Expidition to Castle Ravenloft - Spoilers and Answers

demiurge1138 said:

That said, Klaus' Strahd is badass. He looks like he'd just love to tear open a PC and drink from his still-twitching corpse.

Demiurge out.

Click to expand...

On this we agree.

Thanks for the kind words. I re-visited the sketch and gave it more shadows, as well as finishing Strahd's face a bit more, down to the burning eyes.

Strahd doesn't have to look like Bela Lugosi -- and he never did. IMHO, the best portrait of Strahd was the one in the Black Box, done by Stephen Fabian. If anything, he looks more like the fencing instructor in Young Sherlock Holmes (who turns out to be you-know-who).

My problem with the new look isn't that it's too elvish. Is that it doesn't even look like a vampire. When I saw the Dragon image on some ads, I thought it was a shifter pirate or somesuch. Strahd HAS to look older, in order to justify Tatyana calling him "elder" and Strahd's fear of his own mortality (all themes that were present since I6).

Felon said:

There are players out there right now looking at Strahd's stat block who don't know that they could at some point in the future be playing Ravenloft. I don't think players can be expected to assiduously avoid looking at any and all adventure-related previews in existence just because a DM might consider using it down the line.

Here's the scenario: a DM speaks up some point and says "I'm thinking about running the new Ravenloft adventure--nobody's read through it, have they?"

To which the players reply "No, never looked at the book--but of course, his stat block was featured in an article on the WotC web site. He has those extra abilities and we have to go destroy some sites or something, right?".

It was just not a good idea. That particular little preview probably cost them more sales than they made.

Click to expand...

Barring players with photographic memories, I don't see this as a problem at all. Having a vague idea of what the adventure entails won't ruin a player's enjoyment. Seeing the stat block might even give them a fear of the final encounter they wouldn't have had otherwise.

JRRNeiklot said:

I beg to differ. I suppose I could buy it and tear the front cover off.

Click to expand...

But the pic shown above isn't the cover. It's an interior picture (and one that, I have to agree, does Strahd a terrible disservice).

The Strahd on the cover, though, I like a great deal.

Mouseferatu said:

But the pic shown above isn't the cover. It's an interior picture (and one that, I have to agree, does Strahd a terrible disservice).

The Strahd on the cover, though, I like a great deal.

Click to expand...

I was about to say... and I agree. I like the cover image. He looks old. And hungry.

Demiurge out.

GQuail said:

I think it's fair to say that if you think there's trust issues of that sort with your group...

Click to expand...

Quit trying to personalize this. That's the second time you've tried to insult me and/or my playing group.

This issue is a legitimate concern and has nothing to do with my group in particular. If you can't see the issue by now, then I'm not going to waste any more time on you.

hexgrid said:

Barring players with photographic memories, I don't see this as a problem at all.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah, because there are no players out there who have memorized the Monster Manual back and forth.

/sarcasm

You're kidding yourself. Players can easily remember the stuff about Strahd that's special. In particular, they will know that he doesn't suffer from traditional vampire weaknesses. That's supposed to have real shock value for the characters, like when the starts to rise and the players think they have him beaten. Imagine evil peals of laughter as he bask in the vermillion glow...as he crushes someone's head.

Once more, not a good idea.

Did the original Strahd have levels in Wizard (necromancer or otherwise)? (As I recall, back then foes were typically not given levels in a class, so he likely was not, I presume.)

It seems odd to me that - both here and in the Dragon magazine - he has levels of Wizard but not one level of Fighter, as his history states that he had been a warrior / warlord for - what? - about 10-20 years?! Did he forget all that experience when he became a vampire? Perhaps he was level drained so low that he forgot exactly which class levels he was supposed to regain and accidentally / purposefully chose 'wizard' instead?

Personally, I think Strahd would have been better stat'ed as a Fighter X/ Wizard X / Eldritch Knight X - using a variant EK that had either a good Will save / poor Fort save or a variant with a medium save for both the Fort and Will saves. (I've never understood why the EK has a poor Will save.) That, I think, might better work with his stated character history. On the other hand, at the least this would drop him to 4th or possibly even 3rd level spells instead of 5th level spells (dependent on how many levels of Ftr he was given; I'd choose 2-3 as he is a long served veterin - compared to 1-2 level warriors that is quite notable in power level, almost certainly worthy of a warlord).

How do others feel about this matter? Am I alone in my view that stated character history should be reflected in the stat's, class choice, etc of a N/PC, especially if it lasted years?

Felon said:

Oh yeah, because there are no players out there who have memorized the Monster Manual back and forth.

/sarcasm

You're kidding yourself. Players can easily remember the stuff about Strahd that's special. In particular, they will know that he doesn't suffer from traditional vampire weaknesses. That's supposed to have real shock value for the characters, like when the starts to rise and the players think they have him beaten. Imagine evil peals of laughter as he bask in the vermillion glow...as he crushes someone's head.

Once more, not a good idea.

Click to expand...

Actually knowing Strahd's spells are negative level city will be a huge advantage. All of a sudden the cleric starts to load up on Death Ward scrolls. Leaving the DM with no option but to add in some Babau demons to a Strahd encounter for thier dispel magic spell like ability.

Nyeshet said:

How do others feel about this matter? Am I alone in my view that stated character history should be reflected in the stat's, class choice, etc of a N/PC, especially if it lasted years?

Click to expand...

If strahd's first character level was a fighting type, he would not be able to take some of the feats that actually make him a threat in the 3e game. In previous editions, I too liked fighter 1 caster N characters, but in 3E the idea does not execute as well.

Unless he uses the retraining rules from the PHB 2 to change his feats, several of his important feats might be lost.

Also in older editions, all a better than average commoner could be was a fighter and thus the main reason why NPC casters were occasionally described as having fighter levels under their belts. In 3E 2 levels of warrior serve well enough.

Depending on the prerequisites for his feats, this might be workable

Wiz 1 from dabbling with forbidden books in his teens.
Warrior 1 as he goes out to war to disuade rumors.
Wiz 2 as he plucks more secrets from whence his crusade takes him.
Warrior 2 as he travels back to Barovia.
Wizard 3 as he broods and plots for a way to win Irena <<<Vampire template can be added anytime after here safely.

Add the rest of his wizard levels and add 1 to his CR for the 2 warrior levels.