D&D 5E Ravenloft= Meh

We have 7 pages of replies to essentially a 'I dont like X' statement? Wow.

Everyone likes particular settings for particular reasons. I dislike Greyhawk because for the longest time, nothing ever happened. Time was stationary in Greyhawk. New Empires were not formed, Iuz remained a threat all the time with no resolution.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Ironically Soth stopped being a Dark Lord because he was terrible as one. The Dark Powers found him boring because he eventully just stopped doing anything. He would just sit around looking a dream world in mirrors. As a result he became one of the few Dark Lords to escape the Demiplanes of Dread because the Dark Powers kicked him out.


I think you don't know anything about Strahd.

I know Tatianna is not really dead or is reborn or some rubish like that. It bored me back in the 90's and unlike most TSR setting I have never felt the urge to reread it.
 

Thank you for illustrating my point. The fact that the paladin can do these things on Oerth or Faerun is actually part of why Ravenloft is scary, if run as a horror game. Because Ravenloft plays by a different set of rules. And the rules-makers/enforcers hate paladins.
Then replace paladin with fighter. The fact is I won't be scarred by mundane horror threats in a system build to routinely punch cuthulhu in the face.

The horrors of the night don't scare when your last campaign had you fighting the things that give those horrors their nightmares
 


The main problem about horror in Pen&Paper is that the group always knows what the others are doing. If they were unsure whether the others are even still alive or not, it would probably be more scary.
 

I postulate that D&D is a poor fit for horror.

For horror you need to feel vulnerable and not in control. A D&D character is designed to be the opposite of that.

This doesn't mean Ravenloft can't be great fun. Only that it's futile to aim for horror.

The trappings of horror yes (mists, eerie sounds, misshapen villagers, thing go bump...)

Actual horror no.
 

Then replace paladin with fighter. The fact is I won't be scarred by mundane horror threats in a system build to routinely punch cuthulhu in the face.

The horrors of the night don't scare when your last campaign had you fighting the things that give those horrors their nightmares

The class does not matter. And neither do the monsters. You could run a horror game in D&D with only human commoners as monsters.* You are comparing two different things and saying what holds true for one is comparable for the other because they have superficial similarities. But they are not the same and the assumptions of the one do not carry over to the other.

But, all of that is merely tangential to the actual point of my original post, which was to provide solid advice on running horror in D&D in order to refute your absurd claim that D&D cannot do so. Since you never actually responded to that, and since the advice is solid enough to bear repeating, I will repost it:

[sblock=How to run horror in D&D]Not only can D&D do horror, I, in fact, inject at least a little horror into every game I run.

But, while the monsters are a tool for delivering horror, they absolutely are not the primary vehicle.

Instead, you need two things:

1: The Unknown. Don't tell them what's out there, show them. Some of it. Let their imaginations fill in the details. Absolutely, never, ever, call a monster by a categorical name. The minute you do that, you have put a quantitative value on it, which is the Enemy of Unknown.

2: Tension. Put the PCs in a bad situation and keep making it worse. Don't let up. If the players care about success, they will feel the tension. Of course, in order for this to work, you have to be fair--and make sure your players know it. Actively root for their success. But keep the tension building.

And truthfully, if you do both of those things, you don't even really need that much player buy-in. As long as you've established trust between DM and players, you still have everything you need. If, for example, a player cracks a joke (whether in- or out-of character) that resets the tension level, all you have to do is tighten the screw to compensate. Which you were going to do, anyway. Let them joke. Laugh with them, even. It won't improve their situation any.[/sblock]

* And, in fact, I think I will--a Night of the Living Dead scenario, but the commoners only act like zombies and the PCs need to figure out why or they will just. Keep. Coming.
 

I postulate that D&D is a poor fit for horror.

For horror you need to feel vulnerable and not in control. A D&D character is designed to be the opposite of that.

This doesn't mean Ravenloft can't be great fun. Only that it's futile to aim for horror.

The trappings of horror yes (mists, eerie sounds, misshapen villagers, thing go bump...)

Actual horror no.

I disagree. It can be done. I've done it. Horror is more about fear and revulsion than about power.
 

I know Tatianna is not really dead or is reborn or some rubish like that. It bored me back in the 90's and unlike most TSR setting I have never felt the urge to reread it.

She was reincarnated. But why does that matter? And why is that bad writing or make Strahd a weaker character?
 


Remove ads

Top