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

​

 

[Bedrockgames]

Anyway. This is so off topic now, it’s in the long grass. I’m out. Sleep well.

Same here

 

[Reynard]

Maybe we can redirect the conversation and lower the temperature before we end up getting this thread locked. This isn't really the place, I don't think.

What I find most interesting (potentially) about the broad number of domains is the idea that we might get rules to help support the various sub-genres of horror those domains represent. I think even small tweaks akin to the 3E planar tendencies might be enough. For example, what if body horror domain causes PCs to suffer disadvantage on Con saves, or the zombie apocalypse domain gives special advantage to hordes surrounding PCs.

 

[Charlaquin]

I don't know. I think instead of always taking a negative "where is the problematic" approach, there are way more ways to look at things.

Of course there are more ways to look at things. critical analysis implies critique. It is far from the only mode of analysis, but it is a useful one.

Sometimes these things are not problematic even though a negative reading could frame them as such,

It’s not a matter of framing, it’s a matter of analyzing. You analyze works under many different lenses. A critical lens is one that seeks to identify problems within a work.

sometimes the intent really matters and totally changes the message (and the message is really what is important, not what you choose to see because you've been trained to always focus on the negative).

Intent does matter, but it is not the only thing that matters, and it generally matters far less than outcome. As well, any given work contains many messages, not all of them intended. There is value in looking critically at messages that were not necessarily intended.

If these threads are any indication of the value of critical analysis, and I am not saying they are, god help us. Because it really just looks like people have lost the ability to have fun, and don't give creators much benefit of the doubt.

They aren’t. And again, critique and charity are not mutually exclusive. One can identify issues with a work AND give the creator the benefit of the doubt that the issues were not placed intentionally. And no, no one has lost the ability to have fun. They just find different things fun than you do.

 

[Retreater]

What tombs are there in Storm King's Thunder? Dragon Heist has no tombs at all that I can think of. Dungeon of the Mad Mage isn't a tomb. Saltmarsh adventures don't feature tombs, although they have a few underground lairs.

I'd say that "plunder a tomb" isn't really a feature of any of the WotC AP's.

Okay. So here are the tombs to be looted in the official adventures - just from a quick skim, where they are actually called out as burial areas by name.
Baldur's Gate: Descent into Avernus - Crypt of the Hellriders, Uldrak's Grave, High Hall Catacombs, Grand Cemetery
Tomb of Annihilation - Tomb of the Nine Gods
Out of the Abyss - no tombs by name
Hoard of the Dragon Queen - no tombs by name
Storm Kings Thunder - (took a little digging, but because I ran it I remembered) Morgur's Mound, Deadstone Cleft, Stone Stand, Flint Rock (could be more)
Princes of the Apocalypse - Tomb of Moving Stones
Dungeon of the Mad Mage - no tombs by name
Rime of the Frost Maiden - Necropolis of Ythryn
Ghosts of Saltmarsh - no tombs by name
Curse of Strahd - Castle Ravenloft catacombs, Amber Temple
Tales from the Yawning Portal - Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, Tomb of Horrors

Expand that out to sections of dungeons with burial sections, places not explicitly labelled as tombs, and you get many more.
And then look at lost temples, shrines, ruined cities of lost empires, etc., and I think nearly every adventure features these types of locations.

 

[Faolyn]

And why would that bother someone that doesn't have any nostalgia for the property in the first place? It's just an interesting factoid. "Wait, in the comics The Scarlet Witch was Magneto's kid? Crazy!" At most it drives the individual to explore further.

Because there's always going to people who want to know more than what's in the book. Because it's likely that that person will end up talking to someone who mentions something in an earlier version that doesn't exist in the newest one. Because that person might end up gaming with people who prefer old-school RL. Because the individual was, as you say, driven to explore further.

 

[Reynard]

Because there's always going to people who want to know more than what's in the book. Because it's likely that that person will end up talking to someone who mentions something in an earlier version that doesn't exist in the newest one. Because that person might end up gaming with people who prefer old-school RL. Because the individual was, as you say, driven to explore further.

None of that explains why it would be a problem.

 

[TwoSix]

Because there's always going to people who want to know more than what's in the book. Because it's likely that that person will end up talking to someone who mentions something in an earlier version that doesn't exist in the newest one. Because that person might end up gaming with people who prefer old-school RL. Because the individual was, as you say, driven to explore further.

And then they'll discover the material is a reboot/retcon, not a direct continuation. This will be familiar state of affairs to anyone who has consumed any serialized media ever in the past 20-30 years or so.

 

[Mecheon]

The perfect being the enemy of the good is what will kill future Greyhawk, Dragonlance and Dark Sun releases. Adapt or be consigned to the dustbin as WotC releases yet another MTG setting...

I mean, frankly, the deaths are going to be Greyhawk not having enough to make it stand out (How many "What actually is Greyhawk's draw" threads have we been through at this point?), Dragonlance's absolute derth of issues (Just saying, I still consider a Greyhawk revival more likely than Dragonlance simply because one doesn't have a very recent lawsuit and doesn't make me go into a tyrade about alignment), and Dark Sun...

well, I still have hope for ol' Dark Sun

But, I do not get this argument on Ravenloft given Ravenloft's whole thing since day 1 has been "Things can and do change based on the capracious will of the Dark Powers for whatever reason they want". Even when the idea of it being a landmass was introduced, the reason given was "The Dark Powers shoved all of these things together for whatever reason". Maintaing adherance to previously created things, some of which REALLY did not work, being argued in a place where we know Dark Powers scour other universe and times looking for neat stuff to grab and add to their personal Sims collection just seems a losing battle

Ravenloft's lore is all about the setting adapting and throwing newer more terrible horrors at people. It, frankly, was the worst setting to ever try to introduce a metaplot to

 

[Hussar]

No, that’s a corkscrewing of my words. You don’t claim someone’s future husband sexually assaulted them when they first met when they kissed. That’s the recipients decision not yours. Kissing a person without their express permission might be sexual assault. Only they decide if it is or not.

Yet again more hyperbole.

Sorry, but, kissing a person without permission is sexual assault. Full stop. Someone might decide to let it slide or not press charges, but, that doesn't change the fact that kissing someone without permission is sexual assault.

-----

See, the biggest problem with these kinds of discussions is that people act like any criticism of a work means that the work is now garbage and anyone who likes it must be garbage too. Nothing could be further from the truth. I LIKE the Brendan Fraser Mummy movies. They're fun. They're entertaining. They're a great way to kill a couple of hours on a Saturday afternoon. I would certainly watch them again. And have watched them all multiple times.

But, that in no way makes them above critique. Just because I like something doesn't mean that I get to pretend that it is now above all reproach. Far from it. It is entirely possible to recognize the failings in something and still really enjoy it. Heck, look at the Lord of the Rings movies. The fact that every single protagonist is white, and the only white antagonists that we see on screen are the leaders of characters that are played by non-white actors. This is problematic. Does that mean that the LotR movies are racist or that Peter Jackson is a closet KKK member? Of course not. That would be ridiculous. But, at the same time, we can recognize that yes, the works are a product of their time and going forward, maybe we can try to do better.

The same goes for WotC going forward and bringing these settings into the now. Changing the setting so that your character will be a local seeking to improve the lot of the locals rather than a foreign invader bent on plundering tombs avoids the rather uncomfortable tropes of the original setting. Why is that a bad thing? If you want to play a tomb plunderer, go right ahead. No one is stopping you. The only difference now is that that isn't the baseline assumption. Again, why is that a bad thing?

 

[Faolyn]

And then they'll discover the material is a reboot/retcon, not a direct continuation. This will be familiar state of affairs to anyone who has consumed any serialized media ever in the past 20-30 years or so.

...That was the entire point of my initial post on this.