Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft Review Round-Up – What the Critics Say

Now that you've had time to read my review of Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, and the book officially arrived in game stores on May 18, it's time to take a look at what other RPG reviewers thought of this guide to horror.

Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft: An In-Depth Review

The last few D&D books had a lot for DMs. Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft tops them all. Players will get a lot out of it, too, but VRGtR is a feast of useful, imagination-sparking material—and that's not entirely limited to those who like horror. The Demiplane of Dread known as Ravenloft is...

www.enworld.org

Terrifyingly Awesome...​

Games Radar not only ranked VRGtR one of the best D&D books ever, they also praise it for taking a fresh approach to the decades-old RPG. GR notes that the chapter on domains could have become repetitive quickly, but instead it's packed with creativity.

VRGtR transformed the reviewer at The Gamer from someone uninterested in horror into someone planning a horror masquerade adventure. While they praise VRGtR for its player options, they like the information for DMs even more. That ranges from the new mechanics that replace the old madness rules to advice for DMs on how to create compelling villains.

Bell of Lost Souls praises VRGtR for how it makes players think about their character's stories, not just in terms of backgrounds but also through the Gothic lineages, how they came about, and impacted the character. They also like all the tools DMs get plus an abundance of inspiration for games. They actually like the fact that Darklords don't have stats because if they do, players will always find a way to kill them. Overall, they deem VRGtR “indispensable” for DMs and as having great information for everyone, which makes it “a hearty recommendation.”

Polygon was more effusive calling it “the biggest, best D&D book of this generation” and that “it has the potential to supercharge the role-playing hobby like never before.” As you can tell from those two phrases, Polygon gushes over VRGtR praising everything from the new character options to safety tools to its overflowing creativity, and more. They compliment the book for being packed with useful information for players and DMs.

...And Scary Good​

Tribality broke down VRGtR chapter by chapter listing the content, and then summed up the book as being both an outstanding setting book and horror toolkit. They especially like that the various player options, such as Dark Gifts and lineages mean that death isn't necessarily the end of a character, but rather the start of a new plot.

Gaming Trend also praised VRGtR, especially the parts that discourage stigmatizing marginalized groups to create horror. They also considered the information on how to create your own Domain of Dream and Darklord inspiring. For example, it got them thinking about the role of space in creating horror, and how the mists allow a DM to drop players into a Domain for a one-shot if they don't want to run a full campaign. GT deemed VRGtR “excellent” and then pondered what other genres D&D could tackle next, like comedy adventures.

Strange Assembly loves the fact that VRGtR revives a classic D&D setting, and especially focuses on the Domains of Dread. They like the flavor of the Gothic lineages but not that some abilities are only once a day, preferring always-on abilities. Still, that's a small complaint when SA praises everything else, especially the short adventure, The House of Lament. VRGtR is considered an excellent value and worth checking out if you like scary D&D.

Geeks of Doom doesn't buck the trend of round-up. They really enjoyed the adventure inspiration and DM advice but especially appreciate the player options. agrees They really like the flexibility that's encouraged – and the new version of the loup-garou.

The Final Grade​

While none of these publications give out a letter grade, the superlatives VRGtR has earned makes it pretty easy to associate ratings to each review. Games Radar, The Gamer, Polygon, and Bell of Lost Souls are so effusive in their praise that they would obviously be A+. Gaming Trend, Tribality, Strange Assembly, and Geeks of Doom also praise VRGtR, though their language isn't quite as strong or they have a very minor critique. That would make their reviews at least an A. Adding in the A+ from my own review, and Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft grades this product by which all others will likely be judged in the future:

A+​

 

[Faolyn]

I think I've said that about a half dozen times now, and everyone who responds eventually gets around to this same strawman. What's with that? I know you saw me describe this aspect at least twice in parts you participated in - so why are you claiming everyone has a backstory when of course not everyone has a backstory in adventures you buy!

Because an alignment is completely unnecessary for an NPC you didn't expect the PCs to talk to. It's also unnecessary for an NPC that has a specific role in your adventure, like a Relentless Killer. Which should have at least enough of a backstory that you know why it's relentlessly killing people.

Heck, even if it's a completely random encounter, knowing that you rolled "bandits" is more useful than anything else.

You chose to dismiss my entire last post, so I'll copypaste the part that's important here:

The PCs meet a Chaotic Evil shopkeeper and ask to buy something. Quick! How does that shopkeeper react? Because "attack the PCs," "sell the PCs things that look useful but will explode (literally or metaphorically) later on," and "act totally normal, like any other shopkeeper, and then after work they go off and drown puppies and stalk that one bartender they lust after," are all Chaotic Evil things.

Or more seriously: The PCs meet a Chaotic Evil minion of a bad guy. How does the minion react? Because "attack the PCs," "Ally with the PCs to help overthrow its master, since it has no real loyalty to the master," "threaten the PCs with its master's wrath until they give it money," and "run away, since it has no real loyalty to its master, and therefore doesn't feel the need to risk its life on behalf of its master," are also Chaotic Evil things.

If this is some nameless NPC, then why bother giving it an alignment? It'll act according to its role in the story. Shopkeepers are gonna keep shop. If it turns out that the PCs like the nameless NPC enough that you feel the need to bring it back in a later adventure, then you have some time to think of a backstory for it.

If it's a named NPC, then you probably already know at least a sentence's worth of detail about it ("Minion Bob hates his boss") and so an alignment is superfluous, because that sentence will likely be enough to get you through the encounter. The PCs try to threaten or bribe Minion Bob into betraying his boss. Welp, he hates his boss, so sure, he's game!

And if you do give it an alignment, then as I showed above, that alignment doesn't actually dictate anything about how the NPC is going to act. I listed three ways a CE shopkeeper can react and four ways a CE minion can react, and that's just what I wrote down right then and there. I can think of lots of other ways. So I repeat: The fact that a minor NPC has a particular alignment has no singular meaning as to its actions. You'd be better off coming up with a bunch of Random NPC Interaction charts; at least something like that would actually tell you what the NPC would do. (<rolls dice> "OK, 13 on the die, so the Shopkeeper Table says... she decides to shortchange the PCs.")

Also, maybe if everyone is giving you the same answer, that means it's time for you to reevaluate your question.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

I feel the fact that other RPGs that don't use alignment as a categorization schema for their NPCs by and large don't seem to have the problems alignment's proponents are claiming in this thread speaks for itself.

 

[Mistwell]

Because an alignment is completely unnecessary for an NPC you didn't expect the PCs to talk to.

I've told you I've used it countless times for 40 years, and know many others who also do that.

Are you calling me a liar, or just a bad DM here, or what?

It's one thing for you to say YOU don't find it useful in that context. It's another for you to declare it's objectively useless.

If this is some nameless NPC, then why bother giving it an alignment? It'll act according to its role in the story. Shopkeepers are gonna keep shop. If it turns out that the PCs like the nameless NPC enough that you feel the need to bring it back in a later adventure, then you have some time to think of a backstory for it.

Right.

OK so we're not communicating here. This is the part i've repeated over and over. You've quoted it several times now. But every time, you default it back to something it's not.

There is no "if it turns out that the PCs like the nameless NPC enough..." part of this. How are we not past that point already, given that's exactly where I started this discussion?

There is no time to think about the story. That's what "on the fly" means. That's what "unexpected" meant. The NPC became important suddenly. Not "they came back to the NPC" the NPC already suddenly became important. Which happens A LOT in games I DM because I don't railroad and my players do unexpected things.

It's like you have not even groked the basic premise of what I've been saying. Or, given how you've mis-stated it three times now, like you don't want to engage about it.

Also, maybe if everyone is giving you the same answer, that means it's time for you to reevaluate your question.

Just the three same guys who always say they don't like alignment. Take a look at my posts about alignment in this thread. DOZENS of "likes" on those posts.

Again nobody has ever told you that you have to like or use alignment. It's purely you three guys, over and over again, telling everyone alignment is useless so it should be removed, and routinely ignoring or diverting from any comment from people who say they find it's useful.

I'd love for you to explain how those two characters being listed in an NPC stat block makes your game worse?

 

[PsyzhranV2]

Just the three same guys who always say they don't like alignment. Take a look at my posts about alignment in this thread. DOZENS of "likes" on those posts.

Maybe go take a look at TTRPG discussions on other forums and social media platforms, or even in the TTRPGs General subforum here on ENWorld.

 

[Mistwell]

Maybe go take a look at TTRPG discussions on other forums and social media platforms, or even in the TTRPGs General subforum here on ENWorld.

I am not looking to find people to disagree with. I was not saying "My view is right because it's popular" I was saying "I don't think people are confused by what I am saying as a meaningful number of people seem to like it."

Are you confused by what I am saying? He was suggesting I needed to change how I was saying it because three people kept strawmanning it as if they didn't get what I was trying to say. Are you saying you also didn't get it? I am betting you did.

 

[Faolyn]

Are you calling me a liar, or just a bad DM here, or what?

It's one thing for you to say YOU don't find it useful in that context. It's another for you to declare it's objectively useless.

I'm saying alignment useless because it doesn't perform the job you claim it does.

Right.

OK so we're not communicating here. This is the part i've repeated over and over. You've quoted it several times now. But every time, you default it back to something it's not.

There is no "if it turns out that the PCs like the nameless NPC enough..." part of this. How are we not past that point already, given that's exactly where I started this discussion?

Because by that point, the NPC is no longer nameless and you've likely figured out its background and/or personality. And you yourself said that "[questions about motivation] won't be answered by ANY stat block. Again (and I cannot stress this enough), I am not talking about important NPCs with full back stories."

So neither am I. You barely even need a few sentences of backstory before it becomes more useful than a written alignment, let alone a full developed one.

Also, you keep claiming that alignment is like weapons or AC or hp, but have yet to show how, when those three things have strict definitions and rules as to how they're used and nobody in nearly 50 years can even agree on what any one alignment actually means.

There is no time to think about the story.

If you've been playing D&D for forty years, you're more than capable of telling your players to hold on for a moment while you figure things out.

That's what "on the fly" means. That's what "unexpected" meant. It's like you have not even groked the basic premise of what I've been saying.

I do. You've failed to understand what I've said:

If it's a nameless NPC, then you don't need it to have an alignment. You need it to fill a function. If you make this nameless NPC respond to the PCs, then you will cause it to naturally develop a personality of its own based on the way the PCs are acting. Thus, you don't need an alignment, because you're developing its personality and that's more important than its alignment.

Knowing that a nameless NPC is chaotic evil won't tell you anything about how it reacts to the PCs and won't provide you with any useful information "on the fly." Both a LG shopkeeper and a CE shopkeeper can be meek and obsequious or brash and demanding.

But since you keep insisting alignment is somehow important for on-the-fly GMing, what information does alignment actually tell you about the NPC? Seriously. Try actually answering the question instead of whining that nobody is listening to you or we're being mean to you: a shopkeeper is chaotic evil. The PCs enter his shop. Now what?

Or are you going to say I'm a jerk and not answer me again?

Just the three same guys who always say they don't like alignment. Take a look at my posts about alignment in this thread. DOZENS of "likes" on those posts.

I wasn't aware we were on reddit or facebook, where likes counted for anything. Good to know. Enjoy your internet points.

Again nobody has ever told you that you have to like or use alignment. It's purely you three guys, over and over again, telling everyone alignment is useless so it should be remove, and routinely ignoring or diverting from any comment from people who say they find it's useful.

Considering that WotC has decided to get rid of alignment, and most other gaming systems never had alignment to begin with, it's more than "purely us three guys" talking about it. I'd wager it's the majority of the industry and fanbase realizing it's alignment is unnecessary and just a handful of people complaining that they've been using alignment for ever and ever so how dare they change it.

 

[Mecheon]

I'd love for you to explain how those two characters being listed in an NPC stat block makes your game worse?

I think its moreso they don't do enough on their own to justify all of the other problems with alignment.

If alignment was just "Two letters on a stat block", then we wouldn't had the past nearly 3 decades of arguments about it. But its a lot more than that, and that's where the problem lies.

 

[JEB]

I also found alignment useful, in much the same way @Mistwell describes - as a shorthand when I wanted an easy button for personalities. I never considered it a straitjacket - I considered it a tool, and also descriptive rather than prescriptive.

I also think its elimination won't solve the problems folks think it will solve - the majority of monsters will still be written in a bio-essentialist way, players will still mindlessly kill humanoid foes like they're enemies in a video game, etc. Even alignment debates online are probably here to stay, thanks to the concept becoming memetic. But one thing its removal does do is take a tool away from folks who did like it... and also likely makes its defenders feel less welcome in the community.

That all said, this debate is much bigger than a thread about Ravenloft, and frankly doesn't seem to be going anywhere... so perhaps you all could take this to another thread and let folks get back to talking about the new book? Unless you plan to steer it back specifically to Ravenloft-related applications...

 

[Paul Farquhar]

players will still mindlessly kill humanoid foes like they're enemies in a video game,

Which is fine. Enemies don't need an "always CE " flag to tell players they are there to be killed. All those other TTRPGS that aren't D&D work that way, and have done since the late 70s, before video games where much of a thing. WEG Star Wars D6 doesn't have alignment, but that doesn't stop players killing Imperials "like enemies in a video game". And that just reflects the movies. Luke Skywalker is supposed to have killed over 300,000 people on the Death Star. That's humans, not always-CE greenskins, or don't-matter constructs. Heroes don't need to worry about it unless they want to be the dark-and-brooding archetype.

 

[FrozenNorth]

It's not completely unnecessary as it still adds something on the lawful-chaotic scale, like I mentioned earlier. Does he adhere to an external or internal code of conduct? Does he appreciate destruction for its own sake? Those kinds of questions have a suggested answer by alignment which isn't well suggested by the description you gave.

I think this is why I find alignment so mystifying. To me, it is pretty obvious that some Relentless Killers have a twisted code they follow, others appreciate destruction for its own sake, and a million things in between.

Saying Relentless killers are NE (but you can change this if you like) is 100% more bizarre than the implication that each Relentless Killer is different (though they use the same mechanics).