NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="humble minion" data-source="post: 9106225" data-attributes="member: 5948">I get what you're saying, and in most part I agree.  In modern D&D, in the most populous D&D player demographic, CoS largely defines Ravenloft, and of course it's going to be the most dominant influence on a follow-up book.But CoS itself IS a followup to 90s books (and the 00s Arthaus stuff).  As soon as you stick the word 'Ravenloft' on the cover, you're voluntarily bringing some of that baggage on board.I wasn't complaining, more making an observation.  It's very clear that there's many ways to view and play the setting - just to state the obvious.  Hickman obviously has one viewpoint, he apparently disliked the Core and some of the other Ravenloft stuff that came along after the original module.  So when WotC wanted to write a one-off Strahd-centric module, they brought him on to the project.  But there's lots of later-generation writers who liked other domains, and some of the later expanded Ravenloft lore, so when WotC wanted to write a broader setting book, that's who they tapped.  I think we on the outside sometimes tend to see 'WotC' as a lockstep creative monomind, whereas that's clearly not the case.  Opinions there change between writers as well as over time.  Maybe different people were in charge when VRGtR was greenlighted and written than were during the creation of CoS, or maybe the people in charge had their opinions change over time.  Again, probably stating the obvious, but it's worth keeping in mind.</blockquote>

Verification