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+​

 

[Micah Sweet]

By having them unconnected, each domain can have it's own unique identity instead of having to squeeze everything into the Gothic horror genre. To me that's the opposite of bland.

I know that "weekend in hell" was the original conception of 2nd ed Ravenloft, despite the presence of a core. Even so, the work they did over the course of 2nd and especially the Kargatane's 3rd ed contributions really added an enormous amount to making it a campaign setting, and the amazing world-building really spoke to me (my favorite part of being a DM). Reversing that to go back to the old model (with a lot of details changed) feels like an attack against something I love, even though I know it really isn't.

 

[Older Beholder]

I know that "weekend in hell" was the original conception of 2nd ed Ravenloft, despite the presence of a core. Even so, the work they did over the course of 2nd and especially the Kargatane's 3rd ed contributions really added an enormous amount to making it a campaign setting, and the amazing world-building really spoke to me (my favorite part of being a DM). Reversing that to go back to the old model (with a lot of details changed) feels like an attack against something I love, even though I know it really isn't.

I can see how that might leave people disappointed. I remember appreciating that element when it was introduced (or built upon after the initial box set) I just thought bland was a bad description for things no longer all being the same.

I like the flexibility in being able to pick my favourite domains and stitch them together however I like, I think it makes sense from a design point of view and I can understand why they went this way given the tool box approach to the 5E books.

 

[Jiggawatts]

Nobody stops you adding the things you love.

Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft is literally the best toolbox that looks like a Campaign Setting because of the Van Richten and allies letters within, but still, this book is more a toolbox than anything.

Nobody stops you linking the domains. The roads and pathways are considered wrapped in most for those who want them separate , there is that, and for those wanting them linked, no problem, go ahead

Canon matters. Pretending that it doesn't is disingenuous.

 

[imagineGod]

Canon matters. Pretending that it doesn't is disingenuous.

Canon matters? Seriously, in Dungeons and Dragons products that keep getting retconed each edition, sometimes even within the same edition.

Even strong canon products like Warhammerr Fantasy struggle yo keep their lore sacred. Though it is significant to note that in the current 4th Edition did not alter the population of elves in the human Imperium above a percentage point.

 

[Remathilis]

I know that "weekend in hell" was the original conception of 2nd ed Ravenloft, despite the presence of a core. Even so, the work they did over the course of 2nd and especially the Kargatane's 3rd ed contributions really added an enormous amount to making it a campaign setting, and the amazing world-building really spoke to me (my favorite part of being a DM). Reversing that to go back to the old model (with a lot of details changed) feels like an attack against something I love, even though I know it really isn't.

Ravenloft, true to it's genre, was an unholy mashup of two play styles: weekend in hell and living world. They designed a bunch of individual domains that obeyed thier own logic, then stitched a bunch together with not a lot of thought as to thier neighbors. Tepest would kill demihumans for being "fey" yet it's northern neighbor is Darkon. How do those nations conduct trade? The moon changed in number, size, color and phase simply by crossing the border. The Sea of Sorrows disappeared when you were walking the coast from Mordent to Valachan. Things like this made the idea of a living world difficult. Even if you were iron out these inconsistencies, you still have dozens of domains that are floating in the Mists that don't connect to anything and don't have any of the trade or intrigue access. Often, those Domains were second class citizens as far the setting was concerned.

Ravenloft had two choices: rebuild it like a real campaign setting with fixed nations, trade, commerce and faiths akin to a spooky Forgotten Realms, or break it apart and make each it's own haunted playground. I would have loved the former (borrowing the design from Masque of the Red Death but making it a fantasy world rather than Earth) I respect the fact they went back to weekend in hell with nods to the interconnected settings.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Ravenloft, true to it's genre, was an unholy mashup of two play styles: weekend in hell and living world. They designed a bunch of individual domains that obeyed thier own logic, then stitched a bunch together with not a lot of thought as to thier neighbors. Tepest would kill demihumans for being "fey" yet it's northern neighbor is Darkon. How do those nations conduct trade? The moon changed in number, size, color and phase simply by crossing the border. The Sea of Sorrows disappeared when you were walking the coast from Mordent to Valachan. Things like this made the idea of a living world difficult. Even if you were iron out these inconsistencies, you still have dozens of domains that are floating in the Mists that don't connect to anything and don't have any of the trade or intrigue access. Often, those Domains were second class citizens as far the setting was concerned.

Ravenloft had two choices: rebuild it like a real campaign setting with fixed nations, trade, commerce and faiths akin to a spooky Forgotten Realms, or break it apart and make each it's own haunted playground. I would have loved the former (borrowing the design from Masque of the Red Death but making it a fantasy world rather than Earth) I respect the fact they went back to weekend in hell with nods to the interconnected settings.

As I mentioned, much of the world building that made it make sense occurred in the Kargatane material for 3rd edition. They added mistways, somewhat reliable trade routes that allow trade with several of the islands of terror. Connections between the domains are explained and expanded, although you could certainly do more. All the domains had a way to feed themselves, either through growing food or trade (the original Falkovnia was the bread basket of the core, for example). It was enough to work with and, as I said, worldbuilding is my thing.

 

[Remathilis]

As I mentioned, much of the world building that made it make sense occurred in the Kargatane material for 3rd edition. They added mistways, somewhat reliable trade routes that allow trade with several of the islands of terror. Connections between the domains are explained and expanded, although you could certainly do more. All the domains had a way to feed themselves, either through growing food or trade (the original Falkovnia was the bread basket of the core, for example). It was enough to work with and, as I said, worldbuilding is my thing.

3e did the best it could with what it had, but it still felt torn between logical world building (where do people get thier food from?) and nightmare logic (where did the coast go?) In a choice, I'd have preferred a more logical design with flourishes of nightmare (a larger and more complicated Innistrad) but at least the 5e version is consistent in embracing nightmare logic completely.

 

[Shardstone]

This is a new version of Ravenloft. I get that you guys miss your old versions, but you have two editions of books of those. I've read all the 2E and 3E Ravenloft books, and I still love Van Richten's, because it lets me play Ravenloft in a new style.

I don't understand why you guys basically want reprints of the same material for yet another edition. Ideas are allowed to change and morph; they aren't static things, forever locked in one form.

 

[Micah Sweet]

3e did the best it could with what it had, but it still felt torn between logical world building (where do people get thier food from?) and nightmare logic (where did the coast go?) In a choice, I'd have preferred a more logical design with flourishes of nightmare (a larger and more complicated Innistrad) but at least the 5e version is consistent in embracing nightmare logic completely.

I suppose there's something to that, but I still find the direction they went very disappointing. At least my version of Ravenloft is now entirely in the hands of those fans who really care about it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is a new version of Ravenloft. I get that you guys miss your old versions, but you have two editions of books of those. I've read all the 2E and 3E Ravenloft books, and I still love Van Richten's, because it lets me play Ravenloft in a new style.

I don't understand why you guys basically want reprints of the same material for yet another edition. Ideas are allowed to change and morph; they aren't static things, forever locked in one form.

WotC updated the Realms and Ebberon to 5th ed without making major, incompatible changes with older material. They could have done the same with Ravenloft if they wanted to. If this had come out a couple years ago, I think they would have.