D&D 5E Ravenloft Previews of Dementlieu, Lamordia, and Har'Akir

WotC has been sprinkling previews of individual Ravenloft domains to various websites -- including Dementlieu, Lamordia, and Har'Akir. Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft is only a couple of weeks away, coming out on May 18th!

Dementlieu​

• Forbes takes a look Dementlieu, which has inspirations like Cinderella, The Masque of the Red Death, and Dark City. "Dementlieu is one of over 30 domains of dread detailed in the book. It’s a sharp contrast to Barovia’s dark forest and looming Gothic castle on a hill. Instead it’s covered in a glamorous sheen of fine clothes and fancy parties. Everyone is dying to be invited to the Grand Masquerade held by Duchess Saidra d’Honaire every week on her private island. And, in many cases, killed if they are discovered at the ball if they’re not supposed to be there."
• Syfy Wire looks at Lamordia, inspired by Frankenstein. "Many of the Domains of Dread are inspired by some horror tale or piece of creepy folklore, and Lamordia definitely has its roots in Frankenstein. But while the Domain is inspired by that classic horror story, its elements are then shot through the lens of D&D adventures and explored to dozens of horrific extremes. Mordenheim's land isn't just about resurrection gone awry, it's also the Domain for all different types of science gone wrong, bizarre experiments, body horror weirdness, and grim tales of society versus a frigid land. Just as there's more to Frankenstein than a scientist who abandoned his child, there's more to Lamordia than stitches and semi-dead flesh."
• Polygon has Har'Akir, an Egyptian-themed domain. "Why is there a Domain that is a desert that is riddled with these ancient, inexplicable haunted monuments and ruined pyramids? How does a Domain like that exist? How does it make sense? To an extent it doesn’t, and it’s going to be the players that come and explore that, who are some of the only people that realize that the entirety of the domain is, to an extent, gaslighting them."

Ankhetop, darklord of Har'Akir

​

 

[Urriak Uruk]

Then again I ask: why use Ravenloft at all if you're going to "reinvent" it so completely? The only reason I can see is crass name recognition to get more people to buy it, and that's not a good enough reason for me. I agree that this is the direction D&D seems to be going, I would just rather they build on the old lore rather than reanimate it's IP and put it in a new body. They seem embarrassed by their past but unwilling to give up the financial benefits that come from using the old names.

It honestly doesn't seem like this much of a reinvention... this new book seems very much to be embracing the concepts and themes of Ravenloft from previous editions, and they are largely changing up some of the old lore.

Clearly some folks here don't like the core being broken up, or revamping domains like Har'Akir to be a little less trope-y... but this book still very much feels like a Ravenloft book to me. I don't believe that by changing lore you're suddenly not embracing the spirit of the old IP.

That's like saying a superhero movie like Spider-Man isn't really a Spider-Man movie because in the comics he is supposed to build webshooters instead of them being part of his powers.

 

[Charlaquin]

See, I have no problem with any of these story elements existing in a D&D product. Not one. But I can't see a reason that does not have to do with IP protection and other money reasons for them to change the existing lore for Ravenloft in this way instead of simply creating new domains (or an entirely new campaign setting) that explore what they want to explore. This is by far the biggest suite of changes to lore they've ever done to one of their campaign settings, IMO, and I don't see a creative reason why they couldn't have just created new material instead of telling entirely new stories with old names bolted on. If Ravenloft is that problematic (and I can see why it would be), don't bring it back at all, or keep the domain concept but make a bunch of new domains that conform to modern storytelling standards. There's no need to keep the old names for new creative work except to increase sales through name recognition. I can understand that reason, but I can't respect it.

There’s a lot of demand for old settings to return. There is also a lot of demand for WotC to modernize D&D, to move away from elements of its past that are no longer considered socially acceptable. Taking the old ideas and updating them like this is exactly what most of the audience wants. If you prefer the classic material... it’s still there. You can still use it.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Thi k of it like this... When van rictens guide comes out in a couple weeks there will be kids reading it who has parents in or not long out of diapers when the original ravenloft came out like 40 years ago the rework let's both groups use this as a foundation to build great d&d stories off rather than just a way to build karloff off d&d and still allows you to build karloff if you want

I am sorry, but it doesn't. As an old fan, and as someone who knows many old fans, this is for the younger audience for sure. I am sure some will see this, who also liked old Ravenloft, and think its great (and that is great and fine). But we don't all have to act like we love the new stuff and the new previews if it isn't our thing. This is definitely not what I am looking for in Ravenloft. And there is no moral good or bad in not liking (or liking) something the IP holders of Ravenloft put out and label Ravenloft.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There’s a lot of demand for old settings to return. There is also a lot of demand for WotC to modernize D&D, to move away from elements of its past that are no longer considered socially acceptable. Taking the old ideas and updating them like this is exactly what most of the audience wants. If you prefer the classic material... it’s still there. You can still use it.

I can and will use the old stuff as I see fit, and maybe even use some ideas if I like them. One thing I mentioned above is that this is a radical lore change (and a retcon, not a "timeline advances" kind of change). The Realms didn't rewrite the past. Neither did Eberron. It makes me really wonder what they will do for future campaign settings. I expect that, as has been said above, this is the shape of things to come.

 

[Charlaquin]

I can and will use the old stuff as I see fit, and maybe even use some ideas if I like them. One thing I mentioned above is that this is a radical lore change (and a retcon, not a "timeline advances" kind of change).
The Realms didn't rewrite the past. Neither did Eberron. It makes me really wonder what they will do for future campaign settings. I expect that, as has been said above, this is the shape of things to come.

I mean, are retcons necessarily a bad thing? It’s an RPG setting, not a novel, it doesn’t really need continuity as long as it has interesting concepts and places to play in. The idea of evolving meta-plots for RPG settings has kinda gone out of fashion.

 

[Reynard]

I mean, are retcons necessarily a bad thing? It’s an RPG setting, not a novel, it doesn’t really need continuity as long as it has interesting concepts and places to play in. The idea of evolving meta-plots for RPG settings has kinda gone out of fashion.

One thing I can see where folks might have issue is it potentially creates misunderstandings if different people in the group cleave to different interpretations of the setting. If someone adores 3e FR lore vs 5E FR lore, it might lead to a moment of disconnect. I mean, I'm guessing, because I am not really a setting person. I think setting books are generally presented as dry text books and I never make it past the overview chapters.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I mean, are retcons necessarily a bad thing? It’s an RPG setting, not a novel, it doesn’t really need continuity as long as it has interesting concepts and places to play in. The idea of evolving meta-plots for RPG settings has kinda gone out of fashion.

I've never really cared if something I like falls out of fashion. My formative D&D years were spent in 2nd edition, so for me, the metaplot is a big part of the story of D&D. I certainly enjoy making an individual game my own, and I understand that this is for players, not readers. Still, Ravenloft was my favorite campaign setting, and I liked the story they were telling. I appreciated when the change to Arthaus for 3rd edition continued the story rather than rewrote it, and have a particular dislike of changing history to fit the current paradigm. What they're doing feels like they want to pretend the past doesn't exist, and frankly it makes me a little sad.

I think of it like Marvel vs. DC in terms of story continuity. DC has reset their universe many, many times, such that no particular character has anything close to a consistent past. Marvel has, for the most part, never claimed that their history didn't happen, or happened in another universe. They just layer more on top. As far as I'm concerned, make mine Marvel!

 

[Hussar]

If we're talking about looting tombs laden with traps and undead being problematic, doesn't that apply to pretty much the entirety of D&D? Raiding (and damaging) lost ruins of extinct or exotic cultures and finding treasure have been present in nearly every officially produced adventure I can think of, dating back to the origins of the hobby. I can't think of a single 5e campaign adventure (maybe Dragon Heist - which has you looting from your own city) that doesn't have this element.
So what would dungeons look like without this element? Or if that's not possible, what would D&D look like without dungeons? Just D?

What tombs are there in Storm King's Thunder? Dragon Heist has no tombs at all that I can think of. Dungeon of the Mad Mage isn't a tomb. Saltmarsh adventures don't feature tombs, although they have a few underground lairs.

I'd say that "plunder a tomb" isn't really a feature of any of the WotC AP's.

 

[TheSword]

I don't speak for @Hussar , but it's well known that depictions like the Mummy and Indiana Jones show a view of foreigners showing up at an archeological dig, with the implication that whatever they find will be carted back to their own country (England/America usually).

Ignore the depictions for a moment (these are films for entertainment, they aren't meant to depict real-life well), and focus on actual colonialism. It is quite factual that countries like Great Britain in the days of their empire took a lot of really incredible pieces from all around the world and put them in their own museums back in England. It is an ongoing problem that countries like India have tried to get some of these pieces back, with the answer being a blanket "no way hose-y." It doesn't help that many of the things you cite (such as locals tomb robbing, or that local museums are underfunded and badly maintained) have been used as justification for colonial-era powers keeping hold of artifacts they stole from other cultures.

I'm sure many of the museums are not actually racist and legitimately believe such pieces will be better maintained and protected in their exhibits, but that alone is not a great excuse for keeping hold of other culture's pieces of culture and history.

The fact that it’s a debate should show you that it isn’t as cut and dried as some would have you believe. As you’ll see from my linked article Egyptian sites were being looted or built on following the governments inability to protect them following the revolution. Yes that is a justification. Just as the horrendous air pollution in Athens was grounds for keeping the Elgin Marbles. These things are not limited to colonialism. Protecting, maintaining and learning from the worlds history is the main reason I’d suggest for the scientists that operate the museums to do so. Whether this is a good enough justification for you is a political issue.

Now when you add in the fact that the artifacts in a D&D/Har’Akir game are being taken from evil creatures. It seems to seem very peculiar to get excited about how disgraceful it is. Particularly when there’s no suggestion that stealing from Ankhtepot will be a particularly good idea.

 

[TheSword]

What tombs are there in Storm King's Thunder? Dragon Heist has no tombs at all that I can think of. Dungeon of the Mad Mage isn't a tomb. Saltmarsh adventures don't feature tombs, although they have a few underground lairs.

I'd say that "plunder a tomb" isn't really a feature of any of the WotC AP's.

Well... other than... Tomb of Annihilation.

To be fair Rime of the Frost Maiden, Curse of Strahd, Descent into Avernus also had a fair few tombs between them. Dungeon of the Mad mage had several scattered between the levels.