletons or mummies... except in the case of one "undead wraith", lowercase once again, even though a wraith has a stat block. So I am not sure it is consistent. I would prefer it if it was.

[Segev]

It does strike me as lazy to try to "include" by changing existing works carelessly rather than adding new ones.

A Carmilla expy would be great (if there isn't one already).

Some Dark Lady based on Lucretia de Borgia would work nicely. Or on The Queen of Hearts taken more Gothic. Heck, something spectacular might be done with Cruella de Ville as inspiration; no need to stick to pre-1950s characters.

If you want to add more lore, great. Few would gripe about whatever you chose to work in with something new to the setting, if the new things are well made. But change for the sake of change, or to "improve" the work in a way that has nothing to do with the work itself, is lazy and obvious and shouldn't satisfy the alleged target audience of the change any more an anyone else, because it hasn't given them anything they didn't have before other than claiming their interests are interchangeable.

[Ettina]

It does strike me as lazy to try to "include" by changing existing works carelessly rather than adding new ones.

Yeah, I'd much rather have other decently-fleshed out Demiplanes of Dread to explore.

[verbatim]

I suspect that a lot of the somewhat controversial decisions are driven by page limits rather than incompetence or ill-will.

Darklord statblocks would drastically cut down on the number of domains of dread included, and cutting popular ones so that you can add replacements with darklords who aren't exclusively white men seems like the kind of thing that sales would veto.

Maybe they could have added a part up front where you roll for each Darklord's origin and some of some darklord options were female (1 on the d6 would be the original) as a less controversial solution?

[Ekzanimus]

Those inconsistencies are on purpose. That you feel one solution is canonical doesn't mean the book is written that way. I can look at the Eberron 3.5 Campaign setting and find a dozen answers to the Mourning, one of which makes the most sense to me. But the official stance is "Ask your DM what happened in their world." Keith won't even share what his answer is.
Yeah, you see, Keith is a very smart man. And he really loves his setting. When he is telling you that something is not clearly explained and it will never be he means it. There are many answers but all of them are vague and there is no truth. When I was reading the "Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft" I was glad to see similar approach at first... But then they've clearly and unambigously stated some things as a given for their version of setting. Priests of Osybus are canon. Disguised Azalin who is travelling Mists is canon. We can change it for our games of course. But we don't need a book to tell us this do we?



Exactly how does the gender swap butcher storied characters? None of them show any sign of issue in playing their role, none seem to have been drastically changed at the core. Could you share what you see as Butchering outside of gender?
P. G. Macer and Segev already answered it better than I can. But I'll add that it is just a pointless change that does not add anything to the story of these characters but is making it worse and more generic.



That's never been fleshed out but always been kind of there. Heck, in Expedition (admittedly not officially Ravenloft, but Officially D&D) it was encouraged to let a PC play Ireena which also means being able to eventually leave.
It does not make it good. Let's bring something that is meant to torment a darklord from his domain somewhere else where he can't go. What can possibly go wrong?



Does the Ghost aspect change the original story? Does the group turning out not to be Vistani truly change anything? I'm failing to see the issues.
In the original story Erasmus was seen as a ghost only when he was summoned against Rudolph by his arch-nemesis. His last living moments were spent begging his father to kill him. Erasmus was not a character. He was a device of Rudolph's guilt and horror. I'll dare to say that him becoming a jolly ghost painter is a somewhat dramatic change of the original tragic story, yes.


Some Dark Lady based on Lucretia de Borgia would work nicely.
I've got serious Borgia vibes from Ivana Boritsi who is one of the two darklords of Borca.


Maybe they could have added a part up front where you roll for each Darklord's origin and some of some darklord options were female (1 on the d6 would be the original) as a less controversial solution?
It is funny that they've done something completely opposite: they've made a Darklord who previously had a male and a female forms (Harkon Lukas) only male. But the less is said about Harkon and his mess of a Domain the better.


They're not - I did not make any connections between Azalin and Firan, but if you did, that's just one more option.
It is strange because there are many not-so-subtle hints. And for those who does not get them WotC even gave Firan Azalin's familiar - who is mentioned in the description of Darkon.



I mean, whenever I worldbuild, I am usually running games for my wife, so I always include female villains, matriarchies, and female NPCs. It's important to me that she be able to see herself in the world. It's probable WotC are looking at their demographics, looking at the (frankly cringy) old 2e material, and taking the chance to update the setting for a broader gaming population. It's not a sign of creative impotence - it's a sign of creative strength. They're changing, growing, and moving forward. Good for them. If you stand still, you die.
You misunderstood me. I have absolutely no complaints about female darklords. I am vocally against genderbending existing characters when they've had a complete freedom to create new characters.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Yeah, you see, Keith is a very smart man. And he really loves his setting. When he is telling you that something is not clearly explained and it will never be he means it. There are many answers but all of them are vague and there is no truth. When I was reading the "Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft" I was glad to see similar approach at first... But then they've clearly and unambigously stated some things as a given for their version of setting. Priests of Osybus are canon. Disguised Azalin who is travelling Mists is canon. We can change it for our games of course. But we don't need a book to tell us this do we?

Again, you're seeing something as more canon, that's not the same as is. The Priests of Osybus are canon, their origin could be their own delusions or myths. Eberron has the entire Blood of Vol are are completely wrong about what they're worshipping. You thinking something is meant to be canon =/= actual canon when the book gives numerous answers that conflict.


P. G. Macer and Segev already answered it better than I can. But I'll add that it is just a pointless change that does not add anything to the story of these characters but is making it worse and more generic.

If it's a pointless change that doesn't add anything, how is it making it worse and more generic? Your answer literally makes no sense. If the gender of a darklord doesn't matter then it doesn't matter. If the change does matter, I'm asking you to articulate WHY is matters and how it is "worse".


It does not make it good. Let's bring something that is meant to torment a darklord from his domain somewhere else where he can't go. What can possibly go wrong?

What can go wrong? A lot for the DarkLord who can't get out, not much for the poor girl who gets away from the ultimate incel. For the record, it's only recently that it's specifically her soul. The original reads just had a girl that looks like Tatyanna keep appearing every so often.


In the original story Erasmus was seen as a ghost only when he was summoned against Rudolph by his arch-nemesis. His last living moments were spent begging his father to kill him. Erasmus was not a character. He was a device of Rudolph's guilt and horror. I'll dare to say that him becoming a jolly ghost painter is a somewhat dramatic change of the original tragic story, yes.

Dramatic change? Maybe not, better change to be an actual character instead of a fridge's son plot device? Absolutely.



You misunderstood me. I have absolutely no complaints about female darklords. I am vocally against genderbending existing characters when they've had a complete freedom to create new characters.

So two questions on this. #1: Why are you against it? What does it hurt? #2: Which of the existing domains do you want scrapped for the new ones?

[Segev]

cutting popular ones so that you can add replacements with darklords who aren't exclusively white men seems like the kind of thing that sales would veto.

It is almost certain that the ones they pallet-swapped will upset people who were fans of them more than if they'd been excluded in favor of new ones. Unless the fans really don't care about the swap, in which case, why would those who you did the swap to benefit care, either?

There are lesser-known domain lords in the book. Not including those in favor of new ones wouldn't hurt much. And if there's clamor for a second book because you left out ones that were popular enough to get the clamor, hey, that's more books you can sell. You could even pad those books out with more new domain lords and ladies to increase the options AND to further increase whatever representation you feel is needed.

But pallet-swaps are easy, especially if you pay no attention to the significance of what you're changing and treat it as cosmetic.

[verbatim]

It is almost certain that the ones they pallet-swapped will upset people who were fans of them more than if they'd been excluded in favor of new ones. Unless the fans really don't care about the swap, in which case, why would those who you did the swap to benefit care, either?

There are lesser-known domain lords in the book. Not including those in favor of new ones wouldn't hurt much. And if there's clamor for a second book because you left out ones that were popular enough to get the clamor, hey, that's more books you can sell. You could even pad those books out with more new domain lords and ladies to increase the options AND to further increase whatever representation you feel is needed.

But pallet-swaps are easy, especially if you pay no attention to the significance of what you're changing and treat it as cosmetic.


I know we're focusing on the pallet-swaps, but there's also a number of less controversial ways they've done this in the book in other domains. There's a table of origins for Tatyana, the Darklord of Valachan is overthrown by a successor, etc. Perhaps they could have done that with the pallette-swaps instead?


People were doing fan rewrites for female Strahd in 5e waay before this book was even decided upon. Writers seeing that and wanting to mix things up without removing popular domains (because of hard page limits) does not strike me as being comparably problematic relative to the amount of attention they're garnering.

[Ekzanimus]

Again, you're seeing something as more canon, that's not the same as is. The Priests of Osybus are canon, their origin could be their own delusions or myths. Eberron has the entire Blood of Vol are are completely wrong about what they're worshipping. You thinking something is meant to be canon =/= actual canon when the book gives numerous answers that conflict.
You definetly should read more carefully.
First, origin of the Priests of Osybus is not stated as a myth or their own delusions. It is stated as a matter of fact not by some in-universe sources but by the authors of the book.
Secondly, Eberron's Blood of Vol are not completely wrong about what they are worshipping because there is no right or wrong answers when it comes to the faiths of Eberron. If you want I can elaborate but it is an offtopic.
Thirdly, you are conspicuosly silent about the whole matter of Firan Zal'honan who is a prominent character in the book. And also Azalin in disguise. Which completely scraps all their attempts to give many possible explanations of Azalin's disappearence in the chapter about Darkon. He is here. He is not on Oerth or destroyed.



If it's a pointless change that doesn't add anything, how is it making it worse and more generic? Your answer literally makes no sense. If the gender of a darklord doesn't matter then it doesn't matter. If the change does matter, I'm asking you to articulate WHY is matters and how it is "worse"..
Again, I am forced to ask you to read more carefully. It is a pointless change that does not add anything because it is detrimental. It erases the whole arcs of this characters with all their hooks and stories just to replace them with hastily put together "modernized" versions of them without any context or sense.



What can go wrong? A lot for the DarkLord who can't get out, not much for the poor girl who gets away from the ultimate incel. For the record, it's only recently that it's specifically her soul. The original reads just had a girl that looks like Tatyanna keep appearing every so often.
I can't care less about Strahd and Ireena in this context. I am talking about the cornerstone of the known design for Domains of Dread. They are prisons that torture their lords/inmates with highly personalized tortures. How the hell can one of this tortures just leave one of them? And yes, if Ireena were just a construct that looks like Tatyana then her fate didn't actually matter. Should she leave or die or something else there would be more and more and more. But she is a reincarnation of Tatyana's soul. Without it in the Barovia all Strahd's torture regimen will collapse.


Dramatic change? Maybe not, better change to be an actual character instead of a fridge's son plot device? Absolutely.
He is not an actual character. He is just a jolly ghost painter whose significance is tied with his father. He is not a character and never was. But with these changes he is not an effective plot device either. Trying to make him a character they've butchered van Richten's story without adding anything worthy to it.



So two questions on this. #1: Why are you against it? What does it hurt? #2: Which of the existing domains do you want scrapped for the new ones?
There are many answers to your first question. Even in this post. Also Segev and P.G. Macer have already answered you. So I'll answer your second question. Kartakass, The Carnival, Richemulot, Darkon, Har'Akir. I'd gladely push them in the "two paragraphs for the Domain" section in exchange for at least somewhat detailed descriptions for Klorr and other completely new domains.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

You definetly should read more carefully.
First, origin of the Priests of Osybus is not stated as a myth or their own delusions. It is stated as a matter of fact not by some in-universe sources but by the authors of the book.
Secondly, Eberron's Blood of Vol are not completely wrong about what they are worshipping because there is no right or wrong answers when it comes to the faiths of Eberron. If you want I can elaborate but it is an offtopic.
Thirdly, you are conspicuosly silent about the whole matter of Firan Zal'honan who is a prominent character in the book. And also Azalin in disguise. Which completely scraps all their attempts to give many possible explanations of Azalin's disappearence in the chapter about Darkon. He is here. He is not on Oerth or destroyed.

I read very carefully. The book is in the conceit of many 5e books and is written by an NPC in the world. This is somewhat common across numerous products and writers. The book writes about the origin of the Priests, and then writes about other things that would contradict the priest's story. You've decided somehow one thing in the text is canon and the others aren't and I for the life of me cannot figure out why.


Again, I am forced to ask you to read more carefully. It is a pointless change that does not add anything because it is detrimental. It erases the whole arcs of this characters with all their hooks and stories just to replace them with hastily put together "modernized" versions of them without any context or sense.

By all means, explain, pick one darklord and give examples. So far you keep making vague statements that it's detrimental. Now you've moved from "It's detrimental" to "It erases whole arcs" I'd love to discuss this more but so far you're giving nothing to actually discuss. You can personally not like the fact that something changed, but that's not the same as a blanket claim that it's a pointless change to the detriment of the entire story.


I can't care less about Strahd and Ireena in this context. I am talking about the cornerstone of the known design for Domains of Dread. They are prisons that torture their lords/inmates with highly personalized tortures. How the hell can one of this tortures just leave one of them? And yes, if Ireena were just a construct that looks like Tatyana then her fate didn't actually matter. Should she leave or die or something else there would be more and more and more. But she is a reincarnation of Tatyana's soul. Without it in the Barovia all Strahd's torture regimen will collapse.

She's only flat confirmed a reincarnation of Tatyana's soul in Curse of Strahd where you can reunite her with Sergei. Prior who knows what it is. Strahd doesn't even care about Tatyanna, he wants to possess the prize he feels he lost. His punishment works because he can never have her. He's "Won" her over in the past, turning her into a vampire and it didn't matter. The fact that he's an incel who can't comprehend caring about anyone else means he's never going to be satisfied and his imprisonment continues. Rather or not it's the same Tatyanna soul is an irrelevant issue.


He is not an actual character. He is just a jolly ghost painter whose significance is tied with his father. He is not a character and never was. But with these changes he is not an effective plot device either. Trying to make him a character they've butchered van Richten's story without adding anything worthy to it.

He's not? The horrible things that happened to him and Rudolph no longer happened because they changed what happened next? Rudolph's origin story stays the same. You again make a point about how this change ruins something but no actual explanation how.


There are many answers to your first question. Even in this post. Also Segev and P.G. Macer have already answered you. So I'll answer your second question. Kartakass, The Carnival, Richemulot, Darkon, Har'Akir. I'd gladely push them in the "two paragraphs for the Domain" section in exchange for at least somewhat detailed descriptions for Klorr and other completely new domains.

I asked why you were against it, not why Segev and P.G. Macer think. If you truly believe in lockstep with them care to provide a post number? Cause I'm trying to discuss the point with you since you engaged and vice versa.

For the second question, glad you have that answer, it's fair, I'd personally agree that I don't really care about Kartakass and Darkon. but for me Richemulot and Har'Akir are Domains I've done a lot with over the years and was excited to see more. If you ask another person you might find they lover Kartakass and don't care about Bleutspar, and other will have a different answer. I don't know what research they did or not, but our personal preferences are not likely to be factual reasons to include or not include something.

[Ekzanimus]

I read very carefully. The book is in the conceit of many 5e books and is written by an NPC in the world. This is somewhat common across numerous products and writers. The book writes about the origin of the Priests, and then writes about other things that would contradict the priest's story. You've decided somehow one thing in the text is canon and the others aren't and I for the life of me cannot figure out why.
So if you really read very carefully do you care to explain to me why exactly Rudolph van Richten decided to include chapters about player consent, safety tools, genres of horror, gaming table preparation and so on in his book? I'll answer this for you. He did not. Because this book is not written by an NPC in the world. There are some letters written by NPCs but they are clearly stated as such and highlighted. Everything else is WotC talking to us, players and DMs. So when they explicitly state something then it is canon.



By all means, explain, pick one darklord and give examples. So far you keep making vague statements that it's detrimental. Now you've moved from "It's detrimental" to "It erases whole arcs" I'd love to discuss this more but so far you're giving nothing to actually discuss. You can personally not like the fact that something changed, but that's not the same as a blanket claim that it's a pointless change to the detriment of the entire story.
Ok, I'll quote P.G. Macer if you can't read less than a page of posts:

"I can only speak to the case of Lamordia, but Viktor (now Viktra) Mordheim was clearly based off Dr. Victor Frankenstein, from the novel by Mary Shelley and countless adaptations thereof. One of the more poignant of the original novel is that Man acting as a creator in the absence of Woman is doomed to tragedy; by changing the scientist to a woman, the 5e team has demolished a strong feminist classic in the name of superficial pandering."

I am not as eloquent but I completely agree with this statement.



She's only flat confirmed a reincarnation of Tatyana's soul in Curse of Strahd where you can reunite her with Sergei. Prior who knows what it is. Strahd doesn't even care about Tatyanna, he wants to possess the prize he feels he lost. His punishment works because he can never have her. He's "Won" her over in the past, turning her into a vampire and it didn't matter. The fact that he's an incel who can't comprehend caring about anyone else means he's never going to be satisfied and his imprisonment continues. Rather or not it's the same Tatyanna soul is an irrelevant issue.
Ok... Well, when I see my interlocutor using such slang as "incel" in the civilized discussion I prefer to wrap this conversation up and slowly back away while avoiding eye contact. Have a good day.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

So if you really read very carefully do you care to explain to me why exactly Rudolph van Richten decided to include chapters about player consent, safety tools, genres of horror, gaming table preparation and so on in his book? I'll answer this for you. He did not. Because this book is not written by an NPC in the world. There are some letters written by NPCs but they are clearly stated as such and highlighted. Everything else is WotC talking to us, players and DMs. So when they explicitly state something then it is canon.

Because despite the conceit of the format you still need that stuff? To my knowledge the first books to do this were the Clan Books back in Vampire: The Masquerade in the 90's. They still have mechanics rules and everything else but were also clearly written from the eye of the clan itself with their own myths and propaganda which lead to contradictions with other books.

PS, even if it's WotC talking to us, if they explicitly state multiple answers that contradict then one is not canon while the others are false. Not unless there's specific wording saying "This is the true story" or some such.

As for your Canon answer, let's look at that a bit more, it's in the Monster stat entry, it's written from the perspective of the priests left behind when Osybus "ascended" So they have no way of knowing what actually happened. Did Osybus BECOME a Dark Power? Or is that what they believe happened? Or was Osybus ALWAYS a dark power manipulating this group for some unseen end? Osybus has no history, no childhood, just a "Mysterious figure of evil and ambition" So the section you're concerned about isn't even as concrete as you think it is.


Ok, I'll quote P.G. Macer if you can't read less than a page of posts:

"I can only speak to the case of Lamordia, but Viktor (now Viktra) Mordheim was clearly based off Dr. Victor Frankenstein, from the novel by Mary Shelley and countless adaptations thereof. One of the more poignant of the original novel is that Man acting as a creator in the absence of Woman is doomed to tragedy; by changing the scientist to a woman, the 5e team has demolished a strong feminist classic in the name of superficial pandering."

I am not as eloquent but I completely agree with this statement.

Thank you. The problem with simply sending me to their threads is that if I address a point it leaves the opening for you to say "Well I didn't agree with THAT part." Not saying you would or wouldn't, but it's so much easier to have you flatly say something you feel so we can have a discussion.

There is gender role in Shelley's original work. But I'd argue the MAIN lesson is balancing Curiosity and Ambition with Caution and Compassion. There are some archaic ideas that those are gender lines, but that's a societal construct, not a factual reality. The idea that Men are Curious and Ambitious but it is women who are Cautious and Compassionate is problematic all on its own. The idea that Viktor better embodies the idea of one set without another because he's a man is problematic and adds little to the story now, though it may have been useful in Shelley's time.

Where as the original Lamordia just lifted that conceit straight. Basically just being Frankenstein with the serial numbers filed off, Viktra took it a step further. She not only created life, she decided she was going to defeat death which lead to a whole slew of new things she pulled off, including her perfect heart. I don't know. It seems like we took the idea and ran with it further. It also puts Viktra more directly in the driver's seat. As I recall the original Lamordia "Adam" was the villain being cruel and rampaging and ignoring the point of Shelley's original monster. Where as here we have Elise as an open book to be as good or bad as the DM needs.

We're talking about a carbon copy of Shelley's work ignoring the whole thing about the monster not being an outright villain vs a retelling with actual emphasis on things and the potential for a story beyond "Kill the beast." Things are added that allow more depth and make it its own story instead of a clone.


Ok... Well, when I see my interlocutor using such slang as "incel" in the civilized discussion I prefer to wrap this conversation up and slowly back away while avoiding eye contact. Have a good day.

I'm quoting PuffinForest and I happened to agree with it. The people who call themselves Incel tend to fall into the "Nice Guy" stereotypes where they feel they're owed something instead of acknowledging that their potential partners are people too with their own feelings and wants.

It's Strahd's entire story. He showed up, saw his brother's fiance and decided HE should get to have her, after all, he's the war hero, he's the noble, he's the older brother, he DESERVES that woman he barely knows who's in love with someone else, and damn it he's not letting anything stand in his way.

Hence my using that term. It's his core plotline. If the term bothers you we can leave it out, but last I checked it's a self chosen title by certain people, not a slur used to denigrate others. (at least no more than saying Murderer, or selfish, or any other term where the behavior described is undesirable.)

[t209]

Things that got me.
Part of me wonders about I'Cath.
Like Tsien Chiang being turned from misandrist sorceress in a forest to "evil is paved with good intentions" who
probably murdered her Gold Dragon teacher and use that power to crush a rebellion against her..
Even her Kara-Tur origin was retconned, though I do wonder if the writer of 2E assume it as "Japan but larger" (same with Baldur's Gate's Yoshimo who came from Shou Lung) or using OA terminology since it stated about "Shou Samurai"--at least from wiki--despite it being Fantasy China.
Also for some reason, both versions haven't got "magic puppet strings that control people who are still aware of it and still usable even after death" (like Demonslayer's Spider Demon, Ninja Scrolls, and I think many works had them) for many Domains.
Also about genderbent,
I remember someone leaking that they are the successors and I think the dead wife of Falconia's ruler was converted into flesh golem by Viktra...somehow.
From Reddit as I remember, but rumor perhaps.

[Corsair14]

Exactly how does the gender swap butcher storied characters? None of them show any sign of issue in playing their role, none seem to have been drastically changed at the core. Could you share what you see as Butchering outside of gender?


Lord Hiregaard is a quick example of losing story. Before HE was a valiant knight with a jealousy problem. His curse was to fall in love with women and then his alter ego Mali-something would show up at night and brutally murder them and then he woke up to the pain of what he had done. He was also a chivalric knight in a middleages fiefdom not a leader of the Mongol horde tribes.

The Dutch Ghost Ship was another one although it has less to do with a gender swap and more to do with going from a Ghost ship and crew to turning the captain and crew into Davey Jones and crew from pirates of the Caribbean.

Its not rocket science to change these back to their original form which I feel was better fluff, especially since I own the material but will cause a bit of confusion if it ever comes up in conversation.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Lord Hiregaard is a quick example of losing story. Before HE was a valiant knight with a jealousy problem. His curse was to fall in love with women and then his alter ego Mali-something would show up at night and brutally murder them and then he woke up to the pain of what he had done. He was also a chivalric knight in a middleages fiefdom not a leader of the Mongol horde tribes..[/QUOTE

So your issue is moving from a European who.murders out of jealousy to a Mongolian who murders out of bloodlust. Fair on the surface. How does gender matter? Would you have been happy with a Hiregaard that murders her male romances? Would you have been unhappy with a male Mongolian?

[QUOTE=Corsair14;25067198]The Dutch Ghost Ship was another one although it has less to do with a gender swap and more to do with going from a Ghost ship and crew to turning the captain and crew into Davey Jones and crew from pirates of the Caribbean.

Its not rocket science to change these back to their original form which I feel was better fluff, especially since I own the material but will cause a bit of confusion if it ever comes up in conversation.

Here you admit it's a plot point change you dislike, not a gender flip.

So again, what is the issue with the gender flips exactly?

[Sparky McDibben]

Honestly, I really just like what they've done with the lore - it hangs together, and I can basically drop these domains into my world as self-contained locations to create adventures. It's a toolbox, not a story, and I LOVE that approach. Good job, Wizards!

[Segev]

So your issue is moving from a European who.murders out of jealousy to a Mongolian who murders out of bloodlust. Fair on the surface. How does gender matter? Would you have been happy with a Hiregaard that murders her male romances? Would you have been unhappy with a male Mongolian?

To be fair, this would have been a good opportunity to not use the name of the existing character, since they changed so much that it really IS NOT the same character. "What's wrong with the gender change?" It's meaningless, yes, in face of the other changes. If it's meaningless entirely, what is the point of doing it?

Make something new when you make something new. Don't slap on old names, and don't slap meaningless labels onto things just to "win points." Do something usefully different. Make something new. Expand the setting. There won't be nearly so many complaints about "they changed it; now it sucks," and you can have more material that makes the setting bigger. Of course, making something new takes talent and skill and creativity, which makes it a difficult thing to do.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

To be fair, this would have been a good opportunity to not use the name of the existing character, since they changed so much that it really IS NOT the same character. "What's wrong with the gender change?" It's meaningless, yes, in face of the other changes. If it's meaningless entirely, what is the point of doing it?

Make something new when you make something new. Don't slap on old names, and don't slap meaningless labels onto things just to "win points." Do something usefully different. Make something new. Expand the setting. There won't be nearly so many complaints about "they changed it; now it sucks," and you can have more material that makes the setting bigger. Of course, making something new takes talent and skill and creativity, which makes it a difficult thing to do.

I'd argue the theme remains the same. The original Tristen Hiregaard was a semi decent leader with a dark streak he refused to control that leads to death and destruction and keeps him from being able to truly lead or move forward in his life.

Myar Hiregaard is a semi decent leader with a dark streak she refuses to control that leads to death and destruction and keeps her from being able to truly lead or move forward with her life.

It's the same story with different trappings. How many European fiefdoms have we seen? How many Steppes Tribes? The core of the plot remains the same and the scenery and details gives something new.

I'd argue that Hiregaard never stood out to me in 2e. He was no different from a dozen other warlords of generic Euro countries. No different from any other generic lord with a mean streak. Never ran his world, never brought my players there, never cared.

I might very well run the new Hiregaard because one of my players is Valenar and the comparison and contrast should fit very well for a horror thread.

Which is kind of my point. The changes aren't a big deal unless you were personally connected to the original plot. In which case I assume you have Domains of Dread or whichever Adventure or Boxset had the old version of your domain, if not Drivethru RPG has them there.

And NONE of this has to do with Gender Flips, which was my point. You say there'll be less "They changed it" But I haven't seen much. Honestly, I've seen... this thread. It's uncommon to the point I made a joke earlier that I was surprised we hadn't seen more of it.

[Segev]

I'd argue the theme remains the same. The original Tristen Hiregaard was a semi decent leader with a dark streak he refused to control that leads to death and destruction and keeps him from being able to truly lead or move forward in his life.

Myar Hiregaard is a semi decent leader with a dark streak she refuses to control that leads to death and destruction and keeps her from being able to truly lead or move forward with her life.

It's the same story with different trappings. How many European fiefdoms have we seen? How many Steppes Tribes? The core of the plot remains the same and the scenery and details gives something new.

I'd argue that Hiregaard never stood out to me in 2e. He was no different from a dozen other warlords of generic Euro countries. No different from any other generic lord with a mean streak. Never ran his world, never brought my players there, never cared.

I might very well run the new Hiregaard because one of my players is Valenar and the comparison and contrast should fit very well for a horror thread.

Which is kind of my point. The changes aren't a big deal unless you were personally connected to the original plot. In which case I assume you have Domains of Dread or whichever Adventure or Boxset had the old version of your domain, if not Drivethru RPG has them there.

And NONE of this has to do with Gender Flips, which was my point. You say there'll be less "They changed it" But I haven't seen much. Honestly, I've seen... this thread. It's uncommon to the point I made a joke earlier that I was surprised we hadn't seen more of it.
If literally the only two things that are the same are a theme to the story (rather than the story itself) and the last name, would it have hurt the writeup to change the last name, too? If you're going to put that much creativity into it, go all the way and make it something new.

If the worst criticism anybody had was "this has the same theme as Tristen Hiregaard's curse," but Tristen isn't written up in 5e, call it a win and move on. But when you slap the same name on it while changing everything else, it's like calling a story "Superman" when it's about a genius politician who can't be beaten because he sees ten steps ahead of everyone else and seems to pull the perfect tool or strategy out of nowhere because he predicted he would need it months ago in this very situation. Sure, you're still dealing with an overpowered character who has new powers as the plot demands and has to have that written around to create interesting challenges, but if you didn't call her "Superwoman" and make sure her last name was "Kent," nobody would have called you out on changing the Superman story for purposes other than ... making a new story.

There's no good in shoehorning the name of something else onto your totally original fiction. It doesn't make your work better; it diminishes it. And it does rob players and DMs of their box set from the old edition because now they have to choose between your new thing and the thing from an earlier edition, rather than having two things they can use.

Sure, the DM can name-swap out to make them distinct and separate...but why should he have to do that, when the writers could have done that and not created the problem in the first place?

[Pixel_Kitsune]

It doesn't make them choose anymore than I have to choose between adapting Kalidnay from 2e or just using Harvard.

IE I choose between using old material or new.

[t209]

Maybe it would be great if they clarify it as a reboot.
The ones you mentioned only work when player who doesn't know Ravenloft or just heard about Curse of Strahd.
Not sure about I'Cath since 1. the idea seems boring or for some reason, didn't adapt Asian Horror tropes (maybe at least ability to control people, even worse still aware and can still be used after death, with magic strings ala Ninja Scrolls and Demonslayer's Spider Demon family).

[animewatcha]

so up till now. How many mobs have immunity to necrotic damage?

[Unoriginal]

so up till now. How many mobs have immunity to necrotic damage?

You mean in all the books combined, or the new monsters in the Van Richten's?

[animewatcha]

All combined including the new book. This is complete immunity being asked for. As resistance with 'the death touch' gets thrown out the window.

[Lavaeolus]

All combined including the new book. This is complete immunity being asked for. As resistance with 'the death touch' gets thrown out the window.

Not a full list, but I remember LudicSavant's breakdown of resistances/immunities per damage type (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?612317-Resistances-Immunities-and-Vulnerabilities-of-Monsters-in-MM-Volo-s-and-MToF). That looks specifically at the Monster Manual, Volo's, and Tome of Foes, but the gist: slightly more resistances (28) than immunities (23). Necrotic's a fairly solid damage type and, when you remove resistances, it's not as drastic a change as it might be for some types but it still becomes pretty nice.

I expect there's a fair few new monsters with necrotic resistances/immunities introduced, though. Give me a bit and I can count them up.

EDIT: So, assuming you're in Ravenloft and have sources of necrotic damage, this could be a quite nice gift to pick up. Richten's introduces just one monster with blanket necrotic immunity. Meanwhile, 9 monsters just have necrotic resistance.

If you're curious, the full list:
Resistant: Death's Head, Nechrichor, Nosferatu, Lesser Star Spawn Emissary, Greater Star Spawn Emissary, Priest of Osybus (with Blazing boon), Strigoi, Vampiric Mind Flayer, Zombie Plague Spreader

Immune: Gallows Speaker

[animewatcha]

Interestingly, way of mercy monk hands of healing does not require the target to be willing. So all the trouble with the werewolves?? Smack away their lycanthropy without any say in the matter. Or does the book combat this in some way?

[1Pirate]

Interestingly, way of mercy monk hands of healing does not require the target to be willing. So all the trouble with the werewolves?? Smack away their lycanthropy without any say in the matter. Or does the book combat this in some way?

I didn’t see anything about HoH being able to remove curses(which is how lycanthropy is in 5e). Also it cannot be removed if one inherited Lycanthropy.

[Ekzanimus]

Things that got me.
Part of me wonders about I'Cath.
Like Tsien Chiang being turned from misandrist sorceress in a forest to "evil is paved with good intentions" who
probably murdered her Gold Dragon teacher and use that power to crush a rebellion against her..
Her new story is just mind-bogglingly ridiculous.
She botched a herbal concoction which should've briefly put her mentor - a frigging Ancient Gold Dragon - to sleep. And her botched herbal tea instantly aged Ancient Gold Dragon and all of his hoard to dust. We are talking about a creature that rivals demon lords. And we are also talking about his treasures. Do you know how many millennia you need to age gold, for example, to turn to dust? I don't. But I'd like some of that tea. You know, if I'll ever have some gods that are very angry at me.

Even her Kara-Tur origin was retconned
It is a running theme of the book. They've deleted many clear connections to the existing settings. New story of Harkon Lukas also don't mention anything about Toril or Cormyr. I think that WotC were afraid that if they should place this load of bollocks in the Forgotten Realms then Ed Greenwood will beat them up with a stack of his notes about Faerun before or after suing them for desecrating his intellectual property. But there are some old connections. For example, Hazlik is a Red Wizard of Thay still.

Also about genderbent,
I remember someone leaking that they are the successors and I think the dead wife of Falconia's ruler was converted into flesh golem by Viktra...somehow.
From Reddit as I remember, but rumor perhaps.
It is only partially true. Yes, there are darklords that are explicitely stated as successors. For example: Chakuna, Darklord of Valachan, who keeps the living head of her predecessor, Urik von Harkov. And there is some vague staff about this in the descriptions of other Domains. For example: there is an inmate in the mental hospital of Dementlieu who is bearing a striking resemblance to the Darklord of the previous version of this Domain. But genderbent Darklords are just retcons. There is no mention of any predecessors in their case.

[t209]

Her new story is just mind-bogglingly ridiculous.
She botched a herbal concoction which should've briefly put her mentor - a frigging Ancient Gold Dragon - to sleep. And her botched herbal tea instantly aged Ancient Gold Dragon and all of his hoard to dust. We are talking about a creature that rivals demon lords. And we are also talking about his treasures. Do you know how many millennia you need to age gold, for example, to turn to dust? I don't. But I'd like some of that tea. You know, if I'll ever have some gods that are very angry at me.
The writer lack of research and trying to be sensible from misandrist sociopath, otherwise
”You have been a naught lady, so I am going to banish myself along with the hoard as a lesser punishment.”

[Ekzanimus]

Please correct me if I am wrong but I think that Dhampir's ability to enhance his bite attack should work with Rogue's sneak attack damage. I am talking about this:


When you attack with this bite and hit a creature that isn't a Construct or an Undead, you can empower yourself in one of the following ways of your choice:

You regain hit points equal to the piercing damage dealt by the bite.
You gain a bonus to the next ability check or attack roll you make; the bonus equals the piercing damage dealt by the bite

You can empower yourself with this bite a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.

It looks insanely overpowered.

[Lavaeolus]

Please correct me if I am wrong but I think that Dhampir's ability to enhance his bite attack should work with Rogue's sneak attack damage. I am talking about this:



It looks insanely overpowered.

The Bite is a simple melee weapon and one without the finesse property, so it doesn't work with Rogue's SA rules-as-written. Mind, I don't really like how the feature raises questions over what exactly counts as "the piercing damage dealt by the bite" -- something that's not always intuitive without going over a feature's wording.

Here (https://www.reddit.com/r/3d6/comments/nf4njv/dhampir_bite_attack_after_official_release/) are some ideas, but even there there's some dispute over, okay, is there a distinction between adding piercing damage to the attack or adding it to the weapon?

[Ekzanimus]

The Bite is a simple melee weapon and one without the finesse property, so it doesn't work with Rogue's SA rules-as-written. Mind, I don't really like how the feature raises questions over what exactly counts as "the piercing damage dealt by the bite" -- something that's not always intuitive without going over a feature's wording.

Here (https://www.reddit.com/r/3d6/comments/nf4njv/dhampir_bite_attack_after_official_release/) are some ideas, but even there there's some dispute over, okay, is there a distinction between adding piercing damage to the attack or adding it to the weapon?
Thank you for clarification. It looks now less broken... but still broken.

[Xervous]

Her new story is just mind-bogglingly ridiculous.
She botched a herbal concoction which should've briefly put her mentor - a frigging Ancient Gold Dragon - to sleep. And her botched herbal tea instantly aged Ancient Gold Dragon and all of his hoard to dust. We are talking about a creature that rivals demon lords. And we are also talking about his treasures. Do you know how many millennia you need to age gold, for example, to turn to dust? I don't. But I'd like some of that tea. You know, if I'll ever have some gods that are very angry at me.


Okay that’s just pants on head. Tell me you’re joking.

[Glorthindel]

It is strange because there are many not-so-subtle hints. And for those who does not get them WotC even gave Firan Azalin's familiar - who is mentioned in the description of Darkon.


Also, Firan is Azalin's original human name (and during the creation of Darkon, he breifly resumed the persona during his 'introduction' to the Realm). So, it's not even a half-hearted disguise, he is literally just pretending to be himself (It has been a long time since I read 'I Strahd : War Against Azalin', so I can't be sure if Strahd knows Azalin's real name, but I think its probable).


Lord Hiregaard is a quick example of losing story. Before HE was a valiant knight with a jealousy problem. His curse was to fall in love with women and then his alter ego Mali-something would show up at night and brutally murder them and then he woke up to the pain of what he had done. He was also a chivalric knight in a middleages fiefdom not a leader of the Mongol horde tribes.

To be fair, Hiregaard has been retconned a few times; I was fairly sure he was pretty-much a Doctor Jekyll clone originally, and all the valiant knight stuff came later. And I am at least moderately warm to the Mongol idea, since a few throw away lines hinted that Nova Vaasa might have been linked to Faerun's Vaasa, and the Mongol idea ties this a bit closer to Vaasa's Hordelands nature. EDIT - Looks like I was wrong about an earlier recton, he's always had the knightly-persona - wonder where I got that idea from *shrug*

The rest of those changes can just **** Right Off though; I am thankful for this thread cos I was tempted to pick the book up, but can now just stick to my 2nd and 3rd ed books.

[t209]

Okay that’s just pants on head. Tell me you’re joking.
That's the reason why I prefer the summary, it's just said "accidentally made poison instead of sleeping potion".
But I think they could have done a "divine punishment"

"You have been a naughty student for trying to use treachery to seize what you cannot.
For that, we would have punish you harsher, but we will banish the hoard as a lenient policy."

[Segev]

That's the reason why I prefer the summary, it's just said "accidentally made poison instead of sleeping potion".
But I think they could have done a "divine punishment"

"You have been a naughty student for trying to use treachery to seize what you cannot.
For that, we would have punish you harsher, but we will banish the hoard as a lenient policy."


"We, the Dark Powers, have decided to be lenient" seems...out of character.

[Ekzanimus]

Okay that’s just pants on head. Tell me you’re joking.
I didn't even paraphrase it very much. :)
"Knowing her mentor would never provide a scale, Chiang drugged the dragon with a rare herb, planning to steal a small scale while he slept. But in her haste, she mixed the herbal concoction poorly. The dragon's body and everything nearby rapidly aged and decayed, killing her benefactor and destroying a hoard filled with ages of treasures and wisdom."

[t209]

"We, the Dark Powers, have decided to be lenient" seems...out of character.

Well this was not what happened.
Just a "fix" I thought up for Gold Dragon. Like maybe more lore-friendly and the leniency as in Gold Dragon that Tsien Chieng accidentally killed. Maybe like a secret test to see if she would be tempted.

[HappyDaze]

"We, the Dark Powers, have decided to be lenient" seems...out of character.
In new Ravenloft, it is not just DM that asks, "Are you sure?" Now Dark Powers ask too!

[Trafalgar]

I didn't even paraphrase it very much. :)
"Knowing her mentor would never provide a scale, Chiang drugged the dragon with a rare herb, planning to steal a small scale while he slept. But in her haste, she mixed the herbal concoction poorly. The dragon's body and everything nearby rapidly aged and decayed, killing her benefactor and destroying a hoard filled with ages of treasures and wisdom."

That's just......dumb.

I hate pushing science into a fantasy game but the reason gold is so valuable is it doesn't really corrode or oxidize. This is why it is or was the basis of so many monetary systems throughout history. If you mint a gold coin that weighs 1 ounce and you lock it up for 10 years, you don't want it to lose 0.05 ounces do to corrosion and oxidation. That would happen if you minted a coin out of iron.

Look at all the gold artifacts found in Tutankhamun's tomb. In almost perfect condition despite being locked away for 3000 years.

[t209]

That's just......dumb.

I hate pushing science into a fantasy game but the reason gold is so valuable is it doesn't really corrode or oxidize. This is why it is or was the basis of so many monetary systems throughout history. If you mint a gold coin that weighs 1 ounce and you lock it up for 10 years, you don't want it to lose 0.05 ounces do to corrosion and oxidation. That would happen if you minted a coin out of iron.

Look at all the gold artifacts found in Tutankhamun's tomb. In almost perfect condition despite being locked away for 3000 years.
This is the reason why summary seems better.
No aging, the dragon went poisoned and hoard went poof.
Not sure about original version, I mean it had sense other than being boring (you go there and kill her or be treated like Asian version of Motel murder and she can turn into treant).
I mean does any of the writers watch anime and at least try to be more magical horror like puppet strings to control people and forced to attack even after death and maybe aware of it.

[Ekzanimus]

This is the reason why summary seems better.
No aging, the dragon went poisoned and hoard went poof.

It is not much better, honestly.
We are still talking about the Ancient Gold Dragon. It is a creature that even gods are somewhat respectful to. I know for a fact that even a god in his own domain can't kill this creature without some problems. And somebody just... poisoned him? And he died on a spot? Just like this? Tien Chiang's story should be completely rewritten to be consistent with D&D lore.

[MoiMagnus]

It is not much better, honestly.
We are still talking about the Ancient Gold Dragon. It is a creature that even gods are somewhat respectful to. I know for a fact that even a god in his own domain can't kill this creature without some problems. And somebody just... poisoned him? And he died on a spot? Just like this? Tien Chiang's story should be completely rewritten to be consistent with D&D lore.

Possible way to make it consistent: this was not truly an accident, but rather a third-party scheme.

She was a scapegoat. She is convinced to be responsible for the death of her benefactor, and was condemned for it, while in truth she was just at the wrong place at the wrong moment, in the middle of a huge assassination plot by some god-like entity.

[Ekzanimus]

Possible way to make it consistent: this was not truly an accident, but rather a third-party scheme.

She was a scapegoat. She is convinced to be responsible for the death of her benefactor, and was condemned for it, while in truth she was just at the wrong place at the wrong moment, in the middle of a huge assassination plot by some god-like entity.
Yes, it can be explained like this. But it is already becoming different story entirely. Her story from the book is absolutely nonsensical as written.

[Segev]

Well this was not what happened.
Just a "fix" I thought up for Gold Dragon. Like maybe more lore-friendly and the leniency as in Gold Dragon that Tsien Chieng accidentally killed. Maybe like a secret test to see if she would be tempted.

Were I to want to make that narrative work, I'd have that be the moment that the Mists swallowed things up and made the Domain.

Specifically, I'd have written it such that she didn't screw up the potion - though maybe she thinks she did - but rather the act of administering it is what caused her to be sucked into the Demiplane of Dread. When she fed it to her master, the dragon and all his hoard evaporated into an all-consuming mist that, when they lifted, left her in her master's lair, but with the hoard and her master gone. Heavily implying that the mists they turned into were The Mists of Ravenloft swallowing her up. She didn't actually kill her master, nor destroy his hoard. Her willingness to betray him that way is what finally drew her into the Demiplane as a Domain Lady, and she THINKS she killed him and lost the hoard.

[Unoriginal]

That's just......dumb.

I hate pushing science into a fantasy game but the reason gold is so valuable is it doesn't really corrode or oxidize. This is why it is or was the basis of so many monetary systems throughout history. If you mint a gold coin that weighs 1 ounce and you lock it up for 10 years, you don't want it to lose 0.05 ounces do to corrosion and oxidation. That would happen if you minted a coin out of iron.

The reason gold is considered valuable is a combination of how it's relatively rare and relatively easy to make into pretty thing. Its resistance to decay is an happy coincidence.

Regardless, remember that a) a dragon's hoard is not only made of gold and that b) dragons have a strong influence over their lair and territory. It's possible that messing with the dragon in a certain way messes with the state of what's around them7what their innate magic bled into.


We are still talking about the Ancient Gold Dragon. It is a creature that even gods are somewhat respectful to. I know for a fact that even a god in his own domain can't kill this creature without some problems.

That's... just not true? Gold dragons are impressively powerful, but they're still just mortals. A god in his own domain can do whatever they want to them.


Yes, it can be explained like this. But it is already becoming different story entirely. Her story from the book is absolutely nonsensical as written.

I'd be willing to bet a few moneys that WotC cut out a significant chunk of the lore written for her, and then they messed up while editing the shortened version. Not the first time it happened.

[Ekzanimus]

That's... just not true? Gold dragons are impressively powerful, but they're still just mortals. A god in his own domain can do whatever they want to them.
Not exactly. I can't from the top of my head remember canonical examples of dragons invading god's domain (if we are not taking into consideration Neverwinter Nights 2: Mask of Betrayer of course) but we have already a 5e story about empyrean who challenged Tiamat to a battle in her own domain and was defeated but not without putting up a fight. And Ancient Gold Dragons are more powerful than empyreans. To be clear - I am not saying that Ancient Gold Dragon can win against a god in his own domain one on one. But it will be a fight not an off-handed annihilation of the dragon.

I'd be willing to bet a few moneys that WotC cut out a significant chunk of the lore written for her, and then they messed up while editing the shortened version. Not the first time it happened.
I think it is true for just about anything in this book.

[Xervous]

Not exactly. I can't from the top of my head remember canonical examples of dragons invading god's domain (if we are not taking into consideration Neverwinter Nights 2: Mask of Betrayer of course) but we have already a 5e story about empyrean who challenged Tiamat to a battle in her own domain and was defeated but not without putting up a fight. And Ancient Gold Dragons are more powerful than empyreans. To be clear - I am not saying that Ancient Gold Dragon can win against a god in his own domain one on one. But it will be a fight not an off-handed annihilation of the dragon.

I think it is true for just about anything in this book.

Let’s not discount the other shared factor in each situation: 5e.

[Unoriginal]

Not exactly. I can't from the top of my head remember canonical examples of dragons invading god's domain (if we are not taking into consideration Neverwinter Nights 2: Mask of Betrayer of course) but we have already a 5e story about empyrean who challenged Tiamat to a battle in her own domain and was defeated but not without putting up a fight.

Descent into Avernus says the Empyrean "was beaten handily by the dragon queen".


Let’s not discount the other shared factor in each situation: 5e.

What do you mean?

[Xervous]

What do you mean?

Both the example including Tiamat and this nonsensical bit with the gold dragon are of 5e. It could be quality control or the review process that’s responsible for the various inconsistencies that pop up at various points. Narrative outcomes that don’t reflect the expected results as suggested by statblocks or even lore.

[MoiMagnus]

Both the example including Tiamat and this nonsensical bit with the gold dragon are of 5e. It could be quality control or the review process that’s responsible for the various inconsistencies that pop up at various points. Narrative outcomes that don’t reflect the expected results as suggested by statblocks or even lore.

I think an ancient Gold dragon with the innate spellcasting variant of the MM (so 9 spells of level 8 of less per day, DC 24) would give some difficulties to Tiamat. If somehow, the gold dragon reach CR 27 (because of some unique powers that named NPCs get), a generous GM could also rule that they get access level 9 spells with this variant.

But in general, monster VS monster fight in 5e are pretty degenerate, as they have quite high attack bonus compared to their AC, on top of being mountains of HP. I'm pretty much on the side of "monster statblock given in the books only exists for the purpose of fighting PCs, but are not canon and do not match the actual capabilities of the monsters".

However, contradiction between the narrative and the lore (or inconsistency in the narrative) is something I find much more annoying.

[Ekzanimus]

Descent into Avernus says the Empyrean "was beaten handily by the dragon queen".
Of course. And I am not trying to tell that Ancient Gold Dragon (who is more powerful than empyrean let's not forget) will be a serious challenge for a god in his domain. He will be beaten. But it will not be a case of a god waving his hand (or claw or tentacle) and turning a dragon to dust. It will be a fight. It will not be very hard for a god to win but it will not be a one-sided slaughter. Gods were bested by mortals in their domains after all. Raistlin Majere comes to mind as a canonical example of such achievements.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Of course. And I am not trying to tell that Ancient Gold Dragon (who is more powerful than empyrean let's not forget) will be a serious challenge for a god in his domain. He will be beaten. But it will not be a case of a god waving his hand (or claw or tentacle) and turning a dragon to dust. It will be a fight. It will not be very hard for a god to win but it will not be a one-sided slaughter. Gods were bested by mortals in their domains after all. Raistlin Majere comes to mind as a canonical example of such achievements.

Depends on the deity and the setting. Remember, Tiamat is a lesser deity, and one operating under severe constraints. And one of the weaker ones at that. An empyrean or ancient dragon against Pelor? Dust. Greater deities don't have stat blocks.

And Raistlin is from a way earlier edition, where the dynamic was very different. And from a novel (at least the Canon version), where they play fast and lose with things like rules and lore).

[Ekzanimus]

Depends on the deity and the setting. Remember, Tiamat is a lesser deity, and one operating under severe constraints. And one of the weaker ones at that. An empyrean or ancient dragon against Pelor? Dust. Greater deities don't have stat blocks.

And Raistlin is from a way earlier edition, where the dynamic was very different. And from a novel (at least the Canon version), where they play fast and lose with things like rules and lore).
Yes, you are correct. I did not imply somebody like Ao. But it is also a good indication of how powerful you should be to kill Ancient Gold Dragon that easily. And it only reinforces my point about Tsien Chiang.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Yes, you are correct. I did not imply somebody like Ao. But it is also a good indication of how powerful you should be to kill Ancient Gold Dragon that easily. And it only reinforces my point about Tsien Chiang.

Not even Ao--any of the "real" gods of the Realms.

But I agree about Tsien Chiang. I'm sorry, but "I accidentally turned a sleeping potion into a poison capable of dusting an Ancient Gold Dragon (who was likely a strong spellcaster itself) as well as its entire hoard before the thing could react" just isn't plausible as an origin story outside of a bad game of Toon.

[animewatcha]

I see a points being made in this direction, but not directly touching upon this.

Diversity, inclusion, and victimhood making it's way into 'later' 5e books?

This is question is NOT meant to be political, but rather changes to lore, etc. because timing of it can't be denied as a possible factor.

@sidenote: If Mods deem this as not the right kind of this thing to ask, please by all means. Delete this post.

[Segev]

Not even Ao--any of the "real" gods of the Realms.

But I agree about Tsien Chiang. I'm sorry, but "I accidentally turned a sleeping potion into a poison capable of dusting an Ancient Gold Dragon (who was likely a strong spellcaster itself) as well as its entire hoard before the thing could react" just isn't plausible as an origin story outside of a bad game of Toon.

Hence my suggestion that that's merely what she thinks happened, and in reality her administering it caused the Mists of Ravenloft to erupt and sweep her into the Demiplane of Dread as a newly-minted Domain Lady. The "dust" she saw was the Mists coming for her.

[Ettina]

Not exactly. I can't from the top of my head remember canonical examples of dragons invading god's domain (if we are not taking into consideration Neverwinter Nights 2: Mask of Betrayer of course) but we have already a 5e story about empyrean who challenged Tiamat to a battle in her own domain and was defeated but not without putting up a fight. And Ancient Gold Dragons are more powerful than empyreans. To be clear - I am not saying that Ancient Gold Dragon can win against a god in his own domain one on one. But it will be a fight not an off-handed annihilation of the dragon.

It's not about what CR they are, imo. Empyreans are part god, and gods get to break the normal rules. An empyrean could challenge a god on their own turf in a way no mortal, no matter how powerful, can.

In 3.5e terms, it requires a divine rank.

[Azuresun]

Uhh... this was TSR's doing, not WotC. Being incapable of leaving has been a part of the setting since day one, with 1983's I6 Ravenloft surrounding the whole of Barovia with the deadly Mists to trap players, expounded upon when first introduced in 2e to block planar travel in this manner.

Even back then there were players that don't like the feeling of being trapped. I'd argue those people aren't big fans of horror in general, since that's pretty typical of the genre. Safe to say, you should be careful in choosing to DM or play within the Domains of Dread unless you happen to all be fans of gothic horror.

And I always read that section with a heavily implied "...except for you, maybe." Escaping the Domains is an obvious focus for a Ravenloft campaign, and a lot of people have vanished without trace into the Mists, who's to say that none of them managed to escape rather than being eaten by unspeakable horrors?

[Glorthindel]

And I always read that section with a heavily implied "...except for you, maybe." Escaping the Domains is an obvious focus for a Ravenloft campaign, and a lot of people have vanished without trace into the Mists, who's to say that none of them managed to escape rather than being eaten by unspeakable horrors?

To be fair, nearly every AD&D Ravenloft module I have ever read had a "starting outside Ravenloft" introduction, and a "returning to your reality" optional ending, so that the module could be used as a "holiday into the mists" if the DM decided. Of course, that was never at the control of the players, merely the whims of the Dark Powers (read: DM), and escape has always been cast as an impossible goal to strive for, with no guarantee of, or set method for success.

[Ekzanimus]

It's not about what CR they are, imo. Empyreans are part god, and gods get to break the normal rules. An empyrean could challenge a god on their own turf in a way no mortal, no matter how powerful, can.

In 3.5e terms, it requires a divine rank.
There are stories in the D&D lore about mortals challenging a god on their own turf and winning. It is not common but it happens. Sometimes mortals even kill gods from afar without entering their domain at all. Yes, it is not common and these mortals are themself very powerful but you can definitely say that Ancient Gold Dragon have an honorable place among the most powerful mortal creatures in existence. :)

I see a points being made in this direction, but not directly touching upon this.

Diversity, inclusion, and victimhood making it's way into 'later' 5e books?

This is question is NOT meant to be political, but rather changes to lore, etc. because timing of it can't be denied as a possible factor.
I'd like to answer you but I didn't exactly understand your question. Can you please be more specific? For example by asking "Is there X and Y in the book?" What exactly do you want to know?

[Unoriginal]

And I always read that section with a heavily implied "...except for you, maybe." Escaping the Domains is an obvious focus for a Ravenloft campaign, and a lot of people have vanished without trace into the Mists, who's to say that none of them managed to escape rather than being eaten by unspeakable horrors?

5e does have that, in CoS. Escaping requires some pretty extraordinary circumstances, but PCs are pretty extraordinary for a reason.

[animewatcha]

I'd like to answer you but I didn't exactly understand your question. Can you please be more specific? For example by asking "Is there X and Y in the book?" What exactly do you want to know?

My apologies for having to be a bit more direct with this. Changes due to Woke-ness.

[chainer1216]

My apologies for having to be a bit more direct with this. Changes due to Woke-ness.

Again, that's not a question, you're just spewing buzz words.

[Segev]

My apologies for having to be a bit more direct with this. Changes due to Woke-ness.


Again, that's not a question, you're just spewing buzz words.

Yeah, the issue with your post, animewatcha, in terms of being able to answer the question is that I, at least, can't tell WHAT you're asking. Ekzanimus's formulation of X and Y in his question to you was trying to determine if what you were asking took that form, not trying to get you to be more explicit.

Your grammar wasn't really a question, making it hard to answer regardless how bluntly or carefully you couch your language. I'm certainly not jumping on you for the question itself; I'm telling you that I literally don't know what the question IS. It reads as meaningfully to me as, "Does canard the applesauce pinwheel?"

[Waterdeep Merch]

"Does canard the applesauce pinwheel?"

Masterfully, except horizon.

[Xervous]

Taking a stab at deciphering the animewatcha hieroglyphs.

The mention of ‘inclusion, victimhood and diversity’ is clearly concerned with themes and their usage going forward. Perhaps he is asking if these themes are either a one-of in Van Richten’s, or if they are a sign of more to follow. Absent from the inquiry is any question approaching a ‘why?’, and there are many different avenues speculation could take us down.

[animewatcha]

I've noticed on message boards that those 4 topics are quite 'sensitive' topics and I don't know how 'far down the rabbit hole' I am allowed to go in these forums. Around the premiere of Tasha's was the corporations on the inclusiveness and so called woke-ness so much that it could seem to some people that it was shoved into their face with everything they see. Such that as an example, will we start having NPCs in adventures having preferred pronouns officially (not against it, but again being forced down throats via RAW). Tasha's Cauldron. Players were already wanting the whole 'place ability score bonus where we want'. I don't know about Descent to Avernus. I don't own Van Richten book, but the gender swapping, somewhat lore changing, and apparently this out-of-nowhere alchemical 'accident' that wipe out a very powerful dragon and it's hoard. To be taken as a 'whoopsies' and left alone like that to just accept? This is going by the quotes throughout the thread. In 3.5e, we would have been able to scour chapters in 10 different books, read 4 dragon magazine articles, and had 6 online articles about it. In 5e, it seems more like a paragraph of 'meh'. I want to be wrong about this. Please tell me I am wrong about this.

[verbatim]

Does anyone here remember if people were making similar statements expressing nervousness about diversity when Elminster was a girl or when the Girdle of Masculinity/Femininity was introduced?

Changing the gender of characters is pretty old in DND and similar mediums, I think viewing it more negatively just because people are more aware of sexism now signifies a desire to vent about diversity/sexism awareness rather than actually caring about the gender of the Darklord.


Several people in this thread have stated why they think changing a character's identity in certain ways clashes with the theming of prior volumes which I think is much more fair, even if I am personally ambivalent on the matter.

[Unoriginal]

In 3.5e, we would have been able to scour chapters in 10 different books, read 4 dragon magazine articles, and had 6 online articles about it.

Because there totally was 10 different books, 4 dragon magazine articles, and 6 online articles about Ravenloft and the different Domains of Dread in 3.5.

WotC made *one* Ravenloft book. The rest was made by White Wolf, without even full access to the intellectual property.

[animewatcha]

Does anyone here remember if people were making similar statements expressing nervousness about diversity when Elminster was a girl or when the Girdle of Masculinity/Femininity was introduced?

Changing the gender of characters is pretty old in DND and similar mediums, I think viewing it more negatively just because people are more aware of sexism now signifies a desire to vent about diversity/sexism awareness rather than actually caring about the gender of the Darklord.


Several people in this thread have stated why they think changing a character's identity in certain ways clashes with the theming of prior volumes which I think is much more fair, even if I am personally ambivalent on the matter.

For the older editions, I can see that as things being sprinkled here and there. Quirks, odds, ends and stuff there. Here it seems to me (again I could be wrong), lots of everything being mashed together as 'as quickly as possible' and/or in 'as few releases' as possible.

@unoriginal: is there a unofficial forum color for exaggeration? I am asking this seriously. I only know of blue for sarcasm somewhat.

[t209]

Does anyone here remember if people were making similar statements expressing nervousness about diversity when Elminster was a girl or when the Girdle of Masculinity/Femininity was introduced?
That or Elminister being Greewood's mary-sue persona.
To be fair, much of Forgotten Realm's "famous" NPCs (especially Elminster and Volo) are disliked by DnD players.

[Ettina]

That or Elminister being Greewood's mary-sue persona.
To be fair, much of Forgotten Realm's "famous" NPCs (especially Elminster and Volo) are disliked by DnD players.

I like Volo, he gave me a haunted house.

Never met Elminster, though.

[Segev]

I like Volo, he gave me a haunted house.

Did he at least give you a vacuum to clean up the ghosts with?

[t209]

Did he at least give you a vacuum to clean up the ghosts with?
Well, unless you get the local Church to supply you with exorcists or have cleric in your party.
Fortunately, the ghost is friendly and hung out with us in our game except for a nervous breakdown but he calmed down after we "banish" him.
He was brought to the parade to finally put him to rest.
Anyway, as far as I see on internet, Volo seems to be hated for good reason (namely the haunted house and maybe PuffinForest's portrayal of him as sleazy buffoon).
Not much Elminster, but he does have least liked opinion.

[Ettina]

Did he at least give you a vacuum to clean up the ghosts with?

I befriended the ghost. We're thinking of getting him to be a bartender once we get the place fixed up.

[Mitchellnotes]

The first Ravenloft adventure was publishid in what, the early '80's? I do not mind one bit that some of the domains are being shifted. Yes, i know there are people here who have been playing for decades. I started playing with AD&D myself. D&D has always pulled from a lot of different tropes, and honestly, how things have been portrayed over time certainly at times been problematic. While people in this thread are upset because it changes the lore they are familiar with, i would encourage you to sit with what that "lore" is now. If it is a stereotypical portrayal of a culture or reinforces negative stereotypes, then I think it is responsible of WotC to update the lore. I care a whole lot less that the lore has changed than that problematic potrayals are being reduced. For every person who even remembers or cares what the lore was, there are what, 5-10 new people playing the game? Its more important to have a responsible portrayal for those 5-10 then consistent lore for that 1 person. I hear the concern, but im not worried about it one bit.

That being said, taking down an ancient gold dragon with poison is a bit silly. May be the foundation of an artifact though?

[Waazraath]

The first Ravenloft adventure was publishid in what, the early '80's? I do not mind one bit that some of the domains are being shifted. Yes, i know there are people here who have been playing for decades. I started playing with AD&D myself. D&D has always pulled from a lot of different tropes, and honestly, how things have been portrayed over time certainly at times been problematic. While people in this thread are upset because it changes the lore they are familiar with, i would encourage you to sit with what that "lore" is now. If it is a stereotypical portrayal of a culture or reinforces negative stereotypes, then I think it is responsible of WotC to update the lore. I care a whole lot less that the lore has changed than that problematic potrayals are being reduced. For every person who even remembers or cares what the lore was, there are what, 5-10 new people playing the game? Its more important to have a responsible portrayal for those 5-10 then consistent lore for that 1 person. I hear the concern, but im not worried about it one bit.

+1. If you look for example at the lore surrounding the 9 hells, it's different in the 3.5 books compared to the 3.0 books, and in the 5e compared to 3.5 - and I'm pretty sure that those are different from Advanced and 4e as well. Is it needed? Not per se. Is adapting to modern times bad? No, neither. If stuff gets changed, will some things change for the worse? Yeah, definitely for some folks, since it's partly a matter of taste. Is that a reason not to change anything? Nope, I don't think so.