• NOW LIVE! -- The Awfully Cheerful Engine on Kickstarter! An action comedy RPG inspired by cheerful tabletop games of the 80s! With a foreword by Sandy 'Ghostbusters' Petersen, and VTT support!
log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E Everything We Know About The Ravenloft Book

Here is a list of everything we know so far about the upcoming Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft.

rav_art.jpg

Art by Paul Scott Canavan​
  • May 18th, 256 pages
  • 30 domains (with 30 villainous darklords)
  • Barovia (Strahd), Dementlieu (twisted fairly tales), Lamordia (flesh golem), Falkovnia (zombies), Kalakeri (Indian folklore, dark rainforests), Valachan (hunting PCs for sport), Lamordia (mad science)
  • NPCs include Esmerelda de’Avenir, Weathermay-Foxgrove twins, traveling detective Alanik Ray.
  • Large section on setting safe boundaries.
  • Dark Gifts are character traits with a cost.
  • College of Spirits (bard storytellers who manipulate spirits of folklore) and Undead Patron (warlock) subclasses.
  • Dhampir, Reborn, and Hexblood lineages.
  • Cultural consultants used.
  • Fresh take on Vistani.
  • 40 pages of monsters. Also nautical monsters in Sea of Sorrows.
  • 20 page adventure called The House of Lament - haunted house, spirits, seances.




 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Russ Morrissey

Russ Morrissey

Voadam

Legend
I mean, at least they still sell the PDFs of the the older editions of Ravenloft. So if anybody really wants to keep the same stuff, ya can.

Of course I don't know which of the older Ravenloft material would be the best to get without going "too overboard" with buying every single thing. I completely missed out on the early editions of DND/Ravenloft and opinions, from what I heard, seem to be mixed about 3.0/3.5 Ravenloft stuff.
Quality and tone of Ravenloft stuff has varied wildly throughout its entire lifecycle IMO. 3.0 core book and the 3.0 and 3.5 Monster Books, and the Van Richten's were all great. I thought the short Secrets of the Dread Lords was good too. There were other products 3e/3.5 products I did not care for (the hero and villain splat books come to mind).

Same for 2e ravenloft. Some great stuff like the Van Richten Guides and some fantastic sourcebooks and modules, but also atrocious ones with horrendous railroading and messing around with PCs in ways I felt were pretty terrible (surprise! you actually died offscreen an hour ago and were replaced by an impostur you've been playing since then) or that significantly went against core aspects of the setting (hey this entire low magic high skilled professional army is actually individually alchemically powered by a formula involving ground up Books of Vile Darkness!, yes the entire nation's army, each of them, and the formulae is a secret of the nation's wizard hating fighter leader).
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Faolyn

Hero
I mean, at least they still sell the PDFs of the the older editions of Ravenloft. So if anybody really wants to keep the same stuff, ya can.

Of course I don't know which of the older Ravenloft material would be the best to get without going "too overboard" with buying every single thing. I completely missed out on the early editions of DND/Ravenloft and opinions, from what I heard, seem to be mixed about 3.0/3.5 Ravenloft stuff.
The Van Richten's Guides are excellent, including the three they produced for S&S. For the record, the third of the S&S VR Guides, the Guide to the Mists, wasn't formally published--they lost the license just before they could, so they released the mostly-formatted but no-art text of the book for free. You can't go wrong with these, since you can just update them to your edition of choice and even use the information in non-Ravenloft settings.

Domains of Dread can be considered an updated Black Box, and it includes (most of?) the domains that were introduced in Islands of Terror and Darklords, so if you want to get a "basic" RL book, this one would be it.

I like the Gazetteers personally, but you can probably ignore most of the other stuff from the S&S line (including the Core books), unless you're planning on running in 3x. The Gazetters update a lot of the lore from Domains of Dread, but only for the Core domains.

I don't buy adventures, so I can't help you there. But Carnival and the Nightmare Lands boxed sets have some interesting features, since those two places are quite unusual.

And, of course, the monster books. There were three MC appendices. The first and third are normal MCs chock fulla monsters (some of which are dumb), while the second is a collection of unique creatures, each with a full personality and writeup. They're excellent. You probably don't need to S&S Denizens of Dread.

And then, if you go to the Fraternity of Shadow's library, you can get all their netzines.
 

Kurotowa

Legend
Well, not really because your creature type also alters how a lot of spells affect you. If you're undead, then you can't be healed by cure wounds, but you can be turned by a cleric. So it's not quite as minor as you might think. (Cool image with the rats, BTW.)

Avoiding those alterations falls under my mention of "making concessions to game balance and ease of play" and is, I highly suspect, considered a feature and not a bug by the game devs. Especially when they tested a dual-type in the UA version and pulled back from it. Really, there was no shortage of people here bringing up examples of weird rules interactions it would create, and they ranged from "annoying" to "unbalanced".

What I'm getting at is, decide what's really important about the character concept, and ask if "Can't be healed or Raised" is a complication you genuinely need to introduce to the game.
 

Remathilis

Legend
The Van Richten's Guides are excellent, including the three they produced for S&S. For the record, the third of the S&S VR Guides, the Guide to the Mists, wasn't formally published--they lost the license just before they could, so they released the mostly-formatted but no-art text of the book for free. You can't go wrong with these, since you can just update them to your edition of choice and even use the information in non-Ravenloft settings.

Domains of Dread can be considered an updated Black Box, and it includes (most of?) the domains that were introduced in Islands of Terror and Darklords, so if you want to get a "basic" RL book, this one would be it.

I like the Gazetteers personally, but you can probably ignore most of the other stuff from the S&S line (including the Core books), unless you're planning on running in 3x. The Gazetters update a lot of the lore from Domains of Dread, but only for the Core domains.

I don't buy adventures, so I can't help you there. But Carnival and the Nightmare Lands boxed sets have some interesting features, since those two places are quite unusual.

And, of course, the monster books. There were three MC appendices. The first and third are normal MCs chock fulla monsters (some of which are dumb), while the second is a collection of unique creatures, each with a full personality and writeup. They're excellent. You probably don't need to S&S Denizens of Dread.

And then, if you go to the Fraternity of Shadow's library, you can get all their netzines.
Addendum: Darkon is fully detailed in Requiem: the Grim Harvest boxset. The adventure ok, mostly a railroad get to the main selling point of the box (2e rules for undead PCs) but the gazetteer detailing Darkon/Necropolis is very good. A little of it is reprinted in Domains of Dread and most of it was in the 3e Gazetteer with Darkon in it. You also got a great poster map of the domain pre-Nocturnal Sea.
 

Faolyn

Hero
Avoiding those alterations falls under my mention of "making concessions to game balance and ease of play" and is, I highly suspect, considered a feature and not a bug by the game devs. Especially when they tested a dual-type in the UA version and pulled back from it. Really, there was no shortage of people here bringing up examples of weird rules interactions it would create, and they ranged from "annoying" to "unbalanced".

What I'm getting at is, decide what's really important about the character concept, and ask if "Can't be healed or Raised" is a complication you genuinely need to introduce to the game.
You're correct. I'm just saying it's not a minor issue. If someone really wants to play an undead, they they should have the drawbacks in addition to the perks. if they just want to invoke the feeling of being undead, then plain ol' humanoid is good enough.
 

JEB

Hero
Problematic changes like Valachan, I Cath or Souragne needed to happen for WotC to sell the book in 2021.
This is the part that keeps me scratching my head, though. If Valachan, I'Cath, Souragne, etc. were deemed too problematic to keep in their original form, what was the value of reviving those particular domains at all? (Especially I'Cath, which is not exactly one of the better-known lands.) If someone really loved the old version of the domain, and never had a problem with it to start with, you're just going to upset them. If someone new comes in, they won't care that the new domain has an old name, so applying it is a waste of time... or worse, they will like the fact that it has "history", only to be turned off when they actually dig into older versions.

If Wizards thought a domain was trouble, it seems like it would have been much smarter to either focus on other, less difficult domains, or invest more in new ones (which they clearly had ideas for - they just gave most of them old names). Unless, as some suggested, the "fix" is the point. Not sure how well that worked out with I'Cath, though...

So while I feel some changes were made to correct socially yikesy things, a lot seems like them wanting to revitalize the brand and correct design flaws from 30 years ago.
Sure, and honestly, a lot of what's in the new Ravenloft looks great. (Dementlieu 2.0 sounds cool, for example - but again, why is it called "Dementlieu"?) However, they could have had all this great new stuff without erasing what came before. Having to do one or the other is a false choice - the Forgotten Realms has managed to do both in 5E, after all.

This also makes me very curious how the other two classic settings are going to be handled. Are you hardcore Spelljammer fans really sure you want it back? You aren't the demographic they want anymore...
 

Remathilis

Legend
This is the part that keeps me scratching my head, though. If Valachan, I'Cath, Souragne, etc. were deemed too problematic to keep in their original form, what was the value of reviving those particular domains at all? (Especially I'Cath, which is not exactly one of the better-known lands.) If someone really loved the old version of the domain, and never had a problem with it to start with, you're just going to upset them. If someone new comes in, they won't care that the new domain has an old name, so applying it is a waste of time... or worse, they will like the fact that it has "history", only to be turned off when they actually dig into older versions.

If Wizards thought a domain was trouble, it seems like it would have been much smarter to either focus on other, less difficult domains, or invest more in new ones (which they clearly had ideas for - they just gave most of them old names). Unless, as some suggested, the "fix" is the point. Not sure how well that worked out with I'Cath, though...


Sure, and honestly, a lot of what's in the new Ravenloft looks great. (Dementlieu 2.0 sounds cool, for example - but again, why is it called "Dementlieu"?) However, they could have had all this great new stuff without erasing what came before. Having to do one or the other is a false choice - the Forgotten Realms has managed to do both in 5E, after all.

This also makes me very curious how the other two classic settings are going to be handled. Are you hardcore Spelljammer fans really sure you want it back? You aren't the demographic they want anymore...
Because ignoring the problem isn't the same as fixing it.

Take Valachan. There were multiple problems with the domain as presented; it was a weird mix of European temperate forests and jungle cats, headed by the only black darklord who just happened to be a panther turned man turned vampire with a penchant for killing his wives. That existed in the world. So now, WotC decides Valachan is too radioactive to touch, so they decide to design a new domain (Adnakaw) and a new darklord (Chalkuna) to fill its place and puts that in VGR, with no mention of Valachan anywhere in it.

But Valachan still exists. Or specifically, WotC didn't say it doesn't exist. Von Karkov, with all his flaws, is out there. They did nothing to correct the inherent design flaws of the darklord or domain. It just pretends they didn't happen, or that they did but WotC doesn't want to talk about it. What is that serving? Do you NEED WotC's consent to use the old Valachan if you have the books? If you don't and Valachan is regnum-non-grata, you aren't any better off than before WotC put out VGR; you're still converting the old 2e/3e stuff by hand yourself.

And are you going to do this with EVERY domain, because (spoiler) every domain got changed in some way. Lamordia has gained a steampunk/mad science vibe. Kartakass when from wolfweres to werewolves, Richemont has plague issues, Darkon is disintegrating, Tepest is about strange hag-worshippers, Falkovia is a zombie war, etc, etc. Even good old Barovia changed quite a bit between Domains of Dread and Curse of Strahd. The fact that Van Richten is alive to write this book (after the events of Bleak House) shows how far they have strayed from the metaplot.

Ultimately, I can't convince you to like the new stuff. If your heart is set on Black Box/Red Box version of Ravenloft, you're going to be disappointed. Much like how 4e Dark Sun is a reconceptualizing of the setting rather than a strict conversion, so too is Ravenloft.
 

Because ignoring the problem isn't the same as fixing it.

Take Valachan. There were multiple problems with the domain as presented; it was a weird mix of European temperate forests and jungle cats, headed by the only black darklord who just happened to be a panther turned man turned vampire with a penchant for killing his wives. That existed in the world. So now, WotC decides Valachan is too radioactive to touch, so they decide to design a new domain (Adnakaw) and a new darklord (Chalkuna) to fill its place and puts that in VGR, with no mention of Valachan anywhere in it.

But Valachan still exists. Or specifically, WotC didn't say it doesn't exist. Von Karkov, with all his flaws, is out there. They did nothing to correct the inherent design flaws of the darklord or domain. It just pretends they didn't happen, or that they did but WotC doesn't want to talk about it. What is that serving? Do you NEED WotC's consent to use the old Valachan if you have the books? If you don't and Valachan is regnum-non-grata, you aren't any better off than before WotC put out VGR; you're still converting the old 2e/3e stuff by hand yourself.

And are you going to do this with EVERY domain, because (spoiler) every domain got changed in some way. Lamordia has gained a steampunk/mad science vibe. Kartakass when from wolfweres to werewolves, Richemont has plague issues, Darkon is disintegrating, Tepest is about strange hag-worshippers, Falkovia is a zombie war, etc, etc. Even good old Barovia changed quite a bit between Domains of Dread and Curse of Strahd. The fact that Van Richten is alive to write this book (after the events of Bleak House) shows how far they have strayed from the metaplot.

Ultimately, I can't convince you to like the new stuff. If your heart is set on Black Box/Red Box version of Ravenloft, you're going to be disappointed. Much like how 4e Dark Sun is a reconceptualizing of the setting rather than a strict conversion, so too is Ravenloft.
I still don’t understand why a domain of black people, with a black lord, who are culturally European, is considered a problem (it very much goes against notions of blood and soil and ethno nationalism). It treats race and culture as delegate things. Feeling those have yo be reconnected would seem a step backwards
 

JEB

Hero
Because ignoring the problem isn't the same as fixing it.

Take Valachan. There were multiple problems with the domain as presented; it was a weird mix of European temperate forests and jungle cats, headed by the only black darklord who just happened to be a panther turned man turned vampire with a penchant for killing his wives. That existed in the world. So now, WotC decides Valachan is too radioactive to touch, so they decide to design a new domain (Adnakaw) and a new darklord (Chalkuna) to fill its place and puts that in VGR, with no mention of Valachan anywhere in it.

But Valachan still exists. Or specifically, WotC didn't say it doesn't exist. Von Karkov, with all his flaws, is out there. They did nothing to correct the inherent design flaws of the darklord or domain. It just pretends they didn't happen, or that they did but WotC doesn't want to talk about it. What is that serving? Do you NEED WotC's consent to use the old Valachan if you have the books? If you don't and Valachan is regnum-non-grata, you aren't any better off than before WotC put out VGR; you're still converting the old 2e/3e stuff by hand yourself.
1) Why is it important to "fix" Valachan, or any other domain perceived as problematic, at all? There's lots of stuff in D&D's history that folks have deemed problematic. Is Wizards of the Coast really obliged to republish all of that material in a "fixed" form? Aren't there better uses of their time? Isn't there plenty of other stuff they could update that isn't so much trouble, or new ideas they could share instead?

2) In cases like Dementlieu, how is Wizards actually "fixing" a domain by completely overwriting it with a new domain that shares the same name?

And are you going to do this with EVERY domain, because (spoiler) every domain got changed in some way. Lamordia has gained a steampunk/mad science vibe. Kartakass when from wolfweres to werewolves, Richemont has plague issues, Darkon is disintegrating, Tepest is about strange hag-worshippers, Falkovia is a zombie war, etc, etc. Even good old Barovia changed quite a bit between Domains of Dread and Curse of Strahd. The fact that Van Richten is alive to write this book (after the events of Bleak House) shows how far they have strayed from the metaplot.
And all of the new versions of those domains could have existed just fine, as updates to the setting, like with the Forgotten Realms. You don't have to erase the past to fix the present.
 

Remathilis

Legend
I still don’t understand why a domain of black people, with a black lord, who are culturally European, is considered a problem (it very much goes against notions of blood and soil and ethno nationalism). It treats race and culture as delegate things. Feeling those have yo be reconnected would seem a step backwards
Ask a person of color, not me. I'm not going through this debate with you again.
 

I still don’t understand why a domain of black people, with a black lord, who are culturally European, is considered a problem (it very much goes against notions of blood and soil and ethno nationalism). It treats race and culture as delegate things. Feeling those have yo be reconnected would seem a step backwards

Well, the only black darklord (and one of the very very few named black characters in the entire line) being an actual literal polymorphed animal was part of it.

But more to the point, Valachan was ... boring. Seriously. Was anyone really interested in or attached to Valachan as it was? It didn't really reflect any major horror tropes, it's darklord's origin was a convoluted mess (what did he even do in order for the Dark Powers to make him a Darklord?) and bad-GM-metagamey (his guards are all werepanthers and when he bites someone they turn into a werepanther and he can turn into a panther but SURPRISE he's a weird variant vampire so if your PCs came to fight him prepared for werepanthers, sucks to be you, oh and he lacks most of the regular vampire weaknesses so even if you did come prepared for vampires, sucks to be you too). It was even tucked away in the corner of the Core with no reason for anyone to ever go there.

Valachan was a stale, boring domain written entirely around one long-ago module in Dungeon magazine, and it was absolutely ripe for reinvention. The racial issues around it would probably only have been a part of the reason why this was done.

Could the authors have just left it out of the book completely? Well, yes. And honestly I'm not sure why they didn't - maybe they wanted to cover as many as possible of the domains of the old Core in the new book - but that doesn't explain why Sithicus or the Shadow Rift were left out. And of course if WotC had been hyper-keen to populate the new book with rewrites of any and all problematic old domains to align more closely with modern principles, they certainly would have put a redo of Sebua (the one with the darklord who fell in tragic love with her rapist...) high on the priority list.
 

Well, the only black darklord (and one of the very very few named black characters in the entire line) being an actual literal polymorphed animal was part of it.

But more to the point, Valachan was ... boring. Seriously. Was anyone really interested in or attached to Valachan as it was? It didn't really reflect any major horror tropes, it's darklord's origin was a convoluted mess (what did he even do in order for the Dark Powers to make him a Darklord?) and bad-GM-metagamey (his guards are all werepanthers and when he bites someone they turn into a werepanther and he can turn into a panther but SURPRISE he's a weird variant vampire so if your PCs came to fight him prepared for werepanthers, sucks to be you, oh and he lacks most of the regular vampire weaknesses so even if you did come prepared for vampires, sucks to be you too). It was even tucked away in the corner of the Core with no reason for anyone to ever go there.

Valachan was a stale, boring domain written entirely around one long-ago module in Dungeon magazine, and it was absolutely ripe for reinvention. The racial issues around it would probably only have been a part of the reason why this was done.

Could the authors have just left it out of the book completely? Well, yes. And honestly I'm not sure why they didn't - maybe they wanted to cover as many as possible of the domains of the old Core in the new book - but that doesn't explain why Sithicus or the Shadow Rift were left out. And of course if WotC had been hyper-keen to populate the new book with rewrites of any and all problematic old domains to align more closely with modern principles, they certainly would have put a redo of Sebua (the one with the darklord who fell in tragic love with her rapist...) high on the priority list.
I liked a Valachan, particularly after they released an adventure for it in dungeon. It was a cool domain. And it was one of the first game setting locations that got me to realize world building can allow you to not tie ethnicity/race to culture, which I thought was cool. Sure the lord was an animal, but he is a villain and lots of lords have backgrounds like that (Harkon Lukas was a wolf). YMMV. Not everyone might have liked it. Still don’t see why it is seen as good to remove that content
 


Remathilis

Legend
1) Why is it important to "fix" Valachan, or any other domain perceived as problematic, at all? There's lots of stuff in D&D's history that folks have deemed problematic. Is Wizards of the Coast really obliged to republish all of that material in a "fixed" form? Aren't there better uses of their time? Isn't there plenty of other stuff they could update that isn't so much trouble, or new ideas they could share instead?

2) In cases like Dementlieu, how is Wizards actually "fixing" a domain by completely overwriting it with a new domain that shares the same name?


And all of the new versions of those domains could have existed just fine, as updates to the setting, like with the Forgotten Realms. You don't have to erase the past to fix the present.
1.) When it comes to representation, yes. Several domains were based around bad takes on non-European cultures (and few on bad takes on European ones as well) that should be looked hard at. Souragne is a domain built around common misconceptions of voodoo. I'Cath is badly butchered Chinese myth. Vistani have famously been savaged for perpetuating stereotypes of Roma. These things should be corrected, not swept under the rug.

2.) Dementieu is fixing a different problem; its called "this domain is painfully boring". Tell me one story you can tell with Dominic d'Honaire that you couldn't tell with a evil noble wizard with a few charm spells? Tell me one story in Dementieu that doesn't involve Dominic that couldn't be told in Mordent, Richemont or Borca? What is so great about the old Dementieu that it must maintain existing in it's boring, one note current form? Especially with no Core anymore, Dementieu barely qualified as a Domain of Dread; I can think of worse places to live in Faerun and Eberron. (Sarlona, with it's nightmare-born psionic thought police is a far more interesting take on a mind controlled populace than Dementieu and that is a whole continent in Eberron).

I'll let you in on a little secret; it's been decades since I ran something in Ravenloft that wasn't Barovia and many of the changes they were making was stuff I always thought was true: Dementieu was all high society and gentry, Lamordia was high tech, Valachan was a jungle. It's taken @humble minion 's let's read thread to remind me it wasn't nearly as interesting as I'd remembered. So I've welcomed many of changes since they fit with my apparent head cannon of what the setting should be like. I empathize with those who loved it as it exactly was, but for me, this aligns far better to what I'd want out of Ravenloft than the 2e version did.
 

Remathilis

Legend
I have. Their opinions on things like this aren’t monolithic. They are as varied as other peoples opinions.
As I am a white male, I don't find it my place to explain this to you. It's best left to someone who is actually affected by it.

To whit, I and Scottish by blood and I'm annoyed that the obvious Scotland domain is filled with nothing but goblyns and messed up ghost-dhampir. But that's my opinion.
 

JEB

Hero
1.) When it comes to representation, yes. Several domains were based around bad takes on non-European cultures (and few on bad takes on European ones as well) that should be looked hard at. Souragne is a domain built around common misconceptions of voodoo. I'Cath is badly butchered Chinese myth. Vistani have famously been savaged for perpetuating stereotypes of Roma. These things should be corrected, not swept under the rug.
I feel like it'd be much better to let folks who actually know something about voodoo or Chinese myth or similar subjects create their own new domains and darklords, than to dig up old, apparently embarrassing takes on the subject and make a point of "fixing" them. (Especially since that may have gone awry with I'Cath, and 5E Souragne sounds like it "fixed" the problems by creating a new domain anyway.)

As for the Vistani, they seem to be fixing them without completely invalidating their old history and rebuilding them from scratch; expanding on the concept in a corrective way (though in a way 4E did first). Though I suppose we'll see for sure when the book is publicly released.

2.) Dementieu is fixing a different problem; its called "this domain is painfully boring".
Then why reuse the name? The new Dementlieu does seem interesting, but I just don't understand why it was important to have it replace the old Dementlieu, which doesn't even meet your above criteria for correcting domains. Why not give that interesting new concept its own identity (I don't doubt a better name could be concocted anyway), and leave the old Dementlieu to fans or DM Guild designers to play with?

I'll let you in on a little secret; it's been decades since I ran something in Ravenloft that wasn't Barovia and many of the changes they were making was stuff I always thought was true: Dementieu was all high society and gentry, Lamordia was high tech, Valachan was a jungle. It's taken @humble minion 's let's read thread to remind me it wasn't nearly as interesting as I'd remembered. So I've welcomed many of changes since they fit with my apparent head cannon of what the setting should be like. I empathize with those who loved it as it exactly was, but for me, this aligns far better to what I'd want out of Ravenloft than the 2e version did.
Well, I appreciate that you at least admit your bias in the matter.
 

Remathilis

Legend
I feel like it'd be much better to let folks who actually know something about voodoo or Chinese myth or similar subjects create their own new domains and darklords, than to dig up old, apparently embarrassing takes on the subject and make a point of "fixing" them. (Especially since that may have gone awry with I'Cath, and 5E Souragne sounds like it "fixed" the problems by creating a new domain anyway.)

As for the Vistani, they seem to be fixing them without completely invalidating their old history and rebuilding them from scratch; expanding on the concept in a corrective way (though in a way 4E did first). Though I suppose we'll see for sure when the book is publicly released.


Then why reuse the name? The new Dementlieu does seem interesting, but I just don't understand why it was important to have it replace the old Dementlieu, which doesn't even meet your above criteria for correcting domains. Why not give that interesting new concept its own identity (I don't doubt a better name could be concocted anyway), and leave the old Dementlieu to fans or DM Guild designers to play with?


Well, I appreciate that you at least admit your bias in the matter.
So let me get this straight: you'd want a book called Ravenloft that had 20+ all new domains with all new Darklords, many using the same tropes as classic domains and no connection to the previous Ravenloft setting?

You've already all but declared the new book Ravenloft In Name Only, so feel free to ignore it and use the classic 2e version. While you're at it, grab a 2e PHB and enjoy it the way it was meant to be played.
 

I liked a Valachan, particularly after they released an adventure for it in dungeon. It was a cool domain.

Serious question (and one that's largely unrelated to the rewrite/retcon/change debate) - what did you do with Valachan, in-game? Other than the main plot with Urik von Kharkov and the Cat of Felkovic (which was the plot of the dungeon module), it always seemed like a domain with very few points of interest. In the let's read thread I was really wracking my brains to think of anything to do with the place, outside telling that single story. I'd love to hear from anyone who grokked it in a way I didn't - if you really liked Valachan and ran a game there, what was the attraction, and what sort of game did you play?

To whit, I and Scottish by blood and I'm annoyed that the obvious Scotland domain is filled with nothing but goblyns and messed up ghost-dhampir. But that's my opinion.
Don't get me started. I'm Australian, and the only even vaguely Australian-influenced domain is an insultingly ignorant crayon scrawl of Australian indigenous culture in the Nightmare Lands, in which one of the major benevolent indigenous creator-beings (which is still revered in the real world) is turned into a minor co-darklord.
 

Awfully Cheerful Engine!

Visit Our Sponsor

Latest threads

Awfully Cheerful Engine!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top