The Size of the Domain of Mist

[Black Knight]

So old Ravenloft sources give actual sizes for Ravenloft, and it seems to about the size of a *very* small country, or even a county. The 3.5 book seems to just sweep the issue aside. I've run Ravenloft adventures, but I'm now thinking of making a campaign of it. Has anyone found it to be an issue how small the land of mist is? I can imagine an area the size of France being a self-sustaining world with wars, but something as small as Ravenloft seems to defy inevitability. Anyone on horse-back with limited supplies is going to be able to travel from one side to the other in half a dozen days. It cuts the possibility of any long journeys and makes sea-faring travel a bit of a joke. There would be no boat journey of over a day.

It could be stretched and villages could be presumed to be on the map, unmarked, but then wouldn't some of the distances for the prepublished adventures be a little off?

Have others found it to be an issue? What have they done about it?

[Dark Angel]

There have been many posts and threads about this. The simple answer is make the lands as big as you need. Remember, a man on horse travelling from Nova Vaasa to Mordent has several lands to go through, several encounters to survive, and several local issues that they must contend with. My Core is about 1000 miles wide (about the size of France) and would be hard to travel anywhere there is not a real road. The isolation and the need to camp outdoors keeps people where they are suppose to be. A day trip to the local city can and should happen plenty, but going from the outskirts to the capital should be a once in a lifetime occurrence for most locals. Up to you, just be consistent.

[Joël of the FoS]

From the FAQ: " Using this size on the inside cover maps in the Ravenloft Campaign Setting and the Ravenloft Player’s Handbook puts the scale at 20-25 miles per inch."

I like this size. That's the one I use. It's small, but it makes everything close. So your enemies are never that far from you. I like that claustrophobic feel.

Joël

[Ryan Naylor]

The original theory was it was like Neverland in Peter Pan: small but packed with adventure (there's a quote about that somewhere). That's the canon size of about 25 miles per inch (or 1 mile per mm, if you want to mix your units).

I prefer 10 times the size and 10 times the population personally, because I find it more realistic for the predator population, population stability and event density. As you can see if the other threads, I'm interested in demography and history. No one has ever noticed the change.


Incidentally, leaving the size bars off the maps in 3e was a production mistake, not something we intentionally did to "deal with" the complaints about size. So now you know.

[Black Knight]

The original theory was it was like Neverland in Peter Pan: small but packed with adventure (there's a quote about that somewhere). That's the canon size of about 25 miles per inch (or 1 mile per mm, if you want to mix your units).

I prefer 10 times the size and 10 times the population personally, because I find it more realistic for the predator population, population stability and event density.

That's another good point in favour of enlarging the population; if werewolves eat people, and some area (say, Kartakass) is full of werewolves and wolfweres, there has to be a serious human population to sustain that kind of predation.

Also, there are the nobles. Each noble in Ravenloft rules over a small area, perhaps a village or two. Historically, nobles have ruled over larger areas. I don't know the actual figures, but I'd be more comfortable with a few thousand villagers being there for each noble, rather than a total population of a few thousand and a few nobles sitting in castles (built by thousands of peasants), sipping wine (built by more industrious tradesman) and doing all sorts of thing which require an immense number of people at one's beck and call.

[Matthew L. Martin]

The original theory was it was like Neverland in Peter Pan: small but packed with adventure (there's a quote about that somewhere).

I think you're confusing my personal interpretation in my "Let's Read" thread with authorial intent. That's the way I've read Ravenloft since I realized how small it was, but I don't recall anything saying that's what the design team had in mind.

[Ryan Naylor]

Quite possibly I am. That would explain why I couldn't find the quote I was looking for in my books.

[alhoon]

The official scale of 3rd edition map was suggested as 1"=25 miles. I go x2 that and about x4 the population (depends on the domain), with settlements having usually x2 population (Again depends).

[brilliantlight]

The original theory was it was like Neverland in Peter Pan: small but packed with adventure (there's a quote about that somewhere). That's the canon size of about 25 miles per inch (or 1 mile per mm, if you want to mix your units).

I prefer 10 times the size and 10 times the population personally, because I find it more realistic for the predator population, population stability and event density. As you can see if the other threads, I'm interested in demography and history. No one has ever noticed the change.


Incidentally, leaving the size bars off the maps in 3e was a production mistake, not something we intentionally did to "deal with" the complaints about size. So now you know.

Yeah, I tend to go that route. You need that kind of population to sustain that many man eaters. I made up one domain where there is a Halfling city with 50,000 halflings! The domain's dark lord is based loosely on Pol Pot. In this case though it is based on the dark lord's hatred of cities rather than the need for prey.

[Dark Angel]

The original theory was it was like Neverland in Peter Pan: small but packed with adventure (there's a quote about that somewhere). That's the canon size of about 25 miles per inch (or 1 mile per mm, if you want to mix your units).

I prefer 10 times the size and 10 times the population personally, because I find it more realistic for the predator population, population stability and event density. As you can see if the other threads, I'm interested in demography and history. No one has ever noticed the change.


Incidentally, leaving the size bars off the maps in 3e was a production mistake, not something we intentionally did to "deal with" the complaints about size. So now you know.

Yeah, I tend to go that route. You need that kind of population to sustain that many man eaters. I made up one domain where there is a Halfling city with 50,000 halflings! The domain's dark lord is based loosely on Pol Pot. In this case though it is based on the dark lord's hatred of cities rather than the need for prey.

A domain of Halflings? 50,000? That somehow is far more terrifying to me than the Pol Pot comparison. I know I will get some flack for this, but the tyrants of Asia need some more representation. Hell, the domains that really support them (I'Cath don't count) are great for those who are the least familiar with them as they don't know every weakness and ability.

[brilliantlight]

The original theory was it was like Neverland in Peter Pan: small but packed with adventure (there's a quote about that somewhere). That's the canon size of about 25 miles per inch (or 1 mile per mm, if you want to mix your units).

I prefer 10 times the size and 10 times the population personally, because I find it more realistic for the predator population, population stability and event density. As you can see if the other threads, I'm interested in demography and history. No one has ever noticed the change.


Incidentally, leaving the size bars off the maps in 3e was a production mistake, not something we intentionally did to "deal with" the complaints about size. So now you know.

Yeah, I tend to go that route. You need that kind of population to sustain that many man eaters. I made up one domain where there is a Halfling city with 50,000 halflings! The domain's dark lord is based loosely on Pol Pot. In this case though it is based on the dark lord's hatred of cities rather than the need for prey.

A domain of Halflings? 50,000? That somehow is far more terrifying to me than the Pol Pot comparison. I know I will get some flack for this, but the tyrants of Asia need some more representation. Hell, the domains that really support them (I'Cath don't count) are great for those who are the least familiar with them as they don't know every weakness and ability.

Outside the city are DARK SUN halflings. The kind that will chase you down and eat you. Halflings are underestimated IMO. You don't use them in stand up fights. What you do is use them as ambushers. Using hit and run sneak attacks halflings can devastate a party. With their bonuses to hide and their dexterity they can be wicked using short bows for sneak attacks.

[alhoon]

In my games and for all groups I've played with, goblins worked better for that kind of thing (man eating, ambush, hit&run)

[brilliantlight]

In my games and for all groups I've played with, goblins worked better for that kind of thing (man eating, ambush, hit&run)

Goblins are even better at moving silently than halflings but they don't have the save bonus, the fear save bonus, the listen bonus, and have a -2 to their charisma. Dark Sun halflings (Which only live in the wild areas and are shunned by the civilized halflings living in the city and surrounding area) are feared on Athas which is one of the toughest, meanest settings in D&D. They are usually cannibals and their territories are avoided ,if possible, by anyone who has any sense.

[vipera aspis]

Is that were the Jergen(sp?) from BoVD came from? Also I'm a huge fan of keeping the central core the same size but expanding the wilds south of Invidia.

[Alastor]

That's another good point in favour of enlarging the population; if werewolves eat people, and some area (say, Kartakass) is full of werewolves and wolfweres, there has to be a serious human population to sustain that kind of predation.

Don't forget that monsters known for eating people may actually derive much of their diet from animals. The description of Verbrek in particular makes it seem as if there are fewer human residents than werewolves, which means that the lycanthropes probably spend most of their time hunting large game (or tourists).