D&D 5E Nananananananaaaa BATMAN! (about vampires in D&D and in general, Ravenloft/Curse of Strahd etc.)

[flametitan]

I get the feeling they're not allowed to reference the DMsGuild. I know they're not allowed to give a proper review, critique, or endorsement of homebrew without prior solicitation from wotc, so I wouldn't be surprised if that extended to older materials.

 

[PMárk]

Sorry I don't understand that. Who do you mean by "they're not allowed"? As far as I'm aware CoS was the very first adventure that was done in-house, no?

 

[flametitan]

Sorry I don't understand that. Who do you mean by "they're not allowed"? As far as I'm aware CoS was the very first adventure that was done in-house, no?

I mean, there may be a memo by wotc that any official book, in house or not, is not to endorse materials not made for the 5e product line, which would extend to older edition materials. It may be done to keep the focus of their marketing to the 5e books, rather than having the DMsGuild stuff detract from it.

 

[PMárk]

Ah, okay, thanks! I think it is fits into the line of decisions what makes sense from a purely business standpoint but controversial at best from a fan standpoint.

People always quick to defend WotC's recent policy on not making CGs with pointing to the older material as "Why do stuff that is already done? It's out there." Bu I think this is a kind of 22's catch, because if you aren't an existing fan, you probably won't know about the older material. If they're writing CoS, for example, or a Planescape adventure as the older material isn't existing, don't mentioning it in the adventure, changing the settings in the adventures and don't even pointing toward DMs'G, then how a new fan supposed to came into contact with the existing material?

I think it is a passive way to slowly withering away the settings and making room for their future vision of the D&D multiverse, which is FR, or more accurately Sword Coast and everything is just a minor, complementary thing.

That means bye-bye RL, or Dark Sun, or Eberron, or DL, etc.

Now I understand how that's entirely inconsequential to someone who didn't care about those settings, or to a newcomer, to whom this version will be the default. That doesn't mean I have to like it, or applauding they're doing this.

On the plus side, as i said in the other thread, if they manage to achieve the whole transmedia thing, and following this path, that could mean I'm losing interest in D&D, but if that brings in more new people, that means more potential people who might later switch to other companies products, which companies want to do a rpg primarily and do fully supported settings.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

First thing I am just going to say. How does Curse of Strahd reject the Ravenloft setting. Second what stuff was really changed. Also whats the difference between the 4e version of the setting and the other version.

On the Hickmans disliking the setting. They don't have a problem with the setting, what they had a issue with was the Ravenloft setting writers stealing Lord Soth without their permission. It's what led to Lord Soth being killed off out of anger at that.

Ah, okay, thanks! I think it is fits into the line of decisions what makes sense from a purely business standpoint but controversial at best from a fan standpoint.

People always quick to defend WotC's recent policy on not making CGs with pointing to the older material as "Why do stuff that is already done? It's out there." Bu I think this is a kind of 22's catch, because if you aren't an existing fan, you probably won't know about the older material. If they're writing CoS, for example, or a Planescape adventure as the older material isn't existing, don't mentioning it in the adventure, changing the settings in the adventures and don't even pointing toward DMs'G, then how a new fan supposed to came into contact with the existing material?

I think it is a passive way to slowly withering away the settings and making room for their future vision of the D&D multiverse, which is FR, or more accurately Sword Coast and everything is just a minor, complementary thing.

That means bye-bye RL, or Dark Sun, or Eberron, or DL, etc.

Now I understand how that's entirely inconsequential to someone who didn't care about those settings, or to a newcomer, to whom this version will be the default. That doesn't mean I have to like it, or applauding they're doing this.

On the plus side, as i said in the other thread, if they manage to achieve the whole transmedia thing, and following this path, that could mean I'm losing interest in D&D, but if that brings in more new people, that means more potential people who might later switch to other companies products, which companies want to do a rpg primarily and do fully supported settings.

They have been mentioning Dark Sun, Eberron and Greyhawk quite a bit and had a Ravenloft book. I think you are being overly pessimistic. 5e is still young as well.

 

[PMárk]

We'll see. believe me, I would be the happiest to be proven wrong and we'll indeed get more support for the settings. As for your questions (assuming you intended to them to be questions) see upthread and the VGtM topic.

To change he discussion to a more positive route, what was the most memorable vampire encounter or npc, or pc in your games people, either in Ravenloft/CoS, or anything else?

 

[MonsterEnvy]

We'll see. believe me, I would be the happiest to be proven wrong and we'll indeed get more support for the settings. As for your questions (assuming you intended to them to be questions) see upthread and the VGtM topic.

To change he discussion to a more positive route, what was the most memorable vampire encounter or npc, or pc in your games people, either in Ravenloft/CoS, or anything else?

No I don't see answers to my questions earlier in the thread. There were no specific answers just you stating that it rejected it and that 4e was diffrent. I would like details, Why and how did Curse of Strahd reject the setting, what changes are there that makes them incompatable? And how is the setting diffrent from the 4e and now the 5e version.


As for memorable vampire. Strahd of course because I ran Curse of Strahd.

 

[PMárk]

Ok, my questions:

- Did you read the other topic's related posts? We explicitely discussed how CoS differs from the 2e/3e version. It started somewhere around here: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...ge-for-Volo-s-Guide-to-Monsters-updated/page7
- Are you familiar with the earlier iterations of the setting?
- We just discussed, very politely should i say that for some it indeed isn't rejecting the old setting, for others like me it is. Both opinions are fine, there's no ultimate truth, just opinions and viewpoints. Do you feel it's too vague? If so, sorry, I couldn't really add anything further aside from what was already written here and in the other thread.


Would you like to detail further your experiences with Strahd? How'd you run him, what were the PCs reactions during the game and after it?

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Ok, my questions:

- Did you read the other topic's related posts? We explicitely discussed how CoS differs from the 2e/3e version. It started somewhere around here: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...ge-for-Volo-s-Guide-to-Monsters-updated/page7
- Are you familiar with the earlier iterations of the setting?
- We just discussed, very politely should i say that for some it indeed isn't rejecting the old setting, for others like me it is. Both opinions are fine, there's no ultimate truth, just opinions and viewpoints. Do you feel it's too vague? If so, sorry, I couldn't really add anything further aside from what was already written here and in the other thread.


Would you like to detail further your experiences with Strahd? How'd you run him, what were the PCs reactions during the game and after it?

I read the comment but I still don't get it it's too vague. I am not familiar with the Ravenloft setting so I don't know what changed. As a result I don't understand at all how it is rejecting it. I want to understand your view on it.

I ran Strahd how it recommends I run him in the book. Arrogant and prone to toying with the players. big on Hit and run and looking for a successor in the group.

Also I will say this Strahd really is not different at all from how he has been portrayed in the past and in Curse of Strahd. Don't get why people think he has been.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

I just like to handle characters, be them npcs or pcs as individuals.

In a fantasy setting with loads of different species of creature, there's plenty of room for both characters that are evil for nuanced individualistic reasons and characters that are supernatural embodiments of pure evil. It's not as though running vampires as unearthly things in human skin means we can't also run villains who are driven by human motives and struggling with human anxieties... we just run them as humans. Or dwarves, or goblins, or stone giants, or whatever. There are so many different options if you want a creature with a soul, and making vampires into just another one of them seems like a waste. In my mind, the realization that the being you're speaking with in truth is utterly alien and unsympathetic, that all its charm is just cold manipulation, that it is going to drink your lifeblood with no more emotion than you would drink a Diet Coke, all that contributes to the horror that the vampire presents. It's a glimpse into the abyss. And it doesn't really work if you know that in the same setting, just a few cities over, there's another vampire who is not acting and really is basically just a human with an unusual addiction. Cheapens the brand.

For example, I never got the whole paladin/inquisitor thing. Goody-good, holier-than-thou, or just plain religiously fanatic and unflexible characters are just irks me on a fundamental level.

Is this supposed to be an example of how you prefer characters with "different shades"? If you don't think intense religious faith can be a ripe field for many-shaded character development, I fear it may be you who is being inflexible here. I could throw a dart in a library of literary classics and be fairly assured to hit a book that explores the nature of piety and goodness in some manner or another. *throws dart* Oh look, it's Les Misérables. *throws dart* Yup, Moby Dick. *throws dart* All-Star Superm -- wait, how did that get there? ...eh, still works.