What have you done with canon darklords?

[jamesfirecat]

I've posted these elsewhere before, but I suppose I can't resist the urge to bring them all up again. My changes tended to be a bit more on the unorthadox side.

• I made Malken real. He was originally a caliban who was spat upon by Nova Vaasan society, until his resentment caused him to murder the one person who'd given him a chance. He claimed it was for idealism, but in truth it was bitterness and the hope of stealing his former friend's body. Now they're both trapped in the same physical shell, shifting between appearances and personalities randomly -- the loss of control doesn't terrify Malken so much as the thought that his once beloved master is still alive and knows of Malken's betrayal.

• The demon in Easan's head was never real, it was just a "funny" lie told to spite the elf. Easen simply latched onto it as a convenient excuse for all of his actions. Every evil act he committed was the "demon forcing his hand", causing him to become more and more desperate -- but he's always been completely in control, saving his own emotional panic, mocking mental illness in an attempt to deny his own culpability. His domain resembles Silent Hill, the only danger you'll find there is what you brought with you. It has a reputation for insanity because no one seems to see the same thing as anyone else. The area around Easan is a giant chaos cesspit because he thinks it should be, but there's always an underlying order to it all, because his "madness" is really just an author's interpretation of it.

• Harkon Lukas isn't the Darklord any more. I loved the NPC, just not as darklord. He's hanging out in a combined version of Kartakass and Verbrek, with Alfred Timothy having the dubious honor of being the real Darklord.

• Von Khrakov is just a plain old werepanther... or patherwere, if one wants to be completely accurate. He's sitting in a domain that somewhat resembles Spanish Mexico. His problems stem less from him being a control freak (though he still is) but his naivety when it comes to how people work (including himself). He sets his standards by what sounds great on paper, and then is upset when they don't work in reality. In truth, he's not the Core's worst ruler, its his personal life that damns him. Everyone close to him lets him down, including himself (because his standards are insane). He usually murders them in response.

• Azalin's memory nonsense powers only work on people in Castle Avernus. It also only writes down visitors' memories -- if Azalin wants to change them, he has to go find their book and manually write in new sections. I feel like that's an acceptable compromise.

• I left Drakov as a butcher, though not as extreme as he's presented in the books. He also has reason enough for it: canonically he's from Krynn, but you could just as easily say he got plucked out of 30 Years War Germany. His brutality was forged from years and years of battle -- its just at the end of it all, he refused to hang up his sword. In his mind he's still besieged on all sides: undead lich to the north, decadent poisoners and wererats to the south, feral wild elves and pseudonatural aberrations in his own land... these are real issues, he's just incapable of seeing he, his allies, and his never-ending battle are the biggest threat to his own country.

Interesting list of changes, why did you decide to have Harkon Lukas choose to hang around the yet again enlarged Verbrek?

[Dark Angel]

Harkon Lukas isn't the Darklord any more. I loved the NPC, just not as darklord. He's hanging out in a combined version of Kartakass and Verbrek, with Alfred Timothy having the dubious honor of being the real Darklord.

I was never thrilled with Lukas as the top political figure of Kartakass either, but also want to keep him in the picture. His dreams of civilized rule don't quite mesh with that picture. So I have Barovia annexing Kartakass when they made a move on Gundarak and it is a simple arrangement where the Barovians get a small tax source while the Kartakassians benefit from Barovian protection (not that foreign encroachment was an issue, but this makes Barovia a little more important looking in the South Core region).

Azalin's memory nonsense powers only work on people in Castle Avernus. It also only writes down visitors' memories -- if Azalin wants to change them, he has to go find their book and manually write in new sections. I feel like that's an acceptable compromise.

I may have to use this one!

I left Drakov as a butcher, though not as extreme as he's presented in the books. He also has reason enough for it: canonically he's from Krynn, but you could just as easily say he got plucked out of 30 Years War Germany. His brutality was forged from years and years of battle -- its just at the end of it all, he refused to hang up his sword. In his mind he's still besieged on all sides: undead lich to the north, decadent poisoners and wererats to the south, feral wild elves and pseudonatural aberrations in his own land... these are real issues, he's just incapable of seeing he, his allies, and his never-ending battle are the biggest threat to his own country.

In this light this makes Drakov look like Lex Luthor with the attitude of how he has to do what needs to be done against this powerful alien that everyone loves and adores. An alien that could easily take over the world. Drakov is one of the 'normal' human rulers without supernatural (or at least as much) influences in the Core. He has to do things to preserve his nation. Some propaganda bs here and there, you have his next public address before he launches another Dead Man's Campaign.

[brilliantlight]

Elena chooses to be an evil jerk. If she didn't rely on her paladin powers supplied by the dark powers and just took a step back and looked at what she was doing, she'd realize that SHE is the evil in the land. It's her "I have powers, so I must be right" attitude which makes her evil.

THAT is pretty much canon.

[brilliantlight]

I most disliked the character of Vlad Drakov. He is a parody of a bogeyman - a bloodthirsty thug so stubborn that he literally cannot see the punishment he's been given.

His original curse is simply to know he can never conquer any nation. This curse does literally nothing to make him more human. He continues to oppress his subjects in a such a way that most people would be damn glad he doesn't get to rule anything else. His cruelty is entirely unjustified and serves no purpose except to cement his regime of misrule. Meanwhile, he does not even learn from his mistakes - he understands nothing of how the Demiplane works, even to the point that the Dark Powers give him no way to close his borders. His pig-headed insistence on using sword and shield means his armies are easily repelled by gunpowder using cultures.

I actually LIKED him because of this.
...
De gustibus non disputandum est!

Joking aside, I find his constant bloodthirst and cruelty, paired with his military prowess (he IS a warlord, after all) makes him the catalizer of change in the Core.

Before him, the Core never knew war.
Before him, there was practically no diplomacy in the Core.

Being like he is means being static.
Which darklord, in a way, is not?
Take Azalin, for instance: he knows about his curse, he knows about the Dark Powers.
Does this better his position? His curse is still on, he's still prisoner.

The curse doesn't need to be higly... Supernatural.
Darklords are doomed to ALWAYS REPEAT their mistakes. That's it.

The only darklord who I find not much convincing is Easan... But I never bothered too much with him OR Vechor...
So I think I'll just shrug and go on with the rest of the Core.

EDIT: To come back to the topic.
The only modification I made is rewriting Azalin's spellbook (one of the most modified SB in D&D history! ) to better suit my tastes and making the Shadow Rift Gwydion's reality wrinkle.

EDIT2: Nathan, I just noticed you did the same. Ok, we got an empathic link. Who's the wizard and who's the familiar?

Agreed, it isn't like brutal, uncaring thugs were unknown in dark ages Europe! There was a decent number of kings, princes and nobles who got off on brutalizing the peasantry. Vlad Tepes was hardly the only one! He was more brutal than most but most nobles treated commoners as dirt, at best.

[brilliantlight]

Regarding Elena Faithhold being "too stupid" to be evil, it is very possible to be highly intelligent and still engage in self deception. (In fact, sometimes being intelligent can help you imagine rationalizations of your evil.) The human mind simulates rational logic, but the mental heuristics and algorithms it uses are loaded with the potential for cognitive distortions and mental compartmentalization. The pain of cognitive dissonance is a terrible one, and since it's often easier to adjust self perception than behavior, the easier solution is often to rationalize and make excuses. Once a person does this long enough, it can become more or less automatic.

I think on some level despite all her denial, Faithhold still knows that she is doing evil on some level. That's why she has her nighttime rides filled with grief.

My feelings on Jaqueline Renier are similar. In my mind, Renier has the capacity for doing better but she chooses not to. I think removing her capacity for love and totally delinking it from her curse. This is because it may render like any other evil lycanthrope- ruthless by nature (and thus perhaps less deserving of being a darklord.) Many human darklords are chosen because they are much more evil than most other humans. In a way, the opposite is true for Renier. She is somehow truly capable of love, not just in the romantic sense but in the sense of empathy and altruism. She therefore has a much better capability to be "human" and maybe even to bring the wererats into a higher state of enlightenment- yet she has chosen to squander her gifts. The way I see Claude Renier, he was much the same way- that's the reason he never trusted the rest of his kindred except for her- his humanity alerted him to the wrongs of their natures. And yet when push came to shove, he chose to be just as ruthless as they were.

If I were to revise Jackie Renier's curse, I would probably play up the empathy aspect and how she misuses it, extending it to more than just romantic or personal love. Somebody mentioned her favoring her human side rather than rat side- I like that. Perhaps she seeks to help the wererats escape their bestial natures and assimilate into human society (though as its rulers.) And she truly has a matriarchal concern for Richemulot and its people- she wants them to prosper (albeit under her thumb.) However, her curse is two-fold- the wererats she would lead into the light are horrible misanthropes almost by nature, and the falling population of humans in Richemulot (remember mention of all those empty cities?) Beyond simple romance, Renier wants to be part of a greater community where her ability for empathy is reciprocated. However, she conflates this (or perhaps merely settles for) trying to create a cult that embraces her as a goddess, thus cutting corners and hypocritically justifying any evil that she has to commit to better her backwards kindred.

I agree with you on Elena. Deep down she knows she has become what she long fought. She can't admit it to herself on a conscious level or she would commit suicide. That wouldn't even help her in my campaign as all DLs are both unaging and undying.

I like what you did with Jaqueline. That makes her curse that much more sensible. As is she is a slightly better than average wererat so why is she cursed. Under your reasoning it is because she has the potential to be better but chooses not to be. That is what gives her the curse.

[The Lesser Evil]

Here's my takes on some other darklords:

Dominic D'Honaire- small tweak- Instead of the "bad seed angle", I see him as having something of an Oedipus Rex Complex. His mother is noted as having died at his birth, so I can imagine him blaming his father for it and growing up with an idealized version of his late mother. His messing with people's minds and his wanton lust might be outgrowths of his estrangement. (He might also have gleefully gaslighted his nanny into committing suicide because she didn't live up to his standards of how he imagined his mother.)

Gwydion the Sorcerer Fiend- As described, he is a hopped-up 2-D tyrant. In my version, his motivations are more mixed and twisted- he views the Shadow Fey somewhere between his children, his worshipers, and his pets. As such, he has something of a twisted parental/overprotective "love" for them- think if Elmyra (from Tiny Toons) or the Abominable Snowman (from Loony Tunes) were an eldritch abomination. "D'oh, my own little Shadow Fey. I will name them George, I will pat them and pet them and hug them and love them. Oh, George, you were naughty to pretend you were free from me!" He may even see them as "sick" without his care- like a parent with Munchhausen Syndrome by Proxy.

-The Three Hags (summarized from the Three Hags thread): The Three Hags are more or less aware of their cursed nature as darklords. From the beginning, they wanted to escape the backwoods family farm, but in becoming darklords, they've exchanged one podunk place for another. Furthermore, their jealousy and spite towards all things beautiful doesn't merely come from personal vanity. It's more like, they can't even enjoy the benefits that beauty might provide them- their hideousness prevents them from joining civilization. They can't even enjoy the daylight- the sun dispels their disguise and burns their flesh. I also extend their inability to enjoy beauty to affect their productivity- they are incapable of creating anything truly beautiful in form without some sort of corruption attached to it. Hence, they corrupt, pervert, or destroy beauty rather than create it out of jealous spite.

The Three Hags aren't entirely motivated by vengeance. In my version, they've seen a nasty future for themselves in Tepest, similar to the bruja hags' visions of their own deaths. However, the Three Hags come up with schemes to escape their miserable fates, refusing to accept destiny. Their creation of Blackroot, for example, might have an ulterior motive in that they hope to manipulate him into becoming the darklord so they might escape. Their contact with Azalin's agents (from when they made Azalin's crystal) might have given them a few more ideas on how to escape Tepest. (I see their chafing confinement there as a big element of their curse.)

Finally, I see the Three Hags as so closely connected they are more or less codependent on each other. But every once in a while, something like the dandy will come along and put them against each other, totally scattering their organization to the wind.

[brilliantlight]

I like what you did with Dominic D'Honaire, it makes sense.

[Don Fernando]

Here's my takes on some other darklords:

Dominic D'Honaire- small tweak- Instead of the "bad seed angle", I see him as having something of an Oedipus Rex Complex. His mother is noted as having died at his birth, so I can imagine him blaming his father for it and growing up with an idealized version of his late mother. His messing with people's minds and his wanton lust might be outgrowths of his estrangement. (He might also have gleefully gaslighted his nanny into committing suicide because she didn't live up to his standards of how he imagined his mother.)

I like the idea, but in order to have the Oedipus Complex, Dominic requires to actually have met and idealize her mother. Since she died at child birth he never actually knew her, and by that never actually knew what it feels like to have a mother. This could have been developed at a later age, but we actually know that Dominic is doing nasty stuff from an early age. To me, this feels more like a mental illness and not an obsession. What do you think?

[brilliantlight]

Here's my takes on some other darklords:

Dominic D'Honaire- small tweak- Instead of the "bad seed angle", I see him as having something of an Oedipus Rex Complex. His mother is noted as having died at his birth, so I can imagine him blaming his father for it and growing up with an idealized version of his late mother. His messing with people's minds and his wanton lust might be outgrowths of his estrangement. (He might also have gleefully gaslighted his nanny into committing suicide because she didn't live up to his standards of how he imagined his mother.)

I like the idea, but in order to have the Oedipus Complex, Dominic requires to actually have met and idealize her mother. Since she died at child birth he never actually knew her, and by that never actually knew what it feels like to have a mother. This could have been developed at a later age, but we actually know that Dominic is doing nasty stuff from an early age. To me, this feels more like a mental illness and not an obsession. What do you think?

Actually I think her dying at child birth makes it even easier. He can have a completely idealized picture of his mother. She wasn't around showing her human foibles to ruin his idealization. She was certainly human and even if she were a good person she would have her faults. Faults Dominic was never around to see.

[The Lesser Evil]

I like the idea, but in order to have the Oedipus Complex, Dominic requires to actually have met and idealize her mother. Since she died at child birth he never actually knew her, and by that never actually knew what it feels like to have a mother. This could have been developed at a later age, but we actually know that Dominic is doing nasty stuff from an early age. To me, this feels more like a mental illness and not an obsession. What do you think?

Good points (although actual obessions are often categorized as mental illness, even in Ravenloft's own madness system). Regarding not knowing her, it's not so much like he idealized her but he idealized the idea of her/having a mother, probably from what he was told of her secondhand. As for the Oedipal Complex giving D'Honaire an out for his crimes, I don't think that would entirely apply here. It may provide an original source for his estrangement, but it wouldn't be an actual cause for all the evil things he did- those were conscious decisions regardless of the original source of their original derivations. Just like a character with antisocial personality disorder is still held accountable for any crimes he commits, so to can we can still hold Dominic accountable for the evils he consciously chose.

Also, remember that young Dominic is described as being unusually aware and intelligent. He may have had at some level some awareness of a possible Oedipal Complex, but chose not to do anything about it.

On another note, I looked over Gazetteer III and it looks like my take is a lot more canon than I thought it would be. It point blank describes how spoiled he was by most of the surrogate mother figures in his life and how he never really knew what it was like to have a mother. His nanny is described as the only one who didn't spoil him (and thus dying for her resistance.) It's also implied that Dominic arranged an some kind of illness to be put on his father so that Dominic could take his place on the Council of Brilliance.

[The Lesser Evil]

So Easan the Mad is a nice equal but opposite. Whereas Domic is id fueled, Easan is more superego driven. Many wood elves are driven to opposing the unnatural and corrupting influence of the civilizations of shorter lived humanoids, yet they also tend to be fairly withdrawn and reclusive in their interactions with said civilizations. Easan was a believer of the former but not so much of the later- Easan was an agitator who festered on the need to correct through violent conflict. The Empire of Iuz provided a convenient target for war even though it might mean the destruction of Easan's tiny elven nation. Ironically, Easan tolerated relatively little conflict with his own agenda, quickly sabotaging or eliminating rivals in the elven courts.

Iuz' spies kept him alert of what was going in the bordering elven kingdom (the kingom in which Easan resided.) Although the kingdom represented little thereat by itself to Iuz the Evil, he knew it might set a pattern for his own lands to rise up against him. Iuz the Old has been around for quite a while, so he knows the ways of how the humanoid mind reacts to torture and torment. Sometimes threats of a more dire nature are easier to react to than those of a less dire nature because it's easier to muster all one's internal resolves to deal with the former threat than the latter. So Iuz imbued Easan with a fairly weak and harmless (as far as fiends go, maybe something a bit more than a dretch) but indelible spirit. This was done to make an example of what can happen to insignificant gnats who try to interfere with him- they will feel tear themselves apart. An ironic punishment could also be seen here- the conflict that Easan so wanted in the external world was now located in his own internal world.

Easan debased himself (in his eyes) by going to a order of St. Cuthbert followers who dwelled in an ancient monastery. They took him in and through blood, sweat, and tears made the fiendish spirit inside Easan go into remission. Easan might've been able to live out the rest of his life without real worry for the fiend, but Easan wanted its total expulsion from his being and nothing less than total annihilation for it. To accomplish this, Easan performed some sort of taboo magic (or similar) that ultimately destroyed the island and its inhabitants.

After the failure of the monks to cure his infestation completely, Easan turned to dissection and torture using the healing arts he'd observed on the monastery and the tortures he'd survived in Iuz's dungeon. The mists took him into Ravenloft from there.

In my view, the side that was "sick" or possessed was not the side that was what damned Easan. It was the side that was healthy and coherent. In other words, it wasn't the fiendish presence within him that damned him, rather it was more than how he reacted to it.

[brilliantlight]

So Easan the Mad is a nice equal but opposite. Whereas Domic is id fueled, Easan is more superego driven. Many wood elves are driven to opposing the unnatural and corrupting influence of the civilizations of shorter lived humanoids, yet they also tend to be fairly withdrawn and reclusive in their interactions with said civilizations. Easan was a believer of the former but not so much of the later- Easan was an agitator who festered on the need to correct through violent conflict. The Empire of Iuz provided a convenient target for war even though it might mean the destruction of Easan's tiny elven nation. Ironically, Easan tolerated relatively little conflict with his own agenda, quickly sabotaging or eliminating rivals in the elven courts.

Iuz' spies kept him alert of what was going in the bordering elven kingdom (the kingom in which Easan resided.) Although the kingdom represented little thereat by itself to Iuz the Evil, he knew it might set a pattern for his own lands to rise up against him. Iuz the Old has been around for quite a while, so he knows the ways of how the humanoid mind reacts to torture and torment. Sometimes threats of a more dire nature are easier to react to than those of a less dire nature because it's easier to muster all one's internal resolves to deal with the former threat than the latter. So Iuz imbued Easan with a fairly weak and harmless (as far as fiends go, maybe something a bit more than a dretch) but indelible spirit. This was done to make an example of what can happen to insignificant gnats who try to interfere with him- they will feel tear themselves apart. An ironic punishment could also be seen here- the conflict that Easan so wanted in the external world was now located in his own internal world.

Easan debased himself (in his eyes) by going to a order of St. Cuthbert followers who dwelled in an ancient monastery. They took him in and through blood, sweat, and tears made the fiendish spirit inside Easan go into remission. Easan might've been able to live out the rest of his life without real worry for the fiend, but Easan wanted its total expulsion from his being and nothing less than total annihilation for it. To accomplish this, Easan performed some sort of taboo magic (or similar) that ultimately destroyed the island and its inhabitants.

After the failure of the monks to cure his infestation completely, Easan turned to dissection and torture using the healing arts he'd observed on the monastery and the tortures he'd survived in Iuz's dungeon. The mists took him into Ravenloft from there.

In my view, the side that was "sick" or possessed was not the side that was what damned Easan. It was the side that was healthy and coherent. In other words, it wasn't the fiendish presence within him that damned him, rather it was more than how he reacted to it.

Your idea of Easan needing to correct by conflict is good. I think I might well use it if my campaign ever goes there. I will also use the idea that Easan was never actually possessed by a fiend but was lied to and fell for it hook, line and sinker. He then used that "possession" to do whatever he wanted to do and blame it on a nonexistent fiend.

[brilliantlight]

One idea I use is that the Darklords themselves are responsible for 90% of their problems. The Dark Powers cursed them but it is how they deal with it that causes their problems. If Strahd were to accept the idea that Tatyana will always be out of his reach most of his problems would go away. If Drakov were to accept the fact conquest was impossible on RL then he wouldn't be such a laughingstock. If Elana would admit that people were given free will for a reason she wouldn't go slaughtering people and then feeling guilty about it. This isn't what the Dark Powers do, they don't mindzap them into their stubbornness and willful blindness but themselves. All of them have always been extremely stubborn and willfully blind. It is who they are not what the Dark Powers have done that makes them this way. Also all of them are intelligent , most of them very intelligent. The least intelligent of them in Ryan Naylor's netbook (The most complete listing that I know of and should be downloaded by anyone who hasn't yet) is the Headless Horseman at 9 who I don't consider a DL with Jack Karn next at 10 , Elana Faithhold at 11, a few at 12 and the vast majority higher than that. If I ran Karn or Faithhold I would bump them up to at least 12. IMO one of the reasons that the Dark Lords become Dark Lords is that they have a lot of potential. They could be a real force for doing some good in the world but they waste that potential by doing great evil. A dull-witted thug in the back alleys never makes Dark Lord. He hasn't much potential to waste and would be too boring for the Dark Lords to watch. So all my Dark Lords have their ints bumped up to at least 12. They know how to act better but choose not to. That is one reason I like lesserevil's take on Jaqueline Renier ,unlike most wererats she knows how to act better but CHOOSES not to.

[The Lesser Evil]

One thing about Drakov and is over-the-top bloodthirstiness, I would takes some notes from Vlad Tepes and use the impaling thing as a method of psychological intimidation more than simply a past time for sheer sadistic joy. (Although I'd still keep in sadistic joy as a side benefit, because it seems like coming to enjoy their work would be a psychological necessity for people who operate as Drakov does.)

In my mind, Drakov's regime functions almost entirely on fear, fear of the other (i.e., fear of non-Falkovnians, especially Darkonians) and fear of what Darkov's men will do to you if you step out of line. The latter requires a lot of constant displays of power. Hence the semi-frequent impalement. I think one life per day is too much, but Drakov would probably need it to be fairly regular.

[Leliel]

One thing about Drakov and is over-the-top bloodthirstiness, I would takes some notes from Vlad Tepes and use the impaling thing as a method of psychological intimidation more than simply a past time for sheer sadistic joy. (Although I'd still keep in sadistic joy as a side benefit, because it seems like coming to enjoy their work would be a psychological necessity for people who operate as Drakov does.)

In my mind, Drakov's regime functions almost entirely on fear, fear of the other (i.e., fear of non-Falkovnians, especially Darkonians) and fear of what Darkov's men will do to you if you step out of line. The latter requires a lot of constant displays of power. Hence the semi-frequent impalement. I think one life per day is too much, but Drakov would probably need it to be fairly regular.

I like this.

I'll add in that his curse is, as thought by other people, something that plays off his most self-defeating quality; his paranoia. He can't trust other people at all, what set him off from amoral and bloodthirsty into utter ruthlessness was betrayal by his clients and once, a very close friend of his. He lost faith in the concept of being loved, so he doesn't care if he's hated anymore, just so feared it doesn't matter.

His curse is that circumstances conspire to the point where he can't handle things alone, on the personal or political levels. He pays his guards enough to the point where he doesn't really notice the personal bit (he doesn't have relationships that could be spoiled) but army-wise? He's figured out long ago that anything other than keeping the peace inevitably turns out to be underprepared or stymied by poor luck that makes them underprepared. Inevitably, mercenaries that cover the holes in his tactics show up (magic-vulnerability without war witches? An experiment gone mildly wrong lands a Mulan battle thaumaturge in his court, and he'll happily give out some magic weapons in return for an escort home, for instance), but enlisting their help requires some degree of unconditional faith on his part, since mercenaries aren't the kind of people who take being blackmailed or deceived lying down. He despises this, hence his failures; he'd rather suffer humiliation and loss of his soldiers over and over again rather than expose his back, unless he is well and truly desperate (and as soon as the crisis is past, he falls back on old habits).