Gonzoron of the FoS wrote:Drinnik Shoehorn wrote:This is exactly what the DarkDuo said over Champions of Darkness and back then we held them to account. Why is it acceptable for this book, but not CoD, which was awful?
For one thing, we haven't read this book yet, we're pouncing on crumbs. For another, that was the DarkDuo defending what was, if not their own work, at least done on their watch. This is more of Lowder, who worked on the original stuff, essentially giving his blessing to the new stuff, or at least to the concept of changing the old stuff. He doesn't have anything to gain from the new book being successful, but is being magnanimous about it, rather than defensive and gatekeeping. For another, CoD contradicted stuff from what was ostensibly the same product line, without seeming to care much (a failing of editing/developing, regardless of the absolute quality of the writing, if there is such a thing.) This is clearly a deliberate change and a fresh start for the setting, as the writers have been clear and upfront about in their interviews. Not to mention that we as a community were probably overly harsh on CoD at the time too, to be honest; there are some good ideas therein amongst the bad. And even if were objectively the worst book published with the Ravenloft logo, (maybe it is, I've got other nominees) Lowder's advice stands... don't use it. Don't buy it. Sell or burn your copy if you did. Post a negative review to warn others. But savaging the writers personally is IMHO never necessary. I reject the idea that we as a fandom have to hold creators "accountable" for what we don't like. They're not war criminals, they're just writers.
I would agree if this was a book like Tasha's or Xanathar's, where it is purely optional material, but this is the continuation of a setting that has 30+ years of established lore and story. Changing it for the sake of change, ignoring what has come before isn't refreshing or dynamic, it's lazy and money grabbing.
If they had reset the setting to 735. but kept aspects like the Twins, that would be interesting and attention grabbing. But gutting the basic geography of the setting, removing darklords, changing domains so they no longer resemble their established lore, that's not something to celebrate. If I spend, what? £30-£40 on a book
for an established setting, I should not be being told that "If you don't like it, you can ignore it."
That's lazy, that's a cop-out and it's a phrase designed to shut out criticism.
I bought Xanthar's because I wanted new options for classes. I'm not likely to ever use the part on traps, but I don't mind its there. I'm planning on getting Tasha's for the options too, and will ignore the sections on "create a race", because, again, it holds no interest for me. But if I'm buying a book for an
established setting I want updated information on the setting, which continues a story built over 3 editions of a game. I don't want to have it all ignored. I don't want to be told, "You can use your old books." Because of course I can, but why say that when you are trying to move a product, whether because you published it or because you're reviewing it.
If they released a guide to Krynn, but instead of what the Chronicles and Legends have set up, they ignore it and say, "The fiery mountain fell on Krynn, but it wiped out all Palanthas and Istar and made the continent of Ansalon an archipelago, then afterwards magic was celebrated and the towers open to all" people would be in uproar, and this is the equivalent happening to Ravenloft. Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft is the Ghostbusters 2016 of D&D: It's only using an established IP because the writers and developers are either too lazy or too untalented to come up with their own. They'd rather change existing characters and domains because they aren't creative enough to come up with their own.
I get authors wanting to leave their mark on the setting, it's why we got the god-awful Order of the Ebon Gargoyle and CoD mess. But there are ways to do it that complement the canon rather than destroy it. Look at Rogue One, for example. It didn't rewrite the original trilogy, but it complimented it and added to the story, and was a damn good film to boot. Look at Battlestar Galactica, which took the original premise and created something incredible. And the common thread with both is that they both respected the source material.
Nothing Wizards has put out, no press release or interview, has convinced me that the people writing this respect the older material. They look at it, deem it "problematic" and rather than find creative and interesting ways to remove those aspects, they run roughshod over the story and put in their own characters.
Dominic, with his curse and personality, would have been an amazingly interesting way to explore themes surrounding the #metoo movement, and gender roles and politics in general. They could have steered the domain into personal horror and oppression through misogyny. It had the potential to be really good. But instead, we have a discount Sanguinia with a new female Darklord ruling a domain that is
not Demenlieu.
Telling me I should buy a book and then ignore potentially up to 80-90% of the material because is a ridiculous stance to take.
I am aware that at the time it came out it was panned and the idea behind the book was probably fatally flawed.
