Dungeons & Dragons: Ravenloft: Heir of Strahd Review

Like many Ravenloft tabletop adventures, five adventurers are plucked from the realms by the mists to find themselves in Barovia. As usual, Strahd sends one of his minions to invite the newcomers to his castle to enjoy his hospitality, a.k.a. for Strahd to mess with their minds and tempt them.

The characters are:

• Rotrog: An arrogant Orc wizard apprentice
• Kah: A shy Kenku cleric from Waterdeep
• Fielle: A cheerful human artificer from Baldur’s Gate
• Alishai: A moody, hot-tempered Tiefling paladin to Selune
• Chivarion: A good-natured Drow barbarian with a hairless tressym named “Murder” as his pet.

Over the course of the novel, you discover that each one was taken when they were faced with a terrible choice or were poised to take an awful action. That sets the stage for the crux of the novel—which character(s) will succumb to either Strahd’s temptations and/or the malevolent energy of Barovia, embracing their darkest impulses.

Should You Buy It?​

I found Heir to Strahd interesting because while it presented elements of Barovia that Ravenloft players and DMs will be very familiar with, not everything was what I had expected, even though I’ve GM’d Ravenloft adventures. The spirit of Tatyana most notably was presented in a way I did not expect based on the prior information I had read.

I don’t want to explain too much about Tatyana, and how she factors into the plot because it could ruin the mystery of who falls prey to the darkness to become the titular character. I will say that I suspected the doomed character at first, then talked myself out of it, assuming it was a feint to distract from another option. A later character reveal reinforced my original suspicion, but I still thought there might be a twist to go in the another direction. There wasn’t but instead of being unsatisfying, the ending makes me eager for a sequel.

Regardless of how one feels about the mystery and certain aspects of the ending, this Ravenloft novel can be very useful for anyone thinking of DMing an adventure set in Barovia. Dawson, the author of a few Star Wars novels and several fantasy novels, not only sets the tone very well for Barovia but also shows how Strahd could be played by a DM. The audiobook in particular showcased how even a simple conversation with Strahd can be equal parts charming and sinister.

For those who like or prefer audiobooks, the narration by Ellie Gossage was very good. It’s also available in hardcover and ebook editions.

Dungeons & Dragons: Ravenloft: Heir of Strahd: B+.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Do you maybe have anything constructive to add?

And

Yeah, obvious troll is obvious, you are appriopriating social justice language to whine about something that doesn't exist and doesn't happen. I see no reason to take you seriously and have no time for bad jokes.

Mod Note:

One thing we ask ENWorlders to do is keep it civil. One element of that is not making things personal- address the points, not the posters. The first part I quoted definitely fails that test.

The second quoted section also fails, because calling someone out as a troll is not only personal, it’s escalating the situation. Don’t do that- instead, disengage or report the behavior if it’s serious enough.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Despite being traditionally Chaotic Neutral, the Kenku connote ravens of death, corpses, Shadowfell, the Raven Queen, burglars, and "suffer from a sinister reputation that is not wholly unearned".



"The book does not have strong themes of race". I think that is part of the race commentary in the novel.

These traditionally Evil/dark "monsters" are now "normal" player character species.

Dark and not good leaning is not the same as a traditionally "evil" race.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Kenku? They seem to be used as a stand in for non-vocal neurodivergent humans. There are characters like this in Candlekeep, Netherdeep and Witchlight.

 

[doctorhook]

Since 2020 and drama within the hobby, I’ve becoming pretty convinced that D&D should just go 100% post-racial. If I publish a game (and I likely never will) I’d scrap the entirety of race/species in favour of custom biological/body mechanics: short size, blue skin, fiery breath, innate spells would all just be “body features” a character could buy at character creation. DMs could pre-bundle certain “body features” together to create races/species for their world, but the core rules would just skip having any default other than “human-ish” anyway.

Why this? Well players mostly only ever play characters as though they’re human anyway (eg: human minds in alien bodies). And we’ve already recognized that most of “race” was cultural and shifted features to that. And the categories are arbitrary anyway; why are Tolkiens races assumed for every D&D world anyway? And why limit humans to reality? Star Trek is full of “aliens” that are apparently identical to humans but with different noses and no other distinguishing biological features, so why not codify allowing blue or green or magenta skin (a la Guardians of the Galaxy)?

Basically, D&D is already leaning hard into tossing out bioessentialism, so why not take the final step into freeform biology for a fantasy game anyway?

(Note: For anybody who reads this as cynical or sarcastic, I’m not. I do prefer old-school categories for fantasy races, but I actually find it preferable to discard the categories altogether than to water down the meaning of “orc” or “drow”. So please read my suggestion with sincerity.)

 

[Dire Bare]

Since 2020 and drama within the hobby, I’ve becoming pretty convinced that D&D should just go 100% post-racial. If I publish a game (and I likely never will) I’d scrap the entirety of race/species in favour of custom biological/body mechanics: short size, blue skin, fiery breath, innate spells would all just be “body features” a character could buy at character creation. DMs could pre-bundle certain “body features” together to create races/species for their world, but the core rules would just skip having any default other than “human-ish” anyway

Why this? Well players mostly only ever play characters as though they’re human anyway (eg: human minds in alien bodies). And we’ve already recognized that most of “race” was cultural and shifted features to that. And the categories are arbitrary anyway; why are Tolkiens races assumed for every D&D world anyway? And why limit humans to reality? Star Trek is full of “aliens” that are apparently identical to humans but with different noses and no other distinguishing biological features, so why not codify allowing blue or green or magenta skin (a la Guardians of the Galaxy)?

Basically, D&D is already leaning hard into tossing out bioessentialism, so why not take the final step into freeform biology for a fantasy game anyway?

(Note: For anybody who reads this as cynical or sarcastic, I’m not. I do prefer old-school categories for fantasy races, but I actually find it preferable to discard the categories altogether than to water down the meaning of “orc” or “drow”. So please read my suggestion with sincerity.)

There are sci-fi games that do something similar, allowing players to create their own alien species. I wouldn't mind such a thing in D&D as an option, but not a part of the core experience.

D&D fantasy races give players the, well, fantasy of being an elf, dwarf, or hobbit, plus the races added to the game later. They speak to specific mythic archetypes and aren't simply random collections of skin colors, body shapes, and ear shapes. Tolkein's races are pulled from European mythology and have deep roots, and his works dominated the genre in the 60s, 70s, and 80s and arguably still today. To have Tolkein-style races remain central to the D&D experience makes sense. Adding new options based on the evolving fantasy genre also makes sense. Giving players an option to create their own fantasy species . . . makes for a good option to the core for those who would enjoy it.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Your comment has made me to remember the transhumanist TTRPG "Eclipse Phase" where PCs can use different bodies, or to download their minds into other bodies to be used these like "sidekicks". How would be Starfinder if transhumanism was possible?

Of course you are free to create your homemade half-blood lineage but this could be used by munchkins for possible abuses.

And the classes and PC species are like "mental cosplay". Lots of players would rather characters with their own "marks of identity".

 

[doctorhook]

There are sci-fi games that do something similar, allowing players to create their own alien species. I wouldn't mind such a thing in D&D as an option, but not a part of the core experience.

D&D fantasy races give players the, well, fantasy of being an elf, dwarf, or hobbit, plus the races added to the game later. They speak to specific mythic archetypes and aren't simply random collections of skin colors, body shapes, and ear shapes. Tolkein's races are pulled from European mythology and have deep roots, and his works dominated the genre in the 60s, 70s, and 80s and arguably still today. To have Tolkein-style races remain central to the D&D experience makes sense. Adding new options based on the evolving fantasy genre also makes sense. Giving players an option to create their own fantasy species . . . makes for a good option to the core for those who would enjoy it.

Cheers, valid points all around! Still I’d be in favour of reigning in the proliferation of races on a per-setting basis, just for verisimilitude. The Tolkien races are a well-established genre trope in gaming, but I think we could step back and be critical of it more often too: why must every D&D setting include elves, dwarves, and orcs? The main answer is “because we’ve always done so”, which isn’t a very strong reason. D&D has been rocketing away from being strictly Euro-inspired for decades anyway, so why not put other stuff in core? What really makes dwarf different from a human anyway? A dragonman is clearly different biology, but these days elves and dwarves aren’t so clear.

Anyway, I’m mostly thinking that D&D could skip a lot of these issues by reassessing its reasoning around races even more than it has already.

 

[doctorhook]

Your comment has made me to remember the transhumanist TTRPG "Eclipse Phase" where PCs can use different bodies, or to download their minds into other bodies to be used these like "sidekicks". How would be Starfinder if transhumanism was possible?

Of course you are free to create your homemade half-blood lineage but this could be used by munchkins for possible abuses.

And the classes and PC species are like "mental cosplay". Lots of players would rather characters with their own "marks of identity".

Dead on, all true. And yeah, the balance aspect of “build your own species” would certainly need to be a consideration.

 

[wizard71]

Where have you been? ALL of the domains were substantially reconfigured, some to the point where they only share a name with the previous iteration. And this started with the depiction of Barovia in Curse of Strahd.

I checked out after curse of Sthrad which was terrible. I have nothing but contempt for the D&D design team when it comes to adventures. A disjointed book filled with walls of incoherent text, large stretches of railroading and hurried milestone jumps to get you the level where you can finally take on Strahd. I am glad they are gone. They were terrible adventure designers totally ruining amazing stories.

 

[LazarusKane]

I mean in a sense, that you don't need designated "evil" race to be evil, players in my experience do not care if they fight Orcs or Goblins or Haflings. Unless you do something to make a group unique and memorable as individual group, it could all be endless army of clones of Larry from Accounting. And in this case that group stands on their own, not defined by their species assigned stereotype, just as any human group would.

I must disagree: Try to change a band of human bandits in an adventure with a band of (mad) derros or a band of drow [And since drow as described in 1e trough 5e (2014) are a controversial topic: You can absolutely reject them, but if you (would) use them as written] - that's a huge difference. A band of chaotic orcs uses other tactics than disciplined lawful Hobgoblins. A flock of (sneaky) Kenkus is a completely different encounter than a pack of gnolls.

PS: What you describe (and I don't want to critizise you, I assume you're a great DM) is the nightmare that seized me after reading the new Monster Manual with the conversions (Orc -> Tough, Duergar -> Spy etc.) and the new DnD or Tales of the Valiant (Kobold Press) Player Manuals with the cut Attribute Modifiers for the species: The manice of Whateverism.

And now back to the topic of the thread:
That's also a aspect I disliked about the book: Ravenloft is (or was?) a human-centric setting. The group meets very few people but nobody even comments about the "monstrous" Humanoids. And yes, someone can reject the racist undertones ("Monsters!") of the setting but now it would make no difference in the story if every protagonist in the book were a human - yes, even the wish of the kenku about flying is very arbitary. The protagonists as written are merely different colored humans, not members of distinctive species.