Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Faolyn" data-source="post: 8277273" data-attributes="member: 6915329">No matter what they did, they would have pissed someone off. If they had just continued with the lore from 2e/3x, it would piss off people, like me, who don't want to pay for stuff we already have. And it would piss off the people who feel targeted or insulted by the problematic parts. If they had kept it as-is but just removed the problematic parts, it would have pissed off the people who didn't see those parts as problematic. If they had created a "Van Picten's Guide to Shadowcroft," it would have pissed off the people who wanted actual Ravenloft, not a knockoff. And it would have pissed off the MtG players who be unhappy they did a knockoff and not Innestrad. So... are you saying it's OK to piss those people off as long as you're not being pissed off? Do you honestly think that WotC wants to get rid of paying customers? Seriously? First off, if it does have "unsubtle" homages (not that original Ravenloft had subtle homages) to more modern films and books... so what? Why not have these sort of references in the books? Ravenloft had always had them, just buried in the other materials instead of the main book (which is why they had doppleganger plants in the MC that appeared after omens like meteors). Secondly... you know what, just tell me: what is your ideal new Ravenloft book? Then explain why everyone should buy that instead of what's coming out.</blockquote>