D&D 5E Sunlight in Barovia vs Sunlight Sensitivity

[BookBarbarian]

While reading through my copy Curse of Strahd. The section on Sunlight in Barovia got me thinking. Here is the same text from the Adventures League Dungeon Master's guide version 4.0:

"Barovian daylight is bright light, yet it isn’t considered sunlight for the purpose of effects and vulnerabilities, such as a vampire’s, tied to sunlight."

Based on this text I'm tempted to let Dark Elf and Gray Dwarf PCs not have the negative effects of sunlight sensitivity while in Barovia. On the one hand I'm of the opinion that if it's not broke don't fix it. On the other hand it might make this adventure a little more memorable.

Thoughts and opinions?

Note: This could all be academic, my players might not even choose those races.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I’ve got mixed feelings on this. On the one hand, it seems to logically follow from the altered nature of Barovia. On the other hand, it takes some of the flavor away from those PCs and gives them access to some fancy abilities without that counterbalancing flaw. But back in the first hand, I don't think those fancy abilities are extremely overpowered without the flaw.

 

[GX.Sigma]

If it doesn't hurt vampires, it doesn't hurt drow. Seems pretty cut-and-dry to me.

 

[Mercule]

I'd say the RAW fits with them being without penalty. The blurb you quoted doesn't say "for vampires" or even "for undead". It says "effects and vulnerabilities" with one example being vampire. That's pretty telling and gives consistency.

Rules aside, I don't know that drow are particularly appropriate, thematically, to Ravenloft. I'd discourage (or even prohibit) them, myself. One way to do that without being too heavy-handed about it is to "interpret" the passage about sunlight a particular way. If your group is the sort that wants to play drow, though, don't worry about it. I already prohibit drow, so it's a moot point.

 

[RCanine]

Rules aside, I don't know that drow are particularly appropriate, thematically, to Ravenloft.

Why, it's not like you choose Ravenloft; Ravenloft chooses you. It's the one setting where wacky and atypical characters make sense, because their appearance in Barovia can be attributed to Strahd's fickle curiousity.

 

[BookBarbarian]

Why, it's not like you choose Ravenloft; Ravenloft chooses you. It's the one setting where wacky and atypical characters make sense, because their appearance in Barovia can be attributed to Strahd's fickle curiousity.

Indeed, my players will most likely be coming to Ravenloft from the sword coast.

 

[Mercule]

Why, it's not like you choose Ravenloft; Ravenloft chooses you. It's the one setting where wacky and atypical characters make sense, because their appearance in Barovia can be attributed to Strahd's fickle curiousity.

It's not Ravenloft, so much as the horror genre. Some people find drow to be inappropriate protagonists in a horror adventure. There was a section of one of the 2E Ravenloft books (or, maybe Dragon; it's been a while) about genre appropriateness of non-standard races. It has nothing to do with power level, whether it's "logical" for them to be taken, or anything of the sort. It's a meta-game thing. Unless, of course, Ravenloft chooses based on tropes, which isn't out of the question.

That's a very personal, taste-driven thing, though. I wouldn't fault anyone for allowing oddball PCs -- as long as the group is having fun. It was just a call-out for consideration related to the original question.

Personally, I'm not sure where I'd draw the line. Somewhere before myconids, for sure. I don't allow drow, anyway. Kender are obnoxious and very mood-breaking for horror; if a player was strongly interested in playing one, I'd have to ask myself whether they were actually into the "mood" side of a vampire lord or if I should just run the adventure as a dungeon crawl. 3E-style tieflings would be fine. 4E/5E tieflings would be a harder sell, as would dragonborn, but I'd give them a shot. Tinker gnomes would make kender welcome, by comparison. That's roughly my line -- I tend to prefer human-centric settings and parties at all times, though. Someone who likes Talislanta is going to feel very differently, and that's cool.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

I'd say the RAW fits with them being without penalty. The blurb you quoted doesn't say "for vampires" or even "for undead". It says "effects and vulnerabilities" with one example being vampire. That's pretty telling and gives consistency.

Rules aside, I don't know that drow are particularly appropriate, thematically, to Ravenloft. I'd discourage (or even prohibit) them, myself. One way to do that without being too heavy-handed about it is to "interpret" the passage about sunlight a particular way. If your group is the sort that wants to play drow, though, don't worry about it. I already prohibit drow, so it's a moot point.

In a casual game, sure, but the OP referred to Adventurer's League, where the DM is not allowed to prohibit any character option that is legal for play. Perhaps this thread should be moved to the AL sub-forum, so there is no more confusion.

 

[Mercule]

In a casual game, sure, but the OP referred to Adventurer's League, where the DM is not allowed to prohibit any character option that is legal for play. Perhaps this thread should be moved to the AL sub-forum, so there is no more confusion.

Hmm... That's not how I read it. I took the AL text to be supporting data for the conversation.

In that case, strike anything about table rules. It seem pretty clear what the intent of the rules is.

 

[BookBarbarian]

Hmm... That's not how I read it. I took the AL text to be supporting data for the conversation.

In that case, strike anything about table rules. It seem pretty clear what the intent of the rules is.

Indeed It was much easier to get the text from the AL PDF than transcribe it from my copy of Curse of Strahd. This will not be for an AL game. Sorry for the confusion.