Is WotC announcing a new setting at GenCon?

[JohnSnow]

Other than possibly setting, the difference between Ravenloft and White Wolf's stuff is all about tone. There's a vast difference in tone between playing a character who's suffering the curse of lycanthropy or has become a reluctant vampire and playing WoD style vampires of various feuding houses.

The first is gothic horror. The second is gothic superheroes. Both could be described as "getting the chance to play a werewolf or a vampire." But frankly, I think WotC is smart enough to pitch Raveloft properly as what it has always been: gothic horror.

Wishful thinking maybe, but I think they know what their fans want. Ravenloft appeals primarily to fans of Dark Shadows and Dracula, not Kindred: the Embraced and Twilight.

 

[Shawn_Kehoe]

D&D is the game wherein you fight vampires, werewolves, mummies. Also dragons. Typically in dungeons. Also hundreds of other beasties culled from fantasy, myth, and fever-dreams in a fantasy hodge-podge that revolves around invading their homes and taking their money.

Ravenloft was the game where you fought The Vampire, The Wolf-Men, The Mummy. And their numerous minions. And you fought them indirectly, because they ruled over the land, they defined the setting. They made it difficult to free the land from oppressive horror. You did so using your D&D character, though brought through a dark lens, and dropped into a fearful world. The setting added rules to help fit the mood of constant, irresistible evil around every corner.

To me, those are very distinct activities, and a Ravenloft product that lets be be Strahd instead of letting me overthrow Strahd doesn't appeal to me much. And I can't understand why they'd want to call this Ravenloft, when it's not really the same experience.

TSR did release a box set that allowed for PC undead, although from what I've read it was constrained greatly by the AD&D 2E framework. Furthermore, turning the hero against himself is a classic horror trope, which was represented in Ravenloft by Dark Powers checks. At the end of the day, this is going to come down to player / DM dynamics and execution, as it usually does.

 

[Mouseferatu]

TSR did release a box set that allowed for PC undead, although from what I've read it was constrained greatly by the AD&D 2E framework. Furthermore, turning the hero against himself is a classic horror trope, which was represented in Ravenloft by Dark Powers checks. At the end of the day, this is going to come down to player / DM dynamics and execution, as it usually does.

If the Ravenloft game/setting includes rules for such things, that's absolutely fine. The setting's supported that before, a lot of people want them, and it can be done well.

Only if it's heavily focused on such options, assuming them as a default and excluding (or neglecting) the more traditional "heroes vs. evil" gothic tropes, then it might not be the Ravenloft we remember. But it's all a question of emphasis, not whether or not the options exist at all.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Only if it's heavily focused on such options, assuming them as a default and excluding (or neglecting) the more traditional "heroes vs. evil" gothic tropes, then it might not be the Ravenloft we remember. But it's all a question of emphasis, not whether or not the options exist at all.

Yeah, it's just one blurb, so I'm not trying to cast it as definitive, and if the idea is to "struggle against the monstrous self," that would probably be a cool way to represent the oppressive evil of the Dark Powers, and combine it with the gothic horror critters that Ravenloft makes significant. Could be a lot of fun.

But if the game winds up basically being "You get to play a vampire now!", I'm a little more hostile to that idea, sold as Ravenloft. And the blurb sounds more like that then it does the other. But it is just a blurb, so there's not much to read into it.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yeah, it's just one blurb, so I'm not trying to cast it as definitive, and if the idea is to "struggle against the monstrous self," that would probably be a cool way to represent the oppressive evil of the Dark Powers, and combine it with the gothic horror critters that Ravenloft makes significant. Could be a lot of fun.

But if the game winds up basically being "You get to play a vampire now!", I'm a little more hostile to that idea, sold as Ravenloft. And the blurb sounds more like that then it does the other. But it is just a blurb, so there's not much to read into it.

I can definitely see where you're coming from. OTOH suppose you're WotC and you decide you DO want to do a sort of 'Vampire Superheroes' kind of supplement. What WOULD you call it? There's one name that is classically associated with the whole concept of vampires and werewolves and such, and that name is 'Ravenloft'. They might well feel exactly the way you do about it in terms of it not being really the same thing as the original, but they'd still probably have to end up using the existing iconic name for it. In the end marketing trumps pretty much anything else when you're selling retail products...

It will certainly be interesting to see what they end up with. Personally I was never a huge Ravenloft fan anyway. I did run the original module and it was a fun adventure, but on the whole D&D never did gothic horror that well and the Domains and all that went with it always felt kind of tacked onto the system. A module where you fight a vampire is one thing, but if you're going to make an entire campaign about that stuff it seems like there are a LOT better game systems out there to use than D&D, even with some added mechanics.

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

Well I want Spelljammer!!

I need to sees me an Elven Man-O-War on a 4th ed cover or I'll be firing scrote-nibbling giant bombadier space hamsters into yon WOTC HQ!

 

[Scribble]

Well I want Spelljammer!!

I need to sees me an Elven Man-O-War on a 4th ed cover or I'll be firing scrote-nibbling giant bombadier space hamsters into yon WOTC HQ!

As I mentioned in some thread or other, I wouldn't mind the Spelljammer aspects already utilized in the game "played up" a bit, I wouldn't really be a fan of re-adding the whole setting to the game.

I think you can really achieve any of the themes you had in SJ without adding like the space aspect and stuff back.

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

Scribble
it was the "space stuff" that actually made it so cool

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

As I mentioned in some thread or other, I wouldn't mind the Spelljammer aspects already utilized in the game "played up" a bit, I wouldn't really be a fan of re-adding the whole setting to the game.

I think you can really achieve any of the themes you had in SJ without adding like the space aspect and stuff back.

It seems to me that the easiest way for it to work would be just to declare "outer space" to BE the Astral Sea. Fly far enough up into the air and what do you know, you're in the "Star Sea" (Astral Plane, this always worked in my setting). The Crystal Spheres could be incorporated or not as desired really. I never really could figure out exactly what design goal they fulfilled within SJ to start with, but they could easily be added in some supplement. Said supplement could elaborate on the existing 4e rules for "spelljammers" as well and add in some of the iconic SJ stuff like the Spelljammer location, etc. I guess you could call that a setting, or not, as you wish.

 

[Scribble]

Scribble
it was the "space stuff" that actually made it so cool

Eh- for me it was more the theme of being explorers/traders aboard flying ships then the actual "space" part.

I didn't really dislike the idea of the crystal spheres, but they always felt kind of tacked on to me.

I think you can recreate a lot of it using stuff like the astral sea, and domains, and the elemental chaos and such.

In my opinion it would be better served as something you can expand on your own setting with, rather then another place to add on.

It would be nice if they elaborated on that though.