Ravenloft: The Horrors Within Announced, Release Date Scheduled for June 2026

Parmandur · Tuesday at 9:44 PM

Remathilis said:
It's a stoplight. Red means no. Green means yes. Yellow means yes, but...

To be fair, that seems to be what they were doing before with the numbers

mamba · Wednesday at 12:17 AM

Parmandur said:
To be fair, that seems to be what they were doing before with the numbers

It was the idea, but the execution was much worse. No one at WotC can tell whether my vote of 2 was ‘I like the idea but the execution needs work’ or a ‘I do not like this’ (also keep in mind that there were more than 3 values). Red / yellow / green is better since it more clearly communicates what I want to happen as a result of my vote.

Now if only they would understand that people compare it against what they have today rather than on its own without context, and they could actually draw some decent conclusions from this

Eyes of Nine · Wednesday at 1:37 AM

LuisCarlos17f said:
* OMG! If my theory about the future Magic: the Gathering event "Reality Fracture" is true, then there may be some special surprise with Innistrad. We shouldn't rule out the possibility that they will later release something linked to Magic.

Luis Carlos breaking my brain again. I hope this happens. I doubt it will happen, but I hope it happens.

Not to start a war, but Innistrad > Barovia... Based mostly on vibes

LuisCarlos17f said:
* Digital content released in D&DBeyond hasn't to appear in the Roadmap. And Ravenloft has got its own rivals with 3PP horror settings in DDB (Grimm Hollow and Crooked Moon).

Lots of 3pp horror settings, but I'd have to guess that Ravenloft has way better mind-share than either of the other two, which I barely have heard of (classic example of internet fallacy "sample size: 1" but I'll own it)

Gorck · Wednesday at 4:14 PM

Remathilis said:
It's a stoplight. Red means no. Green means yes. Yellow means yes, but...

I would still prefer it if they used clearly defined words rather than vague numbers, letters, or colors. Something simple like:

I love it. Don’t change a thing.
I like it, but it needs a small tweak.
I don’t really care either way. I just want to continue on to the next question.
I don’t like it, but I can see how it can be salvaged.
I hate it. Get out of here with that #^*+%

Henadic Theologian · Wednesday at 5:35 PM

TravDoc42 said:
I love these ideas!!! I love hexbloods, so seeing them get some love would make me happy!

Hexbloods are one of my favourite species since I first saw them and I hope they do more with them not just in Ravenloft, but other settings like the Domains of Delight, Forgotten Realms, Radiant Citadel, Planescape, Spelljammer, etc...

Remathilis · Wednesday at 5:40 PM

Gorck said:
I would still prefer it if they used clearly defined words rather than vague numbers, letters, or colors. Something simple like:

I love it. Don’t change a thing.

I like it, but it needs a small tweak.

I don’t really care either way. I just want to continue on to the next question.

I don’t like it, but I can see how it can be salvaged.

I hate it. Get out of here with that #^*+%

The colors come with definitions, and I don't remember the wording. Red means "I don't like this, please rethink it". Green means "go ahead as is", yellow means "on the right track, but I have some reservations". Originally, red and green didn't allow commentary, but that got changed quickly.

I don't see how that's any less clear than what you're proposing. Considering you can already choose not to answer a question if you don't care, the only additional option you gave was "love it as is" which isn't feasible since everything (supposedly) gets a balance pass and numbers can tweak without feedback.

Henadic Theologian · Wednesday at 9:34 PM

LuisCarlos17f said:
I confess I feel curiosity about the original Barovia in the material plane. This could be a great spin-off because this could enough space for supernatural factions like vampire clans, theriantropes tribes, spellcaster guilds, fae noble houses.. Of course it would be a lot of worldbuilding.

Other idea is a maid of pure heart who becomes the ultimate vampire-hunter, almost overpowered, but the plot-twist is she is the reincarnation of the angel Avacyn(Innistrad), or she isn't but the "heir of Avacyn's soulspark". Then her "hero travel" is not about to become more powerful but spiritually growing and learning to find the balance between mercy and justice.

* OMG! If my theory about the future Magic: the Gathering event "Reality Fracture" is true, then there may be some special surprise with Innistrad. We shouldn't rule out the possibility that they will later release something linked to Magic.

* The tsochart (3.5 Lords of Madness: Book of Aberrations) could be perfect for this 5.5e Ravenloft.

* Digital content released in D&DBeyond hasn't to appear in the Roadmap. And Ravenloft has got its own rivals with 3PP horror settings in DDB (Grimm Hollow and Crooked Moon).

What is your theory about Reality Fracture?

Eyes of Nine · 2026-03-12T02:45:46+0000

Henadic Theologian said:
What is your theory about Reality Fracture?

Upthread a bit

Post in thread 'Ravenloft: The Horrors Within Announced, Release Date Scheduled for June 2026'

Monday at 12:56 PM

Dragonlance doesn't need special rules and WotC would rather player-options sourcebooks to be as generic as possible. And they know if players want only lore/fluff/background then they can buy the older titles in DMGuild.

* We have got the option of the retelling o the original Dragonlance modules, something like Curse of Strahd. If there is a cinematographic production then this will be a new continuity with possible changes, for example goliaths as a specie from Taladas, and ursines(bearfolk) could be more common.

* I have got a new speculation. There is a new event "Reality...

Paul Farquhar · 2026-03-12T10:22:01+0000

Eyes of Nine said:
Not to start a war, but Innistrad > Barovia... Based mostly on vibes

Barovia is rather boring, and still a little racist. There are some rather better domains in VGR though, as well as suggestions for homebrewing your own. But a couple of completely new domains made from scratch are something I expect in the new book.

GarrettKP · 2026-03-12T13:44:50+0000

Remathilis said:
The colors come with definitions, and I don't remember the wording. Red means "I don't like this, please rethink it". Green means "go ahead as is", yellow means "on the right track, but I have some reservations". Originally, red and green didn't allow commentary, but that got changed quickly.

I don't see how that's any less clear than what you're proposing. Considering you can already choose not to answer a question if you don't care, the only additional option you gave was "love it as is" which isn't feasible since everything (supposedly) gets a balance pass and numbers can tweak without feedback.

A reminder to everyone discussing UA (not specifically to you, Remathilis, just you have the most recent reply to this thread) that UA isn’t their only playtesting method, and probably not even their primary playtesting method.

They have a team of private playtesters that they work with that give more detailed feedback and likely get more context for the stuff they receive. The stuff you don’t see in UAs like spell revisions and feats aren’t untested, they just are done with a smaller group that works with Wizards.

As has been mentioned, Public playtesting is made for (mostly) free market research and to get the general “yes or no” vibe to big ideas. The more nuanced feedback comes from private playtesters, because it’s easier to process the notes of 20 people on the 100+ spells they are testing than it would be for them to comb through the hundreds of UA responses.

So keep that in mind when you consider mechanics that make it into the game. It’s all playtested, but maybe not by you. And even then, game balance is just impossible. You’ll never get everything right or satisfy everyone. The goal isn’t to be perfect. It’s to be good enough.