Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft Review Round-Up – What the Critics Say

Now that you've had time to read my review of Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, and the book officially arrived in game stores on May 18, it's time to take a look at what other RPG reviewers thought of this guide to horror.

Now that you've had time to read my review of Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, and the book officially arrived in game stores on May 18, it's time to take a look at what other RPG reviewers thought of this guide to horror.


VRG9.jpg

Terrifyingly Awesome...​

Games Radar not only ranked VRGtR one of the best D&D books ever, they also praise it for taking a fresh approach to the decades-old RPG. GR notes that the chapter on domains could have become repetitive quickly, but instead it's packed with creativity.

VRGtR transformed the reviewer at The Gamer from someone uninterested in horror into someone planning a horror masquerade adventure. While they praise VRGtR for its player options, they like the information for DMs even more. That ranges from the new mechanics that replace the old madness rules to advice for DMs on how to create compelling villains.

Bell of Lost Souls praises VRGtR for how it makes players think about their character's stories, not just in terms of backgrounds but also through the Gothic lineages, how they came about, and impacted the character. They also like all the tools DMs get plus an abundance of inspiration for games. They actually like the fact that Darklords don't have stats because if they do, players will always find a way to kill them. Overall, they deem VRGtR “indispensable” for DMs and as having great information for everyone, which makes it “a hearty recommendation.”

Polygon was more effusive calling it “the biggest, best D&D book of this generation” and that “it has the potential to supercharge the role-playing hobby like never before.” As you can tell from those two phrases, Polygon gushes over VRGtR praising everything from the new character options to safety tools to its overflowing creativity, and more. They compliment the book for being packed with useful information for players and DMs.

VRG10.jpg

...And Scary Good​

Tribality broke down VRGtR chapter by chapter listing the content, and then summed up the book as being both an outstanding setting book and horror toolkit. They especially like that the various player options, such as Dark Gifts and lineages mean that death isn't necessarily the end of a character, but rather the start of a new plot.

Gaming Trend also praised VRGtR, especially the parts that discourage stigmatizing marginalized groups to create horror. They also considered the information on how to create your own Domain of Dream and Darklord inspiring. For example, it got them thinking about the role of space in creating horror, and how the mists allow a DM to drop players into a Domain for a one-shot if they don't want to run a full campaign. GT deemed VRGtR “excellent” and then pondered what other genres D&D could tackle next, like comedy adventures.

Strange Assembly loves the fact that VRGtR revives a classic D&D setting, and especially focuses on the Domains of Dread. They like the flavor of the Gothic lineages but not that some abilities are only once a day, preferring always-on abilities. Still, that's a small complaint when SA praises everything else, especially the short adventure, The House of Lament. VRGtR is considered an excellent value and worth checking out if you like scary D&D.

Geeks of Doom doesn't buck the trend of round-up. They really enjoyed the adventure inspiration and DM advice but especially appreciate the player options. agrees They really like the flexibility that's encouraged – and the new version of the loup-garou.

VRG11.jpg

The Final Grade​

While none of these publications give out a letter grade, the superlatives VRGtR has earned makes it pretty easy to associate ratings to each review. Games Radar, The Gamer, Polygon, and Bell of Lost Souls are so effusive in their praise that they would obviously be A+. Gaming Trend, Tribality, Strange Assembly, and Geeks of Doom also praise VRGtR, though their language isn't quite as strong or they have a very minor critique. That would make their reviews at least an A. Adding in the A+ from my own review, and Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft grades this product by which all others will likely be judged in the future:

A+

 

log in or register to remove this ad

Beth Rimmels

Beth Rimmels

imagineGod

Legend
Let us even assume that Character Class Levels are years of experience in a profession and Hit Points are health and well being. Has anyone in real life trained in the cleric profession sudden gained more health with more years of study and life experiences so that a Level 5 cleric has more than double the health of a level 1? "Or has an injured fighter with only 1 HP just as health in combat as a non-" injured 10 HP fighter?


Other games do not use this system, because if you are looking at real life for examples, D&D does not make sense. So removing alignment just makes the DM's job harder on the fly (glancing up a stat block), yet still does not bring D&D any closer to real life simulation.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mecheon

Sacabambaspis
Why stop at alignment if you are trying to be simulationist instead of just a game?
HP serves the function of how long your characters can continue to fight. Character class levels serve the purpose of abstracting your various experience in your class.

Alignment served the purpose of making thousands upon thousands of complain posts of some DM mis-interpreting to screw over players because they're not playing the alignment the way they think it should be. Or edgelord players using "Its my alignment!" to screw over the party and end up on r/rpghorrorstories because their True Neutral character decided you needed an artibary act of dickishness today to fulfil their view of 'balance'. Or my own complaining posts about Dragonlance morality and how killing the gods and shattering their thrones is the morally good choice in Dragonlance and their so-called 'goodness', given they have as much 'good' to them as one could ascribe morality to your choice in Team Fortress 2 team.

Alignment has had its time and I welcome its funeral.
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
Alignment served the purpose of making thousands upon thousands of complain posts of some DM mis-interpreting to screw over players because they're not playing the alignment the way they think it should be. Or edgelord players using "Its my alignment!" to screw over the party and end up on r/rpghorrorstories because their True Neutral character decided you needed an artibary act of dickishness today to fulfil their view of 'balance'. Or my own complaining posts about Dragonlance morality and how killing the gods and shattering their thrones is the morally good choice in Dragonlance and their so-called 'goodness', given they have as much 'good' to them as one could ascribe morality to your choice in Team Fortress 2 team.
Also, it allowed PCs to kill creatures without risking their own alignment changing, even if those creatures weren't actually doing anything wrong.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
I am a strong believer that sarcasm is warranted when the other side of the argument is being purposefully dense (like not being able to tell just that Relentless Killers are supposed to be evil because it doesn't have two words explicitly describing it as "chaotic/neutral evil").

Also, I don't think it's correct to call it a "responsibility" for WotC to give monsters alignments. Just the opposite, in fact. It's their job to listen to the community, and they have here.
Correct me if I am wrong, but way back when were you not advocating for more crunch and options content, and contending if people didn't want those things all they had to do was not use it?
 

lexpo

First Post
Now that you've had time to read my review of Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, and the book officially arrived in game stores on May 18, it's time to take a look at what other RPG reviewers thought of this guide to horror.


Terrifyingly Awesome...​

Games Radar not only ranked VRGtR one of the best D&D books ever, they also praise it for taking a fresh approach to the decades-old RPG. GR notes that the chapter on domains could have become repetitive quickly, but instead it's packed with creativity.

VRGtR transformed the reviewer at The Gamer from someone uninterested in horror into someone planning a horror masquerade adventure. While they praise VRGtR for its player options, they like the information for DMs even more. That ranges from the new mechanics that replace the old madness rules to advice for DMs on how to create compelling villains.

Bell of Lost Souls praises VRGtR for how it makes players think about their character's stories, not just in terms of backgrounds but also through the Gothic lineages, how they came about, and impacted the character. They also like all the tools DMs get plus an abundance of inspiration for games. They actually like the fact that Darklords don't have stats because if they do, players will always find a way to kill them. Overall, they deem VRGtR “indispensable” for DMs and as having great information for everyone, which makes it “a hearty recommendation.”

Polygon was more effusive calling it “the biggest, best D&D book of this generation” and that “it has the potential to supercharge the role-playing hobby like never before.” As you can tell from those two phrases, Polygon gushes over VRGtR praising everything from the new character options to safety tools to its overflowing creativity, and more. They compliment the book for being packed with useful information for players and DMs.

...And Scary Good​

Tribality broke down VRGtR chapter by chapter listing the content, and then summed up the book as being both an outstanding setting book and horror toolkit. They especially like that the various player options, such as Dark Gifts and lineages mean that death isn't necessarily the end of a character, but rather the start of a new plot.

Gaming Trend also praised VRGtR, especially the parts that discourage stigmatizing marginalized groups to create horror. They also considered the information on how to create your own Domain of Dream and Darklord inspiring. For example, it got them thinking about the role of space in creating horror, and how the mists allow a DM to drop players into a Domain for a one-shot if they don't want to run a full campaign. GT deemed VRGtR “excellent” and then pondered what other genres D&D could tackle next, like comedy adventures.

Strange Assembly loves the fact that VRGtR revives a classic D&D setting, and especially focuses on the Domains of Dread. They like the flavor of the Gothic lineages but not that some abilities are only once a day, preferring always-on abilities. Still, that's a small complaint when SA praises everything else, especially the short adventure, The House of Lament. VRGtR is considered an excellent value and worth checking out if you like scary D&D.

Geeks of Doom doesn't buck the trend of round-up. They really enjoyed the adventure inspiration and DM advice but especially appreciate the player options. agrees They really like the flexibility that's encouraged – and the new version of the loup-garou.

The Final Grade​

While none of these publications give out a letter grade, the superlatives VRGtR has earned makes it pretty easy to associate ratings to each review. Games Radar, The Gamer, Polygon, and Bell of Lost Souls are so effusive in their praise that they would obviously be A+. Gaming Trend, Tribality, Strange Assembly, and Geeks of Doom also praise VRGtR, though their language isn't quite as strong or they have a very minor critique. That would make their reviews at least an A. Adding in the A+ from my own review, and Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft grades this product by which all others will likely be judged in the future:

A+

i just can agree with this decision to not give dark lord stats and the fact they did´t give very domain at lest two or three pages of info, In the end dnd is a table top RPG where you play classes with abilities build primarily around confrontation, the games aspect of dnd is build mainly around combat/dungeon crawling and interacting with creatures by using you stats/ability´s against the creatures stats/ability's, RPG is great and is the main reason i play dnd But the game is not mainly build around RP. Strahd is cr 15 But it is No problem to start cures of Strahd at lv1 and if you wanted the dark lords to work for any lv of player party there is a much better solution then no stats, that being scalable stats, like in tashas they introduce the new type of summon monster spells, this creatures Scale depending on the lv of spell you summon them with, so i think That if you want Dark Lords for any lv then why not try to something in a similar concept to That, where you Have a low lv base stat with basic abilities for the different Dark lords That you then Have ways to Scale up depending on the players lv and grupp Size. I sincerely think That this type of mentality in monster design would not only be much friendlier to new DM But also created something for high level and low lv groups to enjoy. I think this type of monster designee could be good to try in a upcoming book, like instead of creating 4 types of dragons at different ages why not try to create one and then give DMs the Tool’s and instructions for how to scale the dragons Hp/Size/Damage depending on the players lv and Size of their party. the entire Idea of the domains and their Dark lords is That you can Have an entire adventure build around one domain and its lord even if they are strong. what they did in this book, to offer potential stats for some of the Dark lord by directing folk to monsters in the monster Manuel make it so you can beat them up with eas ends up make their argument fall flat right when it comes to the lets not give dark lords stat idea.

in the end This is how i see it, in the Ravnica setting book you get the stats for the guild masters as the setting is build around the guilds and their guild master, Having them Have stats help massively when it come to understand what they can do and how they act, If a character is essential to a setting like Dark lords and their domains then giving them stats make just sens as it is better to give them the option for proper confrontation as most tools the players have is spells and ability's that need the dm to know a monsters stats to know if the thing the player try will work.

i Have to say this entire problem feels more like it was born from they being rushed and didn't get to finish the book the way they wanted or That WotC wanted the book to stay at a certain page count in order to keep the price with in a certain range and as such they was forced to scrap Dark lords.
 

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
Correct me if I am wrong, but way back when were you not advocating for more crunch and options content, and contending if people didn't want those things all they had to do was not use it?
Sure, I always advocate for more content in D&D. However, IMHO, "alignment" is a whole different matter. I have already ignored alignment in my campaigns way before this change was made, so I did exactly what I have recommended others to do. However, I still am pleased to see this change made. That doesn't make me a hypocrite, if that's what you are trying to paint me as.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Sure, I always advocate for more content in D&D. However, IMHO, "alignment" is a whole different matter. I have already ignored alignment in my campaigns way before this change was made, so I did exactly what I have recommended others to do. However, I still am pleased to see this change made. That doesn't make me a hypocrite, if that's what you are trying to paint me as.
Alignment isn't a whole different matter. It's just content you personally didn't happen to like, for a variety of reasons which are essentially the same reasons others didn't like content you did like.

Most made arguments that the impact additional content they didn't want (like some subclasses, spells, etc.) in the game had on their games was negative because it changed the culture of the game, changed player expectations about how the game worked or should work, change their expectations about what other players might choose to use, expectations about possible NPCs which might use those things, etc..

Most importantly, every time some new ability was introduced in expansion material it pigeon holed that type of ability to requiring that thing. So before a PC or NPC could try that thing with a skill check or tool use or some other ability, but now they would be "stepping on the toes" of that new material and that wouldn't be fair. So new content constrained behaviors for those who didn't choose that content. It reduced the flexibility of players and DMs, and forced them into a more narrow range of behavior, simply because that other content existed.

Those are the identical reasons you have for wanting alignment out. It's just now the shoe is on the other foot, so suddenly your reasons are "special" relative to their reasons for not wanting additional content which you told them they could simply ignore.

So yeah, pretty hypocritical. You should just ignore alignment like you always did and not worry about content others might like which you are ignoring. It's not like alignment was hurting your games because it existed, right?
 
Last edited:


Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Why are you making this personal? It's not like @AcererakTriple6 works at WotC and personally struck out alignment.
I am not making it personal. He's one of the guys for years who has championed "just ignore content you don't like because I like additional content." I am responding to his argument. It's not like what he said to others here, for years, happened in a vacuum. How better to persuade him to reconsider his position than to remind him that when the shoe was on the other foot, he agreed with the dissenting view?
 

Mecheon

Sacabambaspis
If a character is essential to a setting like Dark lords and their domains then giving them stats make just sens as it is better to give them the option for proper confrontation as most tools the players have is spells and ability's that need the dm to know a monsters stats to know if the thing the player try will work.
This ties into a problem I have with Ravenloft and how its been presented in the past as "Kill the Dark Lord to escape!"

Like, no, the horror is these things going on. Just killing the person shouldn't be stopping the problem. The goal should be resolving whatever caused it in the first place so the train of suffering doesn't continue. Some of them are combat encouters like ol' Strahd. Others, shouldn't be that

Pardon me terribly mis-quoting from Bogleech, but while you could have just, y'know, killed the baby from Eraserhead, it wouldn't have made it good horror. Mind, I like my horror more Silent Hill-esque
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top