D&D 5E Players think Strahd isn't actually so bad. (Spoilers)

Voi_D_ragon

Explorer
... the abbot is an angel so have him re-corporate at dawn the next day. Strahd knows this will happen because the abbots soul is bound to barovia. Have one more soulless be born in Krezk as the abbots rebirth consumes another innocent.

So I was prepping tonight's session (dinner at Ravenloft!) and was thinking about all the parties still in play in Barovia, so this thing about the Abbot made me think of what he would do when he reformed. At I realized: he would probably be pissed, because the party killed all of the mongrelfolk in the abbey. And then, thinking about Abbot's powers, I realized: he can make flesh golems. And if there's one thing he now has in abundance, it's body parts. I'm just not sure what he would do with this army of golems, since it's clear his original plan with Vasilka failed... maybe he could mount up an expedition to the Amber Temple, but I'm also not sure how he should feel towards the PCs... my first take is he'd attack them on sight, but he knows Strahd brought them here for a reason, so he wouldn't want to incur in his wrath; maybe he could help them in the first stages, and then turn on them when he believed he could pass their deaths off as accidents (I'm thinking his pride, which brings him to try to save Strahd, would also justify going against someone who might help him because he has to be the one).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

TheSword

Legend
I would have guilt be the overwhelming emotion suffered by a returned abbot. He knows how he was restored. Probably because it’s happened before.

Have them witness a soulless birth if they haven’t seen it already and time this with the ringing of the bells to signify the return. Maybe a shaft of light strikes the monastery.

The abbots guilt convinced him to approach the party and explain some of the evil of Strahd. Bring it home.

If you make him a continuing enemy of the party then you are negating their previous victory which I would avoid. However they should realize that killing the abbot doesn’t help in the long run. He is a pawn of Strahd as is everyone. The party might not realize this at this point but once they’ve met the vistani camp and the dusk elves and the hags a picture should start to form.
 

Voi_D_ragon

Explorer
I would have guilt be the overwhelming emotion suffered by a returned abbot. He knows how he was restored. Probably because it’s happened before.

Have them witness a soulless birth if they haven’t seen it already and time this with the ringing of the bells to signify the return. Maybe a shaft of light strikes the monastery.

The abbots guilt convinced him to approach the party and explain some of the evil of Strahd. Bring it home.

If you make him a continuing enemy of the party then you are negating their previous victory which I would avoid. However they should realize that killing the abbot doesn’t help in the long run. He is a pawn of Strahd as is everyone. The party might not realize this at this point but once they’ve met the vistani camp and the dusk elves and the hags a picture should start to form.

It was Strahd killed the Abbot in my campaign (in OP). He only ever helped the party (well there was that whole -I wanted some grimdark so the Abbot murdered Ireena and used her to make Vasillka prettier- but e did heal their wounds)
 

S'mon

Legend
I think you have a great Descent Into Darkness Evil-PCs campaign going. I'd definitely have Strahd look to make the PCs his minions if they seem amenable. If they don't get a reality check at some point then eventually it's

"And the band played on ...FOREVER!"

or

"...And the PCs realised, they had found their TWILIGHT ZONE."

And you end the campaign with the PCs as soulless vampire thralls of Strahd, ready for the next bunch of Heroic Adventurers to come along. I love this stuff. :D

But really, there ought to be a new female N/PC for Strahd to fixate on. Maybe the PCs will protect her better.
 

Voi_D_ragon

Explorer
(Realize this might be getting out of hand for a sinple advice thread, what with all the context and whatnot. Should I turn this into a Storytime?)


Alright, so last night we played the dinner at Ravenloft (which the players loved) and I have a couple new ideas running around in my head.
But let's start at the beginning. The players tie up the Vallakovichs in their house (locking Viktor in the shackle room after stuffing a Dream Pastry in his mouth to pacify him) and sleep through the night (an unfortunate accident occurred, but is not relvant to this post). My cleric took the magic mirror out of the house after casting Nondetection and buried it behind the manor (the Hags had asked them rather forcefully to use it to take out Van Richten).
After this, they toured the street for a little, seeing what I assume would be normal after a coup d'etat, spiced up by the fact that Lady Wachter is actually a cutist leader (so broken windows and doors, dead bodies, exctatic cultists copulating in the streets, and the town square filled by a crowd who brought forth "Vallakovich loyalists" for a group of shirtless fanatics with stars carved into their raw flesh to execute and toss into a pile at the side of the square.
The party recoils from this, ordering the murders to stop at once and announcing a city-wide trial come noon. They go to speak with lady Wachter, who is oversseing things gleefully. They invoke the deal they made upon planning the baron's overthrowal: they want to be appointed supreme Judges and Commanders of the Guard of Vallaki. Wachter agrees with no problem (shaking off a Suggestion casted by the Cleric) knowing full well her legitimacy stems from the capillary control derived of her cult and not the rule of law).
The party then brings the Baron and his wife onto the stage (Viktor wasn't properly contained and Misty Stepped out of his shackles during the night, fleeing to brood on his revenge), before a crowd of Vallakians chanting for their death. Through some very good roleplaying and rolls (including a nat 1 for the malleability of the collective villagers) the players manage to downgrade the death sentence of the Baron and all his "loyalists" to an exile: the loyalists due west (picked up by Van Richten and the Keepers of the Feather), the baron and his wife to Lake Zarovich on a rowless rowboat (picked up by the Mad Mage).
After this the party decided (as they had announced preciously) to go take up Strahd's dinner invitation. Dinner went well, with the Strahd's biggest fan in the party (the sorcerer) starting to doubt him somewhat, the cleric having his faith put in question and almost throwing it away (with that still being a distinct possibility, since Strahd told him to verify what he had said by giving him a scroll of Commune -and everything that implies), the barbarian clearly not trusting Strahd very much at all but being brushed off by the others since he is actually crazy and suffers from grave pseudo-PTSD, and the druid actually seriously considering joining Strahd, since he considers all the things they have done to be bad enough already that becoming his chief druid would just be another drop in the bucket.
The main thing that surprised me were the sorcerer's continued efforts to protect the innocent population of Barovia, both in Vallaki and as he bargained the conditions of his support to Strahd. So Strahd agreed to keep the innocents out of this, but that actually seems really out of character, not only for his tendency to use hostages (which will undoubtedly come up at some point) but for the fact that he revels in tormenting Barovians in his free time. So I came up with a way of rationalizing what is going to happen (that being Vallaki is going to absolutely degenerate into a tyranny, with lady Wachter and her close circle snorting fantasy coke all the livelong day as the inhabitants slave in newly established mines to get the fancy bling and in the fields, as peasants do. All this backed by the hags, who produce a constant stream of Dream Pastries to keep the population subdued. The Abbot might play a role in this, augmenting the city's reproductive capacities, since the hags can only work with souled children). The explanation Strahd would give for this is simple: all this suffering is not only not really happening to his people, but he is shouldering its burden, since the city would reserve the heavy jobs and menial labour to the soulless, and being the soulless a manifestation of his own will, he is the one paying the price for the wellbeing of Vallaki (obiously mistreating the soulless is still evil, but he doesn't think that at all and in fact will try to convince the party of the opposite).

Thoughts?
 

S'mon

Legend
So Strahd agreed to keep the innocents out of this, but that actually seems really out of character

Well he's a charming sociopath - he'll happily lie, and certainly sound convincing. He'll even believe himself - in the moment - that's what the best liars do. I very much like the "shouldering the burdens of rule" angle. And his enjoyment in tormenting the Barovians is more about toying with individuals, while making sure everyone is afraid of him and ultimately controlled by him. But he's not averse to them having high levels of comfort and safety by D&D standards - he's not Orcus. In fact plump well fed sheep are easier to fleece (or suck). :D
 

SnipetheLibro

Villager
"Strahd von Zarovich is a very complex individual, it’s easy to think that this BBEG is just an evil overlord, that is to say, the quintessential representation of evil. If it were like this, then Strahd would be predictable. But Strahd like a real person, comes in layers of history and moments of success and failure. He should never be portrayed as an always evil, always ruthless, always savage individual. Yes, he can be all that, but he is also many other things. "

 

Strand is a tyrant, a fallen angel, and he is rejecting all offered opportunities for his redemption, the true key for the end of the curse. He is too selfish to notice she will reject him for all damage he has caused, the monster he has become. If he really had loved her, he had tried to be the pure heart she would feel proud to be as partner.

But Strand can't be roleplayed like the evil guy from the children cartoons in Saturday morning. He is not the night king, Jeffrey Baratheon, Peter Baelys or Ramsay Bolton but more like a Tywin Lannister with fangs, superpowers and an obsession. Strand von Zarovich can't be only a Patrick Bateman(the main character of American Psycho) with fangs and superpowers, but it would be more interesting with some pieces of gray-zones and anti-villain, maybe as the symbol of the punishment for your sins. Strand is the perfect example to explain the reason I hate Nietzsche's Übermensch. The Übermesnch doesn't obey the "slaves' values" like mercy or solidarity, but good or bad is according only to his own interests. Strand is the kind of person who doesn't doubt to cut the tallest poppy that stands out above the rest.
 



Remove ads

Top