Curse of Strahd: Opinions?

[mason]

Short of declaring this a sequel in a cheesy way (including reincarnated Barovian village girls with the same names), ancestors/descendants would probably be the best for handling continuity. Unfortunately, my descendants and ancestors would probably be as useless as I am for repairing my map.

[Lost Heretic]

Curse of Strahd is pretty flippin great. I'm glad they at least make reference to the Ravenloft setting we love and cherry pick cool ideas to expand the I6 adventure - something WotC couldn't be bothered to do with the dreadful Expedition to Castle Ravenloft.

I'm also glad there's enough changes to the traps and tricks to fool old players. Even if you go into the campaign half remembering Castle Ravenloft, you'll still be scared to death.

9/10, great adventure.

EDIT: Although all the posts here make you wonder how dope a White Wolf rewrite of I6 Ravenloft would have been back in the day... One can only wonder...

[Dion of the Fraternity]

Addendum: Yes I'm happy with "Curse of Strahd," but I guess I would have been much happier if they decided to make super-adventure/reboot of "House on Gryphon Hill" instead.

Think about it:
More villains in Strahd, Azalin and a potential Godefroy reboot;
A barely-touched horror domain/demiplane (Mordent) that can be as fleshed out as Barovia;
The concept of darklords possibly redefined.

[Five]

Think about it:
More villains in Strahd, Azalin and a potential Godefroy reboot;
A barely-touched horror domain/demiplane (Mordent) that can be as fleshed out as Barovia;
The concept of darklords possibly redefined.

I'm all for more Mordent and most definitely the idea of darklords being redefined (I love "what if" like that), but simultaneously developing three evil beings in a limited page count would serve no purpose but to piss on their individual evil(s). At least in my opinion.

With Strahd being (re?)developed now in CoS, it sounds like it could be a a really fun 5E community challenge/project hosted by this fraternity's masters though...

[Zilfer]

Not sure what is considered spoilers so I just did the whole thing spoiler. XD

VIEW CONTENT:

Got home late to take a peek but from what I've read thus far I kind of like some of the changes. I'm taking it with a bit of grain of salt that every ravenloft campaign is different. I like the disguise of who Rictavio is, along with the addition of an apprentice. Regardless of what the module says I'll probably have his ID revealed eventually. Also you might note in the back of the book it still have Van Richten's account of rescuing his son... and setting zombies upon the Vistani for his curse....

Does that mean we could play up the drama between Ezmerelda and him? Maybe she doesn't know and it's a slight regret in his past. Maybe Ez doesn’t know? I know I will be doing slight edits to the story if I can and try and make it work.

I’m not a fan of just Vampire EVIL =/= Redemption. I think that is one of the aspects I like about Strahd is he is possibly one of the redeemable darklords in my eyes or at least probably on of the closest. So this Evil for Evil’s sake because I a vampire and don’t feel anything kinda rings hollow to me. I want strahd to have emotion. His newest love is in danger, I want him to react accordingly with worry or fury. If she escapes I want him to be infuriated. I’ve also pictured Strahd as ‘honorable’ only by way of his own honor. If he says you will not be harmed for dinner by gods nothing better try and hurt you or there will be a price to pay. (This to me rings like All orcs are evil mentality that I do not like, and Drizz’t fights against)

Again overall loving the module, I think they may have left a few things ‘open’ so that we could make up interactions like Madame Eva change allows you to attempt to make her into a DL. Interestingly enough I have never had strahd die for good in one of my campaigns, the original he got an unlucky save against the amulet that stuns him, and the party killed him quickly and staked him. However in mine he has a second contingency coffin up in the mountains like I think the original module suggests if you don’t want him to be dead. Not sure if 5e has that spell but if my group gets that far that is probably how I’ll play it off again.  Unless of course they can figure out that that is the spell.

I do like the little references to older things or nods. I’m currently wondering if Dusk Elf that is loyal to strahd could be replaced with Alec or maybe one of the undead knights could be Alec? (Probably not the second one now that I think about it but like that Dusk Elf…. Alec was loyal to strahd even as he was betrayed/killed. (Listening to I, Strahd currently to refresh and see what I’m going to take from where for the campaign. I think they reuse his last name Gwilym? Gwilum? Something like that. )
More comments to come I think in future.

Edit: I'm kind of surprised there's no new lycanthropy rules or anything like that for if someone gets infected. I will say I have not read that chapter yet so maybe it's tucked away there.... <.< I still probably need to see if 5e Lycanthropy is different too!

[Strahdsbuddy]

Addendum: Yes I'm happy with "Curse of Strahd," but I guess I would have been much happier if they decided to make super-adventure/reboot of "House on Gryphon Hill" instead.

Think about it:
More villains in Strahd, Azalin and a potential Godefroy reboot;
A barely-touched horror domain/demiplane (Mordent) that can be as fleshed out as Barovia;
The concept of darklords possibly redefined.

I always thought the biggest weakness of I-10 was that there was no connection to the villagers before they began getting transpossessed. I tried to remedy this by running an entire campaign leading up to I-10, but I admit I tried to shoehorn the story into a more combat-style of play that I have never been good at running and it all fell flat.

I think there are excellent sandbox elements and good NPCs around Barovia that make the new version very playable. It's really up to us how it will fit into a campaign...if it has to.

[Hell_Born]

Not sure what is considered spoilers so I just did the whole thing spoiler. XD

VIEW CONTENT:

Got home late to take a peek but from what I've read thus far I kind of like some of the changes. I'm taking it with a bit of grain of salt that every ravenloft campaign is different. I like the disguise of who Rictavio is, along with the addition of an apprentice. Regardless of what the module says I'll probably have his ID revealed eventually. Also you might note in the back of the book it still have Van Richten's account of rescuing his son... and setting zombies upon the Vistani for his curse....

Does that mean we could play up the drama between Ezmerelda and him? Maybe she doesn't know and it's a slight regret in his past. Maybe Ez doesn’t know? I know I will be doing slight edits to the story if I can and try and make it work.

I’m not a fan of just Vampire EVIL =/= Redemption. I think that is one of the aspects I like about Strahd is he is possibly one of the redeemable darklords in my eyes or at least probably on of the closest. So this Evil for Evil’s sake because I a vampire and don’t feel anything kinda rings hollow to me. I want strahd to have emotion. His newest love is in danger, I want him to react accordingly with worry or fury. If she escapes I want him to be infuriated. I’ve also pictured Strahd as ‘honorable’ only by way of his own honor. If he says you will not be harmed for dinner by gods nothing better try and hurt you or there will be a price to pay. (This to me rings like All orcs are evil mentality that I do not like, and Drizz’t fights against)

Again overall loving the module, I think they may have left a few things ‘open’ so that we could make up interactions like Madame Eva change allows you to attempt to make her into a DL. Interestingly enough I have never had strahd die for good in one of my campaigns, the original he got an unlucky save against the amulet that stuns him, and the party killed him quickly and staked him. However in mine he has a second contingency coffin up in the mountains like I think the original module suggests if you don’t want him to be dead. Not sure if 5e has that spell but if my group gets that far that is probably how I’ll play it off again.  Unless of course they can figure out that that is the spell.

I do like the little references to older things or nods. I’m currently wondering if Dusk Elf that is loyal to strahd could be replaced with Alec or maybe one of the undead knights could be Alec? (Probably not the second one now that I think about it but like that Dusk Elf…. Alec was loyal to strahd even as he was betrayed/killed. (Listening to I, Strahd currently to refresh and see what I’m going to take from where for the campaign. I think they reuse his last name Gwilym? Gwilum? Something like that. )
More comments to come I think in future.

Edit: I'm kind of surprised there's no new lycanthropy rules or anything like that for if someone gets infected. I will say I have not read that chapter yet so maybe it's tucked away there.... <.< I still probably need to see if 5e Lycanthropy is different too!

I actually don't think that the classic "Van Richten set zombies on the Vistani" thing is present in this module. Yes, Van Richten's profile says he "sought revenge on the Vistani" after his son's vampirization, but that's all it says. And, on the Ezmeralda profile, it says she was a "little girl" when it happened, she lived with her family until she was 15, and then she sought Van Richten out, having been impressed by his initial act of mercy towards her parents despite their role in Erasmus' fate. So, to me, that line is more an explanation why he does things like hunting down and killing Vistani who he thinks have sworn allegiance to evil than referencing his original lore.

As for the Lycanthropy rules, that's because there's already rules for PCs contracting lycanthropy in the Monstrous Manual (page 207, the sidebar "Player Characters as Lycanthropes"). Wereravens just slot into the existing rules rather than being exceptions.

[Zilfer]

Not sure what is considered spoilers so I just did the whole thing spoiler. XD

VIEW CONTENT:

Got home late to take a peek but from what I've read thus far I kind of like some of the changes. I'm taking it with a bit of grain of salt that every ravenloft campaign is different. I like the disguise of who Rictavio is, along with the addition of an apprentice. Regardless of what the module says I'll probably have his ID revealed eventually. Also you might note in the back of the book it still have Van Richten's account of rescuing his son... and setting zombies upon the Vistani for his curse....

Does that mean we could play up the drama between Ezmerelda and him? Maybe she doesn't know and it's a slight regret in his past. Maybe Ez doesn’t know? I know I will be doing slight edits to the story if I can and try and make it work.

I’m not a fan of just Vampire EVIL =/= Redemption. I think that is one of the aspects I like about Strahd is he is possibly one of the redeemable darklords in my eyes or at least probably on of the closest. So this Evil for Evil’s sake because I a vampire and don’t feel anything kinda rings hollow to me. I want strahd to have emotion. His newest love is in danger, I want him to react accordingly with worry or fury. If she escapes I want him to be infuriated. I’ve also pictured Strahd as ‘honorable’ only by way of his own honor. If he says you will not be harmed for dinner by gods nothing better try and hurt you or there will be a price to pay. (This to me rings like All orcs are evil mentality that I do not like, and Drizz’t fights against)

Again overall loving the module, I think they may have left a few things ‘open’ so that we could make up interactions like Madame Eva change allows you to attempt to make her into a DL. Interestingly enough I have never had strahd die for good in one of my campaigns, the original he got an unlucky save against the amulet that stuns him, and the party killed him quickly and staked him. However in mine he has a second contingency coffin up in the mountains like I think the original module suggests if you don’t want him to be dead. Not sure if 5e has that spell but if my group gets that far that is probably how I’ll play it off again.  Unless of course they can figure out that that is the spell.

I do like the little references to older things or nods. I’m currently wondering if Dusk Elf that is loyal to strahd could be replaced with Alec or maybe one of the undead knights could be Alec? (Probably not the second one now that I think about it but like that Dusk Elf…. Alec was loyal to strahd even as he was betrayed/killed. (Listening to I, Strahd currently to refresh and see what I’m going to take from where for the campaign. I think they reuse his last name Gwilym? Gwilum? Something like that. )
More comments to come I think in future.

Edit: I'm kind of surprised there's no new lycanthropy rules or anything like that for if someone gets infected. I will say I have not read that chapter yet so maybe it's tucked away there.... <.< I still probably need to see if 5e Lycanthropy is different too!

I actually don't think that the classic "Van Richten set zombies on the Vistani" thing is present in this module. Yes, Van Richten's profile says he "sought revenge on the Vistani" after his son's vampirization, but that's all it says. And, on the Ezmeralda profile, it says she was a "little girl" when it happened, she lived with her family until she was 15, and then she sought Van Richten out, having been impressed by his initial act of mercy towards her parents despite their role in Erasmus' fate. So, to me, that line is more an explanation why he does things like hunting down and killing Vistani who he thinks have sworn allegiance to evil than referencing his original lore.

As for the Lycanthropy rules, that's because there's already rules for PCs contracting lycanthropy in the Monstrous Manual (page 207, the sidebar "Player Characters as Lycanthropes"). Wereravens just slot into the existing rules rather than being exceptions.

Look in the back of the book where it has the TOMB of Strahd and the letter from Van Richten.... in it is the Exerpt from one of the other Van Richten guides and i'm like 80% sure I saw it last night where he tales the tale of Erasmus from his point of view and it says he set the zombies upon them.

Note: In his description it mentions nothing of the sort but the excerpt/handout in the back mentions it.... <.< Error? Or maybe i was far too sleepy and needed to go to bed in order to get up for work...

Also thank you for the Werewolf location for rules. I'm going to look at that when I get home in case I use the Lycanthrop hunters hook. Good to cover all bases.

[Hell_Born]

No, actually, you were right, my apologies. The profiles for both Ezmeralda and Rictavio describe Van Richten's attitudes that fateful day as non-vengeful, but the excerpt in the appendix is taken from one of the old Van Richten's Guides and clearly references his zombie massacre. Odd. Maybe they didn't think about what they were doing...

[Zilfer]

Yeah no worries. I figured you hadn't looked closely yet. I'll probably do some sort of combination. Again maybe a little drama between Protoege and Master or maybe that was the thing that broke them up for a long period of time but possibly having gotten over it or wanting more in depth answers she seeks him. Who knows? xD

[Joël of the FoS]

At last (mad laugh), I have my copy of CoS in hand !

It's still cold from the delivery truck

* starts reading *

Ah ah ah at disclaimer on credit page

Joël

[Joël of the FoS]

Interesting "material and inspiration" list :

I6 Ravenloft
EtCR
I, Strahd novel
Rahasia by the Hickmans (1984) What is it ? (edit Found it, under the B7 TSR number. It has the Wizard of Wines)
Realm of Terror 1990
Fair Barovia, Claudio Pozas' article in Dungeon, 2012
VRMHC I and III

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

Interesting "material and inspiration" list :

I6 Ravenloft
EtCR
I, Strahd novel
Rahasia by the Hickmans (1984) What is it ? (edit Found it, under the B7 TSR number. It has the Wizard of Wines)
Realm of Terror 1990
Fair Barovia, Claudio Pozas' article in Dungeon, 2012
VRMHC I and III

Yeah, I'd noticed that, and wondered about Rahasia too. I'd heard the Hickman's mention it in a podcast, as another adventure in the "series" that originally held Ravenloft back when it was called "Vampyr". But, not knowing anything about it, I didn't know what they might have pulled in for CoS. I haven't gotten up the "Wizard of Wines" part yet, but the name has been dropped a couple times in the text, and frankly, the name doesn't fill me with confidence. It reminds me of the humor of the crypt names, really. I hope I'm mistaken.

I did like that disclaimer as well...

Another "blink and you'll miss it" notice... Dilisnya is in the list of Barovian family names, and Alek is on the list of first names.

[Zilfer]

^Nice pointing that out. I had forgotten about Leo.... <.< Again the novel adds a bit more to the events that happened rather than, Strahd's own castle guards shooting him because he's a monster to traitorous guards shooting him that work for Leo.... <.< I'll probably have to plot that a bit.

Opinions on the option that Strahd shows up multiple times to "test" them for a replacement for his mantle? Would you ever let someone take that mantle? I have a feeling MY PC's might eventually help Ireena get away from Strahd's grasps and that's when Strahd will get more serious, possibly come close to a TPK but have a sort of cutscene moment where he holds one of them beat up and bloody at his mercy and then goes to tell them he won't let them off easy. He will make them suffer far worse than the wound they have inflicted upon him.

Edit: Also I notice if the party stumbles into the Dinning room is there a way out of the castle after the event takes place? I'm not convinced going into the castle is a good idea for the first parts of the adventure though I think I see a sort of natural progression in the Village pointing the players out of the main village towards the other villages.

[Bluebomber4evr]

Very cool write up Hell Born. Thanks!

I can see that my prediction was correct; this is "Expedition to Castle Ravenloft" for 5E. Not that there is anything wrong with that; I just figured this was not going to be a guide to the campaign setting as a whole.

Some interesting changes made. Not sure how I feel about Madame Eva; I liked her original portrayal and her bit of story with Jacqueline Montarri, etc.

Also the bit about Van Richten having a saber-toothed tiger made me raise my eyebrows. But I don't have the book yet, so I'll reserve judgement.

One thing I would suggest is alhoon, you made a comment about "reality wrinkles aren't cannon anymore." I wouldn't view anything in this module as "canon." Yes, technically it's an official product, but I personally see it as merely one adventure (or series of adventures). I mean, if you consider the number of things printed in 2E that are in books but have been decided as "non-canon" to the setting as a whole, it's easy to picture.

It's not really like "Expedition." It doesn't pretend the rest of the campaign setting doesn't exist, for one. Van Richten is described as being from Darkon and his entire history with the Vistani and Baron Metus is fully described. The Vistani are the same as they were in the campaign setting instead of the "humans and halflings and now Eva's a hag for some reason" that Expedition pulled. The map of Barovia has Krezk, Vallaki and Berez, Mt. Baratok and Mt. Ghakis, and Lake Zarovich in all the same places they were before, and Vallaki's map is identical to the one in Roots of Evil. The Blue Water Inn of Vallaki is described and run by the Martikov family of wereravens as a hideout for the Keepers of the Black Feather. It has the Dark Powers, darklords (well, just the one darklord) and mentions that Barovia is now a "domain of dread" demiplane. There are clerics and shrines to the Morninglord.

Having said that, there's some conflicts in the canon as well. Van Richten is present in Barovia centuries before he was born (although this could easily be hand-waved as using the Mists to travel through time). But then there's the stuff about Eva being Strahd's half-Vistani half-sister, the Amber Temple which basically asserts that the Dark Powers are vestiges (from the 3e Tome of Magic), Berez being destroyed shortly after the events of the first I, Strahd novel (which conflicts with the events of the second I, Strahd) novel, the Wachters are holed up in Vallaki instead of ruling Krezk (Krezk is instead ruled by the unimaginatively named Krezkov family).

Overall, I'd certainly prefer this as a start to a new version of the campaign setting over Expedition, if such a thing comes to pass.