Why Do People Love World of Darkness?

[Pyromancer999]

I don't really get how the system works, but almost everyone I know loves the World of Darkness, to the point where you can visibly see them suppressing the urge to drool whenever someone even mentions that they're thinking of running a campaign, or even a one-shot. So, I was wondering why everyone and their mother(well, not literally everyone's mother, but you get the idea) loves the World of Darkness campaign settings/games. Not that I like it or dislike it, I'm just curious about what makes people love it.

[Mordokai]

From a nonplayer: I love the fluff. Vampires, werewolves, mages... whathave you. You can come up with a cool character concept that's unusual and awesome at the same time. It's high on horror, the more visceral kind and the psychological one as well. It appeals to me as a player and person.

I also love the system itself, with only one dice to determnine success or failure and the rest of the stuff. It's easy to master and still allows for it's share of deepness(is that even a word? I should be making linguistic arguments at midnight) and you can make a lot of similar character that are very different from one another.

Like I said, I'm not a player. I just read a lot of sourcebooks. I do however consider myself a fan of the system. Make what you will of it.

[Lapak]

It is well-liked because it appeals to several different sets of people in terms of what its fluff and crunch support: people who want to get heavily into their roleplaying, people who want crazy action, and people who want a sense of dread.

- The various subsettings all carry a philosophical theme. Many share the common theme of 'losing humanity.' Vampires crave blood, werewolves go berserk, etc. For groups that want to get heavy into mental/emotional roleplaying, this is pretty fertile ground. What actions are permissible in the service of a supernatural drive? What goals are worth risking what is left of your humanity to gain? What makes a person human? The Mage setting instead asks the group to define what reality is, or should be, and what role human choices play in that. They're not crazy-deep philosophically, but there's enough there to support as much effort as you want to put into it.

- Most of the subsettings allow for pedal-to-the-metal action gaming. Carefully designed characters, even at the beginning stages, can be awesomely superhuman and perform amazing feats that are just cool to contemplate. Vampires can mesmerize people, move at superspeed, and get back up when shot through the heart. Werewolves can turn into ten-foot-tall killing machines and throw around small cars. Mages can cause an entire SWAT team's guns to accidentally jam at once, whisper a warning backwards in time, or hack the most secure database in the world from 5000 miles away.

- Most of the settings (in oWoD, at least) have a threat that is simply beyond the players' ability to face. The players are not going to beat the Antediluveans. The players are not going to slay the Wyrm. The Technocracy has a stranglehold on the modern world. It's just Not Going To Happen. The idea that the party is not the biggest thing on the block, that even their major victories are minor on another scale, is a different feeling than a lot of systems give.

Obviously, all those don't apply at once. Action Group might ignore or overturn the sense of doom just as they ignore the mental game; the roleplayer types might not build their characters as war machines. But the fact that there is a certain amount of built-in support for different playstyles when you look at the whole system, fluff and crunch and all, is part of why a lot of people like it - it will let you do what you like best in it.

[STsinderman]

Well its a pretty simple answer

The Fluff: Very well written and comprehensive without being restrictive. Not to mention that it melds seamlessly with the real world.
The System: Easy to understand easy to use, doesn't require much book trolling unless you need to.

Perhaps because in general it is just so darn dynamic, in every sense.

[Grinner]

Honestly, you could just read the books without ever actually playing a game and still be contented.

I also love the system itself, with only one dice to determnine success or failure and the rest of the stuff. It's easy to master and still allows for it's share of deepness(is that even a word? I should be making linguistic arguments at midnight)

I think you were looking for the word "depth".

[Grytorm]

Honestly, you could just read the books without ever actually playing a game and still be contented.

Like me and all role-playing games (in real life at least).

[One Tin Soldier]

Personally, because the people I play with are great gamers.
More broadly, the setting(s). They tend to be quite interesting, and are great for bringing out character concept ideas.

[Adindra]

im currently playing in a zombie apocalypse nwod game and ever since the first session ive loved it even when my character doesnt do too well (i built a computer nerd with next to no athletics because i wanted to make a believable character) i couldnt honestly tell you what it is about the system but it just hooked me from day one

although all of this may be because i have a great storyteller but the system is amazing as well

[Jerthanis]

For me it's because every WoD game is written with the express intent of getting at specific themes of the human experience. Each game has an idea that it puts forth and asks you to explore at your gaming table. These ideas are broad enough in scope that you get a lot of freedom in the character you get to design, but narrow enough that everyone knows what's up going in without any work on anyone's part. I've found this is a particularly good recepie for unique gaming experiences, and they have dozens of game lines, all with their own sets of ideas.

[Fatebreaker]

Three reasons, all interlinked:

#1) Because the settings manage to be evocative, inspiring, compelling, deep, etc., in creating a large, vibrant game-world... while still leaving a lot of mysteries and unexplored territory for players to really dig into and build off of.

#2) Because the crunch and fluff are meant to compliment one another and go hand-in-hand.

#3) Because, in general, the design philosophy seems to be yes rather than no.

My example comes from Exalted, which isn't World of Darkness, but it's the same company. One of my players made an Exalted character whose entire build was based around calligraphy. Everything. Her background fluff, her in-game roleplay, her non-combat crunch, her combat crunch. Everything was devoted to this concept of someone seeking perfect beauty through the written word, both in its expression (what words she used) and its portrayal (how those words were written). And not only was she was wildly effective in combat, but she was a lot of fun to watch roleplay.

Most systems wouldn't really allow for a character defined by calligraphy. A lot of systems that do allow for it don't have the depth that Exalted did for it to fit into the world. And a lot of systems wouldn't really have the game-design to allow for it to be unique (say, games where everyone is largely identical in how they do things, but different in the flavor of the doing).

The Storyteller system (which both Exalted and WoD broadly use, albeit with individual tweaks for each specific system) lets players explore a character concept and mechanically express that within their game while still contributing to the progress of the group in a meaningful way. It's a system that trusts its players. That's a powerful attraction.

If you've never played it, try it sometime. Try it with good players and a good Storyteller. Even if it's not your style of game, I think you'll see what makes it so appealing to folks.

[Incorrect]

Personally I don't like it.
But after thinking quite a bit about why I don't, I realized that I have never had a single good WoD game. It's not for lack of trying; vampire, werewolf, mage, hunter, different versions and all.
But if it's not just a bad GM (all of them), or bad players (also all of them), then it is the clichés. Everyone is brooding emos!
I was even told "Noooo, you can't play a skinny anarchist brujah focused on chemistry and drugs! Brujah are all big and stupid! Here, take a baseball bat!!"

In addition I feel that the rules are a bit strange. It doesn't feel like there is a lot of difference between, for example, having shot a rifle once and being a professional hitman.

I can live with the rules, and I still hope that I someday will play a really good WoD game.


BTW! Dont get me started on WOD LARP. Oh the horror

[Thiyr]

I agree, I think a lot of it has to do with groups and how they run it. I like to think (though this is admittedly mostly a bias that is likely stemming from groups rather than the systems themselves) that it depends if it's nWoD or oWoD. Either way there's a lot of flavor, and the rules work (though can be a bit swingy). Personally, I enjoy it despite never actually being in a great game of it. All my experiences with nWoD were great, but lasted about one or two sessions before people stopped showing. oWoD was decent, but the group left a sour taste in my mouth (stereotypes of clans defined too much, too much was decided by a character's "birthrights" rather than their actions, and there was a ton of fluff that if you don't know it beforehand could weigh a game down a ton).

That said, they both are full of wonderful RP fodder, and they don't wait for you to get into the fancy stuff. You can do astounding things right away, but you're never more than a bad day away from being a pile of dust on the ground.

(that said, if you have a say in it, I suggest going with nWoD. Just the removal of botching makes the game so much more enjoyable imo. Can't say I enjoyed the experience of going into my field of expertise, and then suddenly forgetting the equivalent of how to add 2 and 2 because I got negative successes)

[Roderick_BR]

Funny thing, I do like the setting, but I am yet to find a group that actually roleplay people losing their humanity instead of "bloody superhero/villains that kills everything that moves".
My D&D group roleplays way better than any WoD group I've played with, specially the ones that clain that "D&D is not really roleplay, Vampire is a way better game".

Then again, I just have bad luck finding people to play.

[The Glyphstone]

I agree, I think a lot of it has to do with groups and how they run it. I like to think (though this is admittedly mostly a bias that is likely stemming from groups rather than the systems themselves) that it depends if it's nWoD or oWoD. Either way there's a lot of flavor, and the rules work (though can be a bit swingy). Personally, I enjoy it despite never actually being in a great game of it. All my experiences with nWoD were great, but lasted about one or two sessions before people stopped showing. oWoD was decent, but the group left a sour taste in my mouth (stereotypes of clans defined too much, too much was decided by a character's "birthrights" rather than their actions, and there was a ton of fluff that if you don't know it beforehand could weigh a game down a ton).

That said, they both are full of wonderful RP fodder, and they don't wait for you to get into the fancy stuff. You can do astounding things right away, but you're never more than a bad day away from being a pile of dust on the ground.

(that said, if you have a say in it, I suggest going with nWoD. Just the removal of botching makes the game so much more enjoyable imo. Can't say I enjoyed the experience of going into my field of expertise, and then suddenly forgetting the equivalent of how to add 2 and 2 because I got negative successes)

Pretty much this, though I don't have the OWoD experience.

Interestingly, no D&D group I've ever see did RP to any level even approaching the NWoD LARP club I play with monthly.

[loki_098]

In my experience, OWOD games tend to be a lot of fun because they allow for more character development than some other games. Whenever I've sat down and played D&D with the same people I run World of Darkness for, instead of getting these really awesome, deep, dynamic, three-dimensional characters, with real-world goals and motivations, and even some character flaws, I get "oooh, you mean I'm plus four to Hide AND Move Silently?" There's just not the same sort of personal investment in the character.

Beyond that, at least in LARP rules, the system is hideously easy to learn. Most of the gamers I run with either started with OWOD or started their GM/DM/ST experience with OWOD, just because you don't need more than one book, maybe two, tops, and you don't have to carry dice. If you can play rock/paper/scissors, you can play World of Darkness.

In totally unrelated news, my sig's got a link to our OWOD chronicle...totally online, made of winsprinkles. :D

[Pyromancer999]

BTW! Dont get me started on WOD LARP. Oh the horror

Guess what's part of the reason why I asked?

So, basically, can I presume that the basic reason people love WoD is because it's a Roleplayer's wet dream, not to be coarse, and because it requires almost no thought mechanically?

[Nerd-o-rama]

It's a fun setting - set of settings, really - and New World of Darkness is simple to play, easy to pick up, and still fun and easy to make a variety of characters in (though there's still White Wolf's traditional emphasis on roleplaying a unique character rather than statting a unique character).

NWoD is the only remotely competent White Wolf game in terms of design, in fact. There's still some wonky stuff, but it's not the printed migraine that is Old World of Darkness or Exalted. Although Old World of Darkness had the more intricate fluff, and in terms of setting the difference between the two is mainly one of consistency and open-endedness (New) vs. intricacy and a detailed metaplot (Old).

[Eldan]

In my experience, OWOD games tend to be a lot of fun because they allow for more character development than some other games. Whenever I've sat down and played D&D with the same people I run World of Darkness for, instead of getting these really awesome, deep, dynamic, three-dimensional characters, with real-world goals and motivations, and even some character flaws, I get "oooh, you mean I'm plus four to Hide AND Move Silently?" There's just not the same sort of personal investment in the character.

Interestingly, I've had quite the opposite experience, though it was two different groups. I've played D&D for years with one group, and we had pretty good, story-focused games with interesting characters and NPCs, with, on average, perhaps, about three very short combats per two sessions.
Then I joined another group playing NWoD hunter. And suddenly, it was all shotguns, home-made explosives, fast cars and guns akimbo. If you didn't kill two dozen supernatural creatures per session, the GM had failed, was the prevailing opinion. From what they told me, their Vampire game was about the same. Hacking through hordes of enemy ghouls and vampires, becoming the badassest mother-effer on the block, which was mostly defined by having the highest stats possible in your combat skills.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Interestingly, I've had quite the opposite experience, though it was two different groups. I've played D&D for years with one group, and we had pretty good, story-focused games with interesting characters and NPCs, with, on average, perhaps, about three very short combats per two sessions.
Then I joined another group playing NWoD hunter. And suddenly, it was all shotguns, home-made explosives, fast cars and guns akimbo. If you didn't kill two dozen supernatural creatures per session, the GM had failed, was the prevailing opinion. From what they told me, their Vampire game was about the same. Hacking through hordes of enemy ghouls and vampires, becoming the badassest mother-effer on the block, which was mostly defined by having the highest stats possible in your combat skills.

The thing is that really, emphasis varies depending on the group. You can play NWoD as a psychological roleplaying experience, as creeping CoC-esque horror, or dark superheroes. It really just depends on how you want to do things, as the system is vague enough to support all three and the setting is pretty much just that - a setting for players and GMs to do with as they wish. It's the same with D&D really, the difference being that D&D has a few more combat rules and explicit rewards for playing as aggressive forces of destruction that most DMs I know can take or leave depending on their preference at the time.

[prufock]

I'm playing a V:tM game now. To be honest, I find it less than captivating. I was going to long rant about what I don't like, but I'll trim it to just the highlights.

- Could be because I'm still unfamiliar with it, coming from d20 background, but I find the dice pool mechanics counter-intuitive. It isn't complex so much as convoluted. Instead of just variable DCs, now there are variable DCs AND variable number of successes required. I can get 2 "successes" and still fail at my task? Yeah, that makes sense

- One little thing that really bugs me: the character sheets. First, why have those little dots to fill in instead of actual NUMBERS? Second, WHY OH WHY is there no space for my total bonus to my talents? A custom character sheet may be necessary.

- Lack of self-determination. The setting seems to be built as a railroading ST's dream. I don't mind games having some characters more powerful than me, but in this game you end up being everybody's lackey, and rely on getting favours from others; which of course means you owe them, so you can be their lackey.

- The setting is supposed to be moody, morose, and dark - yet I can't take it seriously. I'm not even sure why. I don't mind moody characters, but when EVERYONE is doing the whole "struggling with being a monster" emo trip, it's boring and ridiculous.

- Speaking of which, the way they arrange the clans leans the characters towards being cliches, as much as we try not to.

- The setting itself makes very little sense to me. After thousands of years the human race hasn't caught on that there really are vampires, werewolves, mages, and all that? Despite the fact that they're everywhere.

- I can't see any plausible reason why the vamps bother with the Masquerade nonsense, except that it's tradition. They have ghouls, thralls, retainers, lackeys, etc everywhere. They have supernatural powers.

- Player vs player, oh how I loathe thee. That is a thing best left to Paranoia!

I know this is only personal opinion, and people will undoubtedly try to refute what I've said, but this is based on my experience.

[The Glyphstone]

That's because Masquerade, and the Old World in general, was/is overall a ridiculously complicated and convoluted mess. NWoD's unified dice pool system is a beautiful thing compared to both OWoD and D20.

The only point you have I can really refute is the dot thing - that's done like it is because WoD characters grow 'organically' to a point; Merits, Disciplines, etc. increase 1 dot at a time. If it was just a number, you'd have to print out a new sheet or attack your existing one with an eraser every time you spent XP, so it's easier to just have the dots to fill in.

Plus, it means all that practice you got in school filling out standardized tests is actually relevant for something.

[Tyndmyr]

Funny thing, I do like the setting, but I am yet to find a group that actually roleplay people losing their humanity instead of "bloody superhero/villains that kills everything that moves".
My D&D group roleplays way better than any WoD group I've played with, specially the ones that clain that "D&D is not really roleplay, Vampire is a way better game".

Then again, I just have bad luck finding people to play.

My limited experience with the system indicates that "roleplay people losing their humanity" translates, in practice to "angst over how much it sucks to be superpowered and awesome".

I don't mean to decry the system mechanically, it's just that it appears to collect some rather odd individuals in it's culture.

[GRM13]

As Glyph has mentioned, for the exception of the Dots I agree with all the stuff you mentioned. I still enjoy oWoD games, but they are far from perfect. Another thing that I dislike is that the character developing (A.K.A. the lvl up) is very driven by players activity.

Now in general I love this cause it means that if I train how to use my gun better in the shooting range, I actually get better at shooting. The problem comes when you have people who love to do convoluted scenes and long negotiations with NPCs, most of the time considering how oWoD work against the other players. There have been time when one player has taken half of the night doing their own individual scene that by the end of the session that person can say he has done around 5-6 things that have helped him either in point getting or to gain an advantage plot wise and a good few are left with "um... I got my blood points back?".

This is obviously dependent on the players, but I don't like it when a system allows the glory hog to actually gain an advantage over the others. Again adding that I quite like the storyteller system with it's flaw/merits and personal development, but it also invites it's own problem players cause of it.

Note: This is all my experience with the oWoD, I haven't' tried any of the nWoD ones as no games have been run though I will say that I dislike their changes to the Changeling one (others I'm indifferent)

[ko_sct]

My limited experience with the system indicates that "roleplay people losing their humanity" translates, in practice to "angst over how much it sucks to be superpowered and awesome".

I don't mean to decry the system mechanically, it's just that it appears to collect some rather odd individuals in it's culture.

The only time we role played people losing their humanity, there was no angst over it. In fact, it the game was almost over when I realized both of the characters had lost part of their humanity over the course of the game.

The first one made a pact for powers with an eldritch abomination. He needed the powers to save 2 of his friends from an other eldritch abomination. Part of his pact was that he had to kill 2 "potential conducts" (people who could be used to strengthen the grasp of an eldritch abomination on our world. He was a potential conduct as well as the 2 he was trying to save and like, 2-3 other npc.) before the end of the week. The time limit pressed him to go on an hunt for the other potential conducts, creating a whole lot of destruction and carnage in his wake. Once he lost his power, he reverted to a more normal state of mind.

My character lost part of his humanity when he desperately needed a way to fly. The void (the eldritch abomination to which he was linked) offered him the power of flight if he could offer something equivalent in exchange. Unable to think of something he asked the void what was equivalent, the void offered him the power to control the effect gravity had on him, and took part of his humanity. So, the righteous one, alway trying, not only to do what was right, but also what was best for everyone, become an uncaring entity, only wanted to protect his surrogate children's and the world from the eldritch abominations, not caring if had to destroy half of it in the process if it was the quickest way. (he also lost his ability to give up or to second guess himself, but thats an other story)

Since me and the other player lost our humanity at different time, and never both of at the same time, there was often confrontation like:

Me: WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING ?!? WHY ARE YOU BLOWING UP CARS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HIGHWAY ?!?
Other player: What ? We know he's in there, it's the fastest and easiest way to kill him.
Me: But what of everyone around ? They might get hurt !
Other player: Pfff, it's probably a lot safer than letting him get away.

(or the other way around when he gained back his humanity and I lost mine)



TL;DR The lost of humanity can be role played in many way. Looking back, in our game it was a pretty constant theme, it just wasn't the "woe is me" angsting thing.

[Civil War Man]

Note: This is all my experience with the oWoD, I haven't' tried any of the nWoD ones as no games have been run though I will say that I dislike their changes to the Changeling one (others I'm indifferent)

Honestly, you are the first person I've ever encountered who prefers old Changeling over new Changeling. Everyone I know finds old Changeling to have creepy undertones with its obsession with children and innocence, while new Changeling is about coping with traumatic experiences and loss of sanity.

But if it's not just a bad GM (all of them), or bad players (also all of them), then it is the clichés. Everyone is brooding emos!
I was even told "Noooo, you can't play a skinny anarchist brujah focused on chemistry and drugs! Brujah are all big and stupid! Here, take a baseball bat!!"

Whoever told you that is a moron.

BTW! Dont get me started on WOD LARP. Oh the horror

No arguments here.

I can't see any plausible reason why the vamps bother with the Masquerade nonsense, except that it's tradition. They have ghouls, thralls, retainers, lackeys, etc everywhere. They have supernatural powers.

I'm not a huge fan of Vampire, mostly due to it attracting a certain type of player. For this particular point, though, the rationale is that mortals are more numerous, and they have lots of weapons. It makes more sense when you take the Mage setting into account (specifically the Technocracy).

[GRM13]

Honestly, you are the first person I've ever encountered who prefers old Changeling over new Changeling. Everyone I know finds old Changeling to have creepy undertones with its obsession with children and innocence, while new Changeling is about coping with traumatic experiences and loss of sanity.

If one looks of it that way what's stopping them from looking every children animated cartoon from the same (care bears, Troll with the green thumb, among others). Both can be played with the same scenarios just as fine just that the dreaming focus on the magical and the wonderful but with warning of it's dangers and fearing the banalities of the world and loosing the ability of believing, while the lost it's all tragedies and sadness over what has happened to your character before the game even starts.

Also to note that the Lost isn't any less creepy with the kidnapping of children by the fae. I just personally see it as changeling going in the middle between cheery fairy tales and grimm stories (though a bit skewered to the first one) and lost just went all the way to grimm. it's easy to move the scales a bit form side to side, but it's harder to drastically shift it to the other side when it's solely focuses on the other.

Then again it also helps that in changeling I can play Plato, the platypus pooka that is a genius but with the attention span of a mouse.

[Libertad]

I think that many people like World of Darkness because it's an RPG where you play as monsters in a modern day pseudo-Gothic environment. The three main lines represent human themes and desires through the context of creatures not quite human: vampires represent mankind's fear of the predators among them; werewolves represent our fear of irrational anger and hurting the ones we love; mages represent the "power corrupts" concept; Prometheans are the loners who wish to be part of the group.

World of Darkness also has the status of being D&D's main competitor. For a time in the 90's, people thought that it may eclipse TSR in influence.

Vampire: the Masquerade was also instrumental in the introduction of many female players to the RPG hobby. White Wolf has always tried to make games with an emphasis on human relationships and the tragedy and drama which arise from them. I think that this is a part why female gamers may have found it more appealing than the standard "Dungeon Crawl."

[Need_A_Life]

In short: The setting.

The mechanics of the system(s) isn't always to my liking. Whether it's how any amount of system savviness means that a 15th generation vampire is an actual threat to a vampire elder (oWoD) or how I wouldn't be able to create myself as a starter character* (nWoD) they don't always make too much sense.

The setting, however, is appealing. Lots of evocative books, filled to the brim with plot hooks waiting to see play. The humanity mechanic (or morality or synergy etc.) is an interesting one and helps guide people towards what the game is supposed to be about, although I don't like how it's executed.

Even when running other games, I steal everything I can from WoD sourcebooks. My current Dresden Files game might never have come to be if I hadn't stolen things from books like Midnight Roads, Geist: the Sin-Eaters, Immortals and Ghoul: The Fatal Addiction.**

I've tried very roleplay-intensive WoD, where we might go an entire session without rolling the dice or at least a few hours. I've also tried a combat-intensive "Klingon Promotion"-esque campaign, where roleplay was practically ignored in favour of planning on who to kill next.
Both were fun, although I would rather play the former again than the latter.

* Merits for Kung-Fu, Languages (Danish(Native), English, German, Latin, Classical Hebrew), a decently-sized apartment and some income is ridiculously expensive.
** AFB; titles are as I remember them.

[Lord Raziere]

Mage. Changeling. Geist. three of my favorite things that I want to play. sure there is a curse involved in all three, but thats a small price to pay for being cool ghostly mediators of the dead, fanciful half-fae full of flair or outright reality warpers who want to find a way to stop normal people from destroying their reality warping by looking at it.

I've also got Werewolf to, and of course Werewolves are badass and I've heard good things about the other splats as well.

[Civil War Man]

If one looks of it that way what's stopping them from looking every children animated cartoon from the same (care bears, Troll with the green thumb, among others). Both can be played with the same scenarios just as fine just that the dreaming focus on the magical and the wonderful but with warning of it's dangers and fearing the banalities of the world and loosing the ability of believing, while the lost it's all tragedies and sadness over what has happened to your character before the game even starts.

Also to note that the Lost isn't any less creepy with the kidnapping of children by the fae. I just personally see it as changeling going in the middle between cheery fairy tales and grimm stories (though a bit skewered to the first one) and lost just went all the way to grimm. it's easy to move the scales a bit form side to side, but it's harder to drastically shift it to the other side when it's solely focuses on the other.

Then again it also helps that in changeling I can play Plato, the platypus pooka that is a genius but with the attention span of a mouse.

Lost doesn't limit itself to kidnapping children. The Fae do kidnap children, true, but they are just as prone to kidnap adults.

It is also not all tragedy and sadness. Not all Lost were tortured at the hands of the Fae. The trauma comes from the inhuman behavior of the Fae and the way one's perception of reality gets warped while in Arcadia. It's about learning to cope with a traumatic or unusual experiences, which can take many forms. I'm in a campaign where I play a Spring Beast, and he is easily the most well-adjusted member of the party, and is even happier than he was before he was kidnapped.

There's also an extra layer in some of the other books where it implies that the Lost are part of the Fae's reproduction cycle.

And the reason the people I know consider Dreaming creepy is because the Changelings are usually physically adult, but spend a lot of time around children because of their purity and innocence, because being an adult exposes you to the banality of the real world.

It actually presents an interesting dichotomy. Dreaming is about desperately holding onto innocence and avoiding becoming an adult, while Lost is about losing innocence and learning to cope with it (essentially becoming an adult).

Anyway, I can see why someone who likes Dreaming would not like Lost. I'm just saying that so far you're the only person I've encountered who prefers the former.