D&D 5E Ravenloft Previews of Dementlieu, Lamordia, and Har'Akir

WotC has been sprinkling previews of individual Ravenloft domains to various websites -- including Dementlieu, Lamordia, and Har'Akir. Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft is only a couple of weeks away, coming out on May 18th!

Dementlieu​

• Forbes takes a look Dementlieu, which has inspirations like Cinderella, The Masque of the Red Death, and Dark City. "Dementlieu is one of over 30 domains of dread detailed in the book. It’s a sharp contrast to Barovia’s dark forest and looming Gothic castle on a hill. Instead it’s covered in a glamorous sheen of fine clothes and fancy parties. Everyone is dying to be invited to the Grand Masquerade held by Duchess Saidra d’Honaire every week on her private island. And, in many cases, killed if they are discovered at the ball if they’re not supposed to be there."
• Syfy Wire looks at Lamordia, inspired by Frankenstein. "Many of the Domains of Dread are inspired by some horror tale or piece of creepy folklore, and Lamordia definitely has its roots in Frankenstein. But while the Domain is inspired by that classic horror story, its elements are then shot through the lens of D&D adventures and explored to dozens of horrific extremes. Mordenheim's land isn't just about resurrection gone awry, it's also the Domain for all different types of science gone wrong, bizarre experiments, body horror weirdness, and grim tales of society versus a frigid land. Just as there's more to Frankenstein than a scientist who abandoned his child, there's more to Lamordia than stitches and semi-dead flesh."
• Polygon has Har'Akir, an Egyptian-themed domain. "Why is there a Domain that is a desert that is riddled with these ancient, inexplicable haunted monuments and ruined pyramids? How does a Domain like that exist? How does it make sense? To an extent it doesn’t, and it’s going to be the players that come and explore that, who are some of the only people that realize that the entirety of the domain is, to an extent, gaslighting them."

Ankhetop, darklord of Har'Akir

​

 

[ART!]

It definitely feels like this book is pushing more positive buttons on the forums than pretty much any other book they have released in a while. That’s got to be a good thing. Hopefully it sells well and WOC is incentivized to release more settings.

I'd LOVE to see a similar book about different subgenres of fantasy. I don't know the history of D&D's setting to know what such a book might include, but I'm sure others here do.

 

[Stormonu]

Excuse me, we’re playing a fantasy game based on stories and lore a thousand years old or more and you want to imply that the appearance of “the mummy” as a bandage-garbed walking corpse is too old a trope to use?

 

[Bedrockgames]

Somewhat. WotC has been making some subtle changes for decades now. His look was the biggest change (losing the Bella Lugosi style tux for the fur-lined nobleman's coat) as well a some changes to his origin. Is he still D&D's Dracula? Yeah, he fills the niche and that will never change. What is different is no one could mistake Curse of Strahd cover for Dracula, while i6 Strahd has been.

The Art for Ravenloft and Castlevania II are very Similar - Retroist

Let’s take a look at a controversy that is over the 30 years old. Did Castlevania II rip off the art style of Ravenloft?

retroist.com

I definitely don't mind changes to the look. The Gary Oldman Dracula looked great in my opinion. My issue, and this is just my personal taste, with the WOTC treatment, is he just kind of looks like a gamer a costume to me. I like the drama of the classic dracula, of the Christopher Lee Dracula, of Oldman. The newer art seems even more in that direction. But again, I've never really been in-line with WOTC aesthetics for this stuff.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Excuse me, we’re playing a fantasy game based on stories and lore a thousand years old or more and you want to imply that the appearance of “the mummy” as a bandage-garbed walking corpse is too old a trope to use?

Old tropes are perfectly good and useable. The idea that what makes something good is evading, twisting, subverting or recasting old tropes, IMO, one of the things that bothers me about a lot of current media (don't mind have my expectations subverted, don't mind a new spin, but the old tropes still have plenty of uses, and they are old because they work). You can respect what came before and still add something new to it. But when your starting point is 'the old stuff was trash', to me it comes off as being fueled more by a chip on the shoulder than by enthusiasm (and there is plenty of room for "I don't like how this was done, so I am going to show people a new way", it is just the total rejection of anything old, dismissal of the history that bothers me)

 

[Bedrockgames]

Oh please. Even in the early 80's, you have a practically perennial Dracula movie. Never minding animated versions, and Count Chocula. I'd wager that Dracula is a fair bit more ingrained in pop culture that Karloff's The Mummy. Other than the fact that The Mummy had a mummy, I doubt most people could tell you anything about the plot of the Karloff movies.

My point was it was in the pop culture. So was the mummy (that is why it was such a big deal when they did the remake in the 90s; and why Anne Rice did a book about a Mummy). These monsters were not obscure to us. I don't understand what is so special about this particular moment that people would be totally cut off from pop culture older than 10 or 15 years. I don't think folks are giving people enough credit. We live in an age on youtube where people are constantly bringing up these old pop culture references.

Most people couldn't have told you anything substantive about the the Universal Dracula either in 1990, but they were still receptive to the trope because it thrived in pop culture and because there were still people who saw or remembered these movies. It wasn't that unusual for something like the Mummy to air on TV when I was a kid.

 

[Retreater]

If we're talking about looting tombs laden with traps and undead being problematic, doesn't that apply to pretty much the entirety of D&D? Raiding (and damaging) lost ruins of extinct or exotic cultures and finding treasure have been present in nearly every officially produced adventure I can think of, dating back to the origins of the hobby. I can't think of a single 5e campaign adventure (maybe Dragon Heist - which has you looting from your own city) that doesn't have this element.
So what would dungeons look like without this element? Or if that's not possible, what would D&D look like without dungeons? Just D?

 

[Reynard]

If we're talking about looting tombs laden with traps and undead being problematic, doesn't that apply to pretty much the entirety of D&D? Raiding (and damaging) lost ruins of extinct or exotic cultures and finding treasure have been present in nearly every officially produced adventure I can think of, dating back to the origins of the hobby. I can't think of a single 5e campaign adventure (maybe Dragon Heist - which has you looting from your own city) that doesn't have this element.
So what would dungeons look like without this element? Or if that's not possible, what would D&D look like without dungeons? Just D?

The thing is, (traditional D&D) dungeons aren't pristine archaeological sites, they are open ruins that have been occupied by successive generations of monsters, madmen and malevolent divinities. They are little pieces of Hell on (in) Earth, where most of the treasures the PCs find aren't stolen grave goods but the detritus left by hundreds of failed adventurers just like themselves.

 

[Remathilis]

If we're talking about looting tombs laden with traps and undead being problematic, doesn't that apply to pretty much the entirety of D&D? Raiding (and damaging) lost ruins of extinct or exotic cultures and finding treasure have been present in nearly every officially produced adventure I can think of, dating back to the origins of the hobby. I can't think of a single 5e campaign adventure (maybe Dragon Heist - which has you looting from your own city) that doesn't have this element.
So what would dungeons look like without this element? Or if that's not possible, what would D&D look like without dungeons? Just D?

Even in 2e, Har'akir was notorious for "mummy cursed" treasure and offending the Gods when looting pyramids. Part of the theme was a "don't touch" attitude towards grave robbing there. What they plan to do in 5e is a good question, but this domain already had the theme of "don't rob the dead" going...

 

[jgsugden]

The entire place is ONE Demiplane. The Demiplane of Dread. Each domain is located within that Demiplane, some as islands in the Sea of Sorrows or Nocturnal Sea, others part of the core continent with each domain bordered by the Mists. Locals can come and go between the domains, if allowed by the darklords, but lethal threats, dangers, and darklord whims make it difficult. The Vistani are the only ones who can navigate the Mists, mysteriously, even teleporting from one domain to another if they wanted.

Which is what I'm assuming they're going to stick by, because if not, then that's just plain stupid design to have them all as separate demiplanes with no form of ravel between them all.

It makes a lot of sense for them to move the domains onto the Shadowfell. I expect that they'll be interconnected to the Shadowfell closely.

That is what I did when the Shadowfell was revealed for 4E. The Shadowfell was a 'simplified' version of the Plane of Shadow, Ravenloft and other similar planes. For my campaign, the Shadowfell is a pervasive reflective plane and the Domains of Dread are mist shrouded 'cancers' that pocket it. The Shadowfell is the dark reflection of the Prime, and the mist shrouded Domains of Dread reflect something so horrific that the universe (well, a particular Goddess) contains their dark reflections for fear they'll endanger the entire Multiverse with their evil.

 

[TheSword]

And when that genre is based on unbelievably racist underpinnings? Should we just whitewash those again as well the way that was done in the 1980's? Recycle them unchanged, introduce them and acquaint the audience with themes that quite frankly, should make people cringe? Is that what you're suggesting? Or, should we keep the stuff that's cool and interesting and doesn't make people want to wash their eyes out with bleach after reading it and cut out the stuff that reads like white supremicist fanfic?

Do you not think this is somewhat hyperbolic?

Preservation of Egyptian Antiquities and Sites is part of a shared world heritage. The portrayal of tomb robbing as being a white colonial attitude is pretty unsophisticated. More antiquities were stolen from tombs by Eqyptian nationals than ever by British and French archeologists, and while no doubt a large number of items went into private collections a huge amount was also preserved for shared human knowledge and understanding.

Tomb robbing is also not limited to the days of Howard Carter. Sites have been recently at risk from Egyptian criminal organizations, and even everyday citizens. Citizens are building houses on precious sites and damaging ancient wonders that aren’t understood by those who are just looking for somewhere to live. The government couldn’t protect them. Who owns humanity’s history?

The Loss and Looting of Egyptian Antiquities

Even now the morality of Egyptology of the 19th and 20th is debated and as does Egyptology today. The museum in Cairo is described as the worlds worst museum displaying the worlds greatest treasures. Poor arrangement, antiquated displays, environmental issues, even water leaks into cases!

Protecting Tutankhamun - Victoria and Albert Museum

Can you expand on those ‘unbelievably racist underpinnings’ that make you want to ‘wash your eyes out with bleach’ and that reads like ‘white supremacist fan-fix’?... I ain’t seeing it.

Debate and things to learn sure. Let’s just keep things proportional.