Ravenloft Campaigns: What’s the meta-point?

[Irda Ranger]

So even though they are tools one can use as gothic horror trappings, because you find them not to your tastes or hard to use they shouldn't be included for anyone to use? I disagree.

1. They're bad tools. It's like using a SuperSoaker to put screws in drywall.
2. I'm just talking about what I would do here. I really have no idea what gave you the impression I was trying to forbid your WrongBadFun. Do whatever you want man.

When we stray into, "What was wrong with Ravenloft as a setting for Gothic Horror?", we are both assuming the answer to the question and suggesting that you didn't like Ravenloft to begin with.

<philosophical tangent>

That's right; but I never ask "What's wrong with ..."; instead of always ask "How could this be better?". That's how Pixar always turns out awesome movies; it's a rule within their studio that whenever someone presents an idea the other guy responds "Yes, and...?". No accusations, just asking for more. I (and Steve Jobs) think its a very constructive mindset for producing outstanding creative projects.

</philosophical tangent>

So when you get to arguing about big cosmological issues like the nature of Domains, I feel like you are arguing about something that happens in a black box that the players don't have to be aware of and as such never need necessarily be the topic of in game conversation.

In a normal campaign setting I would agree with you, but certain explicit features of Ravenloft (such as the Darklord's ability to close the borders of a domain) can make these facts painfully obvious to the PCs. Further, given the history of border closings it should be easily acquired folk wisdom within a domain that "If you get this far you're beyond (local Darklord's) reach."

To the extent that the questions sometimes seem to revolve around trust in the DM because they involve fiat, I'm having a hard time finding sympathy for that. If the barbarous horde thunders off the stepes, this too involves DM fiat from how big the horde is, to the causes that led to the invasion, to the motivations and powers of the major NPCs. If the dragon cult launches an invasion of the known lands, once again this is DM fiat. Huge overarching campaigns themes are almost always simply dependent on DM fiat.

I agree that there's always a bit of a polite fiction on the DM fiat matter (the DM can always "win" if he wants to), but canon Ravenloft presents a unique issue of DM fiat which I find objectionable. Because of the nature of the Demiplane and the various Domains' connection to their respective Lords, the very chain of cause and effect are turned over to the DM. The PCs are taken out of the driver seat right at the moment of what should be their greatest triumph (the defeat of a Darklord).

Consider your barbarian horde thundering down off the steppe. The PCs may decide to attempt taking out the Great Khan, thus hopefully causing the barbarian coalition to fall apart and start fighting among themselves, thus saving the PC's homeland. Wouldn't it suck if instead they killed the Great Khan and *poof* (as a direct consequence of their actions) their homeland dropped into a Shadow Rift? That's certainly not what they hoped for, and it's really out of left field, isn't it? But the RLCS gives the DM the explicit permission to be a jerk like that. His "Toolbox" includes explicit permissions to "reward" a major success with a Ravenloft Shaking Event (RLSE).

So yeah, I think we could improve on that design.

Most importantly, I don't think that a setting with domains and all the cosmology that entails or without domains fundamentally changes the core story of a Ravenloft game.

You're right. It can make the DM's job harder and isn't even necessary to the Core Story. Do you see why I'd "make that better"?

Similarly, I don't think adopting a Gothic horror tone, or a slasher tone, or a psychological terror tone, or a disaster movie tone, or post-apocalyptic, or b-movie horror in the tone of Hammer film or George Romero zombie pic significantly changes the core story or necessarily the core motivation of the players.

On that one we're just going to have to disagree. Those are incredibly different genres, and the player's motivations will necessarily change significantly from one to the other. To suggest otherwise would seem to say (by analogy) that "Adopting a Star Wars tone, Star Trek tone, Aliens tone, Terminator tone or Paranoia tone should not effect the core story or motivation of the players." I think it clearly would.

 

[Celebrim]

No accusations, just asking for more. I (and Steve Jobs) think its a very constructive mindset for producing outstanding creative projects.

The question this is, are you asking for more, or for less? I don't disagree that often less is more, but I don't see how less is more necessarily helps the setting.

In a normal campaign setting I would agree with you, but certain explicit features of Ravenloft (such as the Darklord's ability to close the borders of a domain) can make these facts painfully obvious to the PCs. Further, given the history of border closings it should be easily acquired folk wisdom within a domain that "If you get this far you're beyond (local Darklord's) reach."

No, I don't think the cause and effect would be that straight forward. I think that among the locals, the existance of a border would more closely resemble the existance of taboos in M. Night Shyamalan's 'The Village', ei "Don't stray too far into the woods." Exactly what would happen if you did, much less that the hazard was under the control of someone or something wouldn't necessarily be generally known. Keep in mind the really diverse natures of Darklords. A domain might not even know that it has a Darklord in the case of say an imprisoned mummy, a doppleganger, or a possessing ghost or fiend. What does or does not cause a border to close - if indeed it has ever closed in living memory - need not be common knowledge.

...the very chain of cause and effect are turned over to the DM. The PCs are taken out of the driver seat right at the moment of what should be their greatest triumph (the defeat of a Darklord).

Cause and effect are always in the hands of the DM. The basic structure of the game is that the player offers a proposition, the DM assigns a likelihood of success, and regardless of success or failure, the DM explains the effect. There is no polite fiction involved. You don't pretend the DM is in charge. The DM is in charge.

Consider your barbarian horde thundering down off the steppe. The PCs may decide to attempt taking out the Great Khan, thus hopefully causing the barbarian coalition to fall apart and start fighting among themselves...

They may hope for this outcome, but they can never dictate to the DM the desired outcome. In D&D proposition like, "I attempt to kill the Great Khan" is valid (assuming proximity to the Khan and means is available). The propositions, "I attempt to kill the Great Khan, thus causing the barbarian coalition to fall apart and start fighting among themselves" is not valid outside of extreme narrativist play where mechanics are available to handle it. D&D has never really had mechanisms for putting narrative control in the hands of players, and any player attempting to take narrative control from the DM is typically acting in an anti-social fashion.

"...thus saving the PC's homeland. Wouldn't it suck if instead they killed the Great Khan and *poof* (as a direct consequence of their actions) their homeland dropped into a Shadow Rift?"

Yes, it would suck? What's your point? The DM is most certainly in his rights to drop the PC's homeland into the Shadow Rift as a result of killing the Great Khan. Hopefully he has an interesting reason for doing so, but even if he didn't he'd be well within his authority. About the only thing the DM can't say is, "No, you don't want to do that." or otherwise govern the character (barring edge cases like PC is being magically dominated).

That's certainly not what they hoped for, and it's really out of left field, isn't it?

It really doesn't matter what is hoped for. Even in the real world - maybe especially in the real world - the outcome of actions are never perfectly clear in advance. There are almost always things that are unforeseen and unexpected consequences. What matters is that it makes sense for the particular campaign in question. Maybe the DM's secret twist is that the barbarian horde actually has a very sympathetic motivation - keeping the world from plunging into the Shadow Rift - and only there specially blessed Champion and Chieftain was with his very soul keeping the rift closed. Ooops, campaign suddenly shifts gears - old enemies become new friends, old allies turn out to be duplicitous fiends, and hopefully fun ensues.

Actually, I think your 'left field' suggestion is alot more fun than your expected result.

But the RLCS gives the DM the explicit permission to be a jerk like that. His "Toolbox" includes explicit permissions to "reward" a major success with a Ravenloft Shaking Event (RLSE).

We clearly have different definitions of the word 'jerk'.

Do you see why I'd "make that better"?

Better, or just more specific to what you want in a campaign? It's always easier to remove things from a setting than to add them. If you pare a setting down, the particular trimming that you did might suit you better, but it might not be for everyone.

On that one we're just going to have to disagree. Those are incredibly different genres, and the player's motivations will necessarily change significantly from one to the other.

Why? The core narrative I suggested, "Be a light shining in the darkness", can I think be successfully played out in any of them. I think you can run a Ravenloft session running from a zombie apocalypse. I think you can run a Ravenloft session where the characters are archaelogists or treasure hunters that have - perhaps while looking for something completely different - stumbled into something that should best remain buried. I think you can run a Ravenloft session that plays out like a slasher movie, "Who is the monster going to get next?" The core story in each of these can remain the same, "Somehow when placed in a nightmare, make the world a better place." All that is needed for that narrative is a source of horror and the oppurtunity to be a hero, whether in a small way or a large. In none of the cases I describe is evil anything but unambigiously Evil, and in none of the cases am I removing the oppurtunity to be a hero.

To suggest otherwise would seem to say (by analogy) that "Adopting a Star Wars tone, Star Trek tone, Aliens tone, Terminator tone or Paranoia tone should not effect the core story or motivation of the players." I think it clearly would.

Only because we know what the core narrative of the different stories is. Those are specific stories, not specific generas. Of course when you change narratives the specific narrative of that story arc changes. But within that framework, we could maintain a core narrative. You most certainly could play Star Wars with a Star Trek tone ('Boldly go where no one has gone before...") or adopt the darker tone of Aliens ('Man vs. Beast') or Terminator ('Man vs. His Creation'). Paranoia is a bit harder because its core narrative is simply, "You are thrown into a ludicrously lethal situation. Survive.", but I once ran a couple of sessions of Paranoia with a darkly serious Blade Runner tone. The core narrative stayed the same, but instead of playing it for laughs, I played it as dysotopian horror.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I don't see how less is more necessarily helps the setting.

When you don't like something, less is usually better, ceteris paribus.

Cause and effect are always in the hands of the DM. ... There is no polite fiction involved. You don't pretend the DM is in charge. The DM is in charge.

Now you've wandered very far from the original point of this thread. Without my getting into it in depth let's just say I very strongly disagree with you on this one. But like I said - this is off topic. You can PM or email me if you're curious why.

The DM is most certainly in his rights to drop the PC's homeland into the Shadow Rift as a result of killing the Great Khan.

Again, I strongly disagree. But that's not a Ravenloft issue so much as a meta-D&D issue of what the DM's role is. Off topic. There are plenty of other threads where I have gone into my position here.

Better, or just more specific to what you want in a campaign?

Is there a difference?

It's always easier to remove things from a setting than to add them. If you pare a setting down, the particular trimming that you did might suit you better, but it might not be for everyone.

And if I worked for WotC I might care about that.
___________________________


Fine; you've successfully established your principled oppositional stance to many of my tangential opinions. Did you have anything constructive to add to the original topic of the thread?

 

[ProfessorPain]

And I'm getting the impression that you somehow think that changing the number of moons in the sky, or suddenly switching the order of the seasons, is somehow supposed to instill a feeling of gothic horror in the PCs. The only thing I see it instilling is nonplussed confusion. 98% of the time it's nothing more than a distraction from whatever the "real" plot of the adventure is.

Here are the first three results from Google when searching for "elements of gothic horror." (One, Two, Three) I only quickly scanned them but "randomly confusing geography" and "Oops, we disintegrated the world" somehow doesn't make the list. Instead we have:


Weird how "patchwork kingdoms stitched together at random" didn't make the list, huh?

I'm all for including those listed items that are actually of the "Gothic horror" tradition in my Ravenloft campaign, but I don't see any reason to hold on to legacy issues that are unique to whatever instructions Bruce Nesmith with Andria Hayday received from TSR back in 1990. I suspect it had more to do with cross-selling their campaign worlds and attracting the interest of DL, FR and GH players than out of any belief that it would make Ravenloft a better setting.

I am a little late to the discussion. Is it that you don't like the domain and lord structure; or that you don't feel the specific features laid out in the original matierial within that structure can go? Or did I miss your statement entirely.

I suppose the argument for keeping things the way they were, is most people who play Ravenloft probably don't just want a gothic horror setting; but want the Ravenloft setting itself. Just like someone who plays Dragonlance, doesn't just want an epic fantasy setting; they specifically want to play in the Dragonlance setting. Probably has a lot to do with nostalgia. With Ravenloft I think this is doubly the case; because it is a setting based on nostalgic tropes. I would be lying if I didn't admit part of the reason I fell in love with Ravenloft was it took characters and ideas from books and movies I had grown up on. Then I cut my teeth on Ravelnoft, and now when I play in the setting it reminds me of my early gaming days. I am all for someone developing a new Gothic Horror setting, or just a new horror setting (is any one really terrified by Gothic Horror any more ?). But if they release a book called Ravenloft, and it is something different from the original setting, I probably wont enjoy it as much. Even if what is in the book is objectively better than what was in the original boxed set; because the nostalgia wont be there.

 

[Celebrim]

Now you've wandered very far from the original point of this thread. Without my getting into it in depth let's just say I very strongly disagree with you on this one. But like I said - this is off topic. You can PM or email me if you're curious why.

I'm not the least interested in arguing it. You are the one it seems to me that has been hinting around that the problem with Ravenloft is that you don't like what you perceive to be its balance of authority. Your the one complaining about the fact that the PC's can't 'win', or that the campaign world is ruled by beings that are for all practical purposes omnipotent - complaints that strike me as rather odd since the same complaint could be made against virtually any fantasy world and that they are false to the same extent that they are false about every other campaign world.

Again, I strongly disagree. But that's not a Ravenloft issue so much as a meta-D&D issue of what the DM's role is.

Yes. Keep that in mind before suggesting that its an issue particularly unique to Ravenloft.

As for whether there is any difference between 'good' and 'what you like', if there isn't then it seems to me that there isn't much point in asking for a consensus opinion on what the core story of Ravenloft is or how Ravenloft should be updated. No one can have a valid opinion on 'what you like' except you. If 'good' is only 'what Irma prefers', then no one can tell you what the core story is since you've just made up your mind already and at most are looking for validation. Likewise, if you don't like Ravenloft and its distinctive features in the first place, then you don't seem to me to be wanting to update Ravenloft and there is no point in asking anyone else how they'd do it since 'what Irma likes' won't be recognizably Ravenloft in the end anyway.

Did you have anything constructive to add to the original topic of the thread?

I thought I'd tried to do that early on. It increasingly seems like you didn't really want the questions you initially asked answered. You asked what might attract PC's to Ravenloft. The Ravenloft campaign setting was an artificial world. When people have answered, "I liked Ravenloft because it was an artificial world", you've treated that answer as if it was wrong. The Ravenloft campaign setting was bleak. When people have answered, "I liked Ravenloft because it was a bleak setting.", you've treated that answer as if it was wrong. The Ravenloft campaign setting featured domains, borders, Darklords, and mysterious Dark Powers in the background. You suggestions for fixing Ravenloft seem to revolve around removing its most distinctive features.

Leaving aside what seems to me to be your hostility to D&D generally, the attraction of Ravenloft is that it is a bleak, harsh and nearly hopeless setting. That is the attraction. Bleaker, harsher, and more hopeless is attractive particularly to an experienced PC because it makes the small rewards just that much more savory, because after a while sometimes you want to play a game that isn't at its heart about acquiring phenomenal personal power, and because it simply seems to offer that much more challenge after slaying dragons becomes ordinary and run of the mill. Likewise, the attraction of Ravenloft is that - for a PC that hasn't poured over the DM's material - it is a campaign setting that will be filled with mysteries, bizarre events, claustrophobia, and dread.

As written, these features exist out of the box without the need to be invented. Can they be abused? Sure, but any setting is open to abuse and can become degenerate in the hands of a bad DM. Dragonlance in the hands of a bad DM is simply a railroad. Forgotten Realms in the hands of a bad DM is simply sit back and watch the uber-NPC's do all the heavy lifting.

 

[jdrakeh]

I'm having a hard time understanding exactly what you want from Ravenloft. If you want a historical Gothic Horror setting, of course, Ravenloft isn't where you want to look (you may want to try Danse Macabre, which is the closest thing to a historical Gothic Horror RPG that I've ever seen).

Having said that, it's not fair to say that Ravenloft isn't a Gothic Horror setting because it also contains elements of other genres. Ravenloft may not be purely Gothic Horror as established during the period of that literature's genesis — but neither are many modern works recognized as such (including Hammer's horror films, various White Wolf RPGs, etc).

Your big issue seems to be with purely cosmetic details (shifting realms, for example) that really don't have a great deal of mechanical representation in the setting itself. It's pretty easy to say that all of the domains are just fixed countries on a map and do away with the mists entirely. If that's all that is keeping you from enjoying Ravenloft, I have to wonder if you aren't creating reasons to not like it.

As I mention earlier, there are ways to play Ravenloft that aren't fixated on 'weekend from Hell' scenarios and there was (again) even an entire reiterration of the setting published that did its best to focus on Ravenloft as its own world, complete with native denizens who try to survive in a dark world and fight to make it a better place. If the 'demiplane' thing bugs you, there is material out there that downplays it significantly.

 

[Irda Ranger]

As for whether there is any difference between 'good' and 'what you like', if there isn't then it seems to me that there isn't much point in asking for a consensus opinion on what the core story of Ravenloft is or how Ravenloft should be updated.

I never asked how Ravenloft should be updated. That came up in off-topic discussion but it wasn't why I started this thread.

you don't seem to me to be wanting to update Ravenloft

And here we are with that misunderstanding again ...

You asked what might attract PC's to Ravenloft.

No, I'm quite sure that's not what I asked. I was looking for each person's unique opinion on what they though the Core Story of Ravenloft-based adventures should be. And that Core Story is independent of the campaign setting. It's a theme, not a place.

Leaving aside what seems to me to be your hostility to D&D generally,

What the hell? You're so way off base here I don't even know where you went wrong.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I'm having a hard time understanding exactly what you want from Ravenloft.

I just want to know what you think the Core Story of Ravenloft adventures should be. What's the theme that unites gaming in Ravenloft (or any Ravenloft-like setting). I'm really not asking about the particulars of the campaign setting at all.

If you want a historical Gothic Horror setting, of course, Ravenloft isn't where you want to look (you may want to try Danse Macabre, which is the closest thing to a historical Gothic Horror RPG that I've ever seen).

I hadn't seen this before, but it looks neat. Thanks.

Having said that, it's not fair to say that Ravenloft isn't a Gothic Horror setting because it also contains elements of other genres.

Did someone say that? I didn't. Remealthis and I just expressed a preference for a consistent world, like Krynn or Toril, rather than a patchwork demiplane. I very explicitly want to play in a Gothic Horror setting and was just looking for some opinions on what the focus of such adventures should be.

 

[ProfessorPain]

I just want to know what you think the Core Story of Ravenloft adventures should be. What's the theme that unites gaming in Ravenloft (or any Ravenloft-like setting). I'm really not asking about the particulars of the campaign setting at all.
.

I don't know if there is a single theme running through each adventure; but there is an overall feel and atmosphere, and that has always been the most important thing in my ravenloft games. If there is a theme, in my opinion it would be trying to find safety and stablity in an unsafe and unstable world. On the subject of themes, I have found that Ravenloft works well if you want to emphasize one throughout a campaign. But there are a number of different approaches to Ravenloft. I have run campaigns, where corruption of a just cause was the theme; have run others where isolation was a theme.

Some of the things in my mind that tend to seperate Ravenloft from other settings is it works better with less combat and more role playing. It is a great setting for mysteries, for monster hunter parties, for secret societies etc.

 

[Celebrim]

I would like to discuss how to run a Ravenloft campaign using 4E rules and cosmology, but before we get to the actual rule proposals I would like to discuss why PCs play in a Ravenloft campaign (rather than Core D&D).

- emphasis added

Introductory sentence of this entire thread.

No, I'm quite sure that's not what I asked.

Are you sure that you are sure? Because, I don't know how you read your own sentences, but it seems to me like you stated that you wanted to discuss why PC's where attracted to a Ravenloft campaign rather than core D&D in preperation for a discussion on how to update Ravenloft for 4e.