M.L. Martin
Adventurer
Forked from: What do you think the new setting will be, from Ampersand?
Fear, horror, and powers check rules were attempts to encourage roleplaying, although they may not always have been clear and effective in that regard. And Ravenloft is different enough from 'bog standard D&D' that 4E, with its rigid enforcement of the core D&D experience, may prove an ill fit to the setting.
Documenting from Ravenloft: Realm of Terror, affectionately referred to as the "Black Box," some places where the Land of Mists suffers problems or disconnects with 4E assumptions:
Commentary: Things not always Working Quite Right is a hallmark of the Ravenloft setting, for better and for worse--and the reliability of character abilities is a hallmark of 4E.
Scales, snouts, tails and horns are, unfortunately, a bit more difficult to disguise--and rather more offputting--than pointed ears.
More documentation can be added if requested, but I think a case can be made that Ravenloft as a setting is fairly distant from the game play assumed by 4E, and woven into so much of the system. The setting could be plundered for one-shot domains of dread, but as a long-term setting (whether natives or outlanders), a 4E Ravenloft would mean that one or the other would have to change a lot.
jdrakeh said:That said, I don't recall Ravenloft containing any rules that made it any more 'role-play' oriented than other D&D settings, though I guess that the Tarokka was an attempt at such rules (albeit one that never seemed to work out very well for publishers). For me, Ravenloft always seemed like bog standard D&D steeped in the tropes of Horror easily indentified as originating from other sources (which, incidentally, is why I like it).
Fear, horror, and powers check rules were attempts to encourage roleplaying, although they may not always have been clear and effective in that regard. And Ravenloft is different enough from 'bog standard D&D' that 4E, with its rigid enforcement of the core D&D experience, may prove an ill fit to the setting.
Documenting from Ravenloft: Realm of Terror, affectionately referred to as the "Black Box," some places where the Land of Mists suffers problems or disconnects with 4E assumptions:
Page 14 said:Where [a visitor's] essence is displeased, the land reshapes it, muting an offending ability here, redefining a power there.
Commentary: Things not always Working Quite Right is a hallmark of the Ravenloft setting, for better and for worse--and the reliability of character abilities is a hallmark of 4E.
Page 16 said:Nonhuman characters usually attract attention. . . . A simple disguise can prevent most of this trouble. Ravenloft's inhabitants rarely see nonhumans. They don't expect to, and more importantly, they don't want to. So unless they're given a good reason to assume otherwise, they prefer to believe a person is human. But Ravenloft's inhabitants also are suspicious. The moment a nonhuman starts to shake their false perception of him, all bets are off.
Scales, snouts, tails and horns are, unfortunately, a bit more difficult to disguise--and rather more offputting--than pointed ears.
Page 55 said:Magic, especially in the form of magical items and devices, is less common in Ravenloft than in other realms. Few (if any) magical items are created here. Compared to other worlds, few people live in Ravenloft, and those who do have not lived in here long. As a result, you won't find piles of treasure lying about for the taking. Wealth is not much of a driving force here; survival is. This doesn't mean Ravenloft is void of greed, or that magical items don't exist in this demiplane--they're simply uncommon.
In Ravenloft, magical items don't lie about for no reason. THe ordinary monster does not keep an item he cannot use. If he hoards treasure, he must have a logical and important reason to do so. Otherwise, the "cupboard" may be completely bare. Treasure doesn't accompany an encounter just because players expect it. . . .
In many campaign settings, the search for treasure drives the characters (and their players). This cannot always be the case in Ravenloft. Here, adventurers succeed by keeping their wits and skins; if they foil an evil plot, they've excelled. Survival, in most cases, is its own reward.
Page 136 said:Many AD&D adventures go somethingl ike this: the PCs wander from room to room (or over hill and dale), slaying creatures and seizing the spoils, until at last they face the gibbest creature of all, and destroy it, too. In Ravenloft, you might be tempted to substitute a powerful vampire for the "beast supreme" and fill the string of lesser encounters with "Gothic" monsters such as bats, ghouls, and ghosts. Unfortunately, that formula leaves something to be desired: a story.
Dungeon crawls make the worst kind of RAVENLOFT adventure, because they lack a real villain, a real problem, a real plot. In this realm, characters should do more than cast spells and bash monsters--they should unravel mysteries, too. Each encounter should be more than an isolated incident with a bounty attached. It should provide information that helps flesh out the story, and clues that help the characters succeed (or survive). If "spoils" are involved, those items usually should be a part of the story--something useful or telling--not just a trophy to add to the haul.
More documentation can be added if requested, but I think a case can be made that Ravenloft as a setting is fairly distant from the game play assumed by 4E, and woven into so much of the system. The setting could be plundered for one-shot domains of dread, but as a long-term setting (whether natives or outlanders), a 4E Ravenloft would mean that one or the other would have to change a lot.