Ravenloft: The Horrors Within Announced, Release Date Scheduled for June 2026

[Stormonu]

Just also noticed something else - why is Soth wearing a crown in the cover picture? He was only a knight, never any sort of ruler to my knowledge.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Just also noticed something else - why is Soth wearing a crown in the cover picture? He was only a knight, never any sort of ruler to my knowledge.

It’s to distract people from his missing moustache.

 

[Alzrius]

Edit: Ariakus is here too, and looks quite different:
View attachment 432103

I'm mostly sure that's supposed to be him wearing a helmet.

 

[Stormonu]

I'm mostly sure that's supposed to be him wearing a helmet.

Well, moreso the color - he is the Red Dragonlord (Overlord), after all. The red helmet (and presumably red armor) seems a better fit than him being in the bluish/black armor.

 

[Remathilis]

Just also noticed something else - why is Soth wearing a crown in the cover picture? He was only a knight, never any sort of ruler to my knowledge.

He was the ruler of Sithicus...

 

[Dire Bare]

He was the ruler of Sithicus...

He was also the ruler of his domain in Krynn.

 

[Alzrius]

He was the ruler of Sithicus...

Not in 1987 he wasn't.

 

[Bae'zel]

I'm glad that the artwork that they've revealed so far is more... "dark"? Has a slight more "edge" than previous 5e releases? Hard to explain. I admit that I was a bit disappointed with the current Ravenloft offerings.

I also was not a fan of changing the Dread Lords into being somewhat more sympathetic or "grey". There's a REASON why their flaws drew them to these places. They were BAD people, not Disney half-villain retcons. Horror works better with clearly evil villains, tragic pasts or not, whether the monsters themselves or a human antagonist who makes things worse (eg the Ghost might not actually be bad, but the cruel priest / investigator sure is).

The Frankenstein stand-in, for example, doesn't work for me in a literary sense when gender-swapped the way that they did it. I think it could've been done far better, but stretching the mass-appeal PG-13 target WotC's going for. But that's the very problem with Horror; it HAS to stretch those boundaries. There are better ways to run kid-friendly Scooby Doo or Ghostbusters campaigns, right? Or maybe not.

Whatever.

 

[dave2008]

I'm glad that the artwork that they've revealed so far is more... "dark"? Has a slight more "edge" than previous 5e releases? Hard to explain. I admit that I was a bit disappointed with the current Ravenloft offerings.

I also was not a fan of changing the Dread Lords into being somewhat more sympathetic or "grey". There's a REASON why their flaws drew them to these places. They were BAD people, not Disney half-villain retcons. Horror works better with clearly evil villains, tragic pasts or not, whether the monsters themselves or a human antagonist who makes things worse (eg the Ghost might not actually be bad, but the cruel priest / investigator sure is).

The Frankenstein stand-in, for example, doesn't work for me in a literary sense when gender-swapped the way that they did it. I think it could've been done far better, but stretching the mass-appeal PG-13 target WotC's going for. But that's the very problem with Horror; it HAS to stretch those boundaries. There are better ways to run kid-friendly Scooby Doo or Ghostbusters campaigns, right? Or maybe not.

Whatever.

I don't know the specifics you are talking about regarding the Domains of Dread and there Dark Lords, but Frankenstein's monster is a tragic figure and the tale is morally complex. So it seems to me the "grey" you are talking about is right in line with that source material.

Also, hasn't Strahd had a bit of a "grey" history since the beginning? Wasn't that part of his appeal, that he wasn't simply a black and white villian? I could be wrong, Ravenloft, Domains of Dread, and horror are not my genre of D&D.

 

[dave2008]

EDIT: never mind - I was mistaken regarding the topic of discussion. I have no comment on the actual topic!