Ilsabet Obour and Ivana Boritsi: What's the Difference?

[Speedwagon]

Context: So I've been recently running a campaign in Ravenloft, incorporating as much of the 2e/3e lore as I can while meshing in bits and pieces of 5e lore that I like. Currently, my players are off to the Scholomance in Dorvinia because they're working with the Nuikin Family to find "The Revelations of the Prince of Twilight" (they're also working with the Keepers of the Feather who want the book because it might have some information on a certain incubus that they're hunting but that's tangential info). Prior to this, Dancio occurred, and my bard (who managed to make friends with Bevel Boritsi) was invited to Misericordia to provide entertainment. He met Ivana and after being threatened by her to not get too close to her nephew, she now is using him for her own plot to mess with Ivan (as she knows Ivan is thinking about using the mages in the Scholomance to find a way to slow his aging). I then had a talented friend of mine (who's a voice actress) read off a bunch of lines of Ivana that I came up with, specifically tailored to the bard. In the 5e book, Ivana is stated to be capable of replicating spell effects of up to 7th (7th!!) level as potions or poisons, with an example given with the Dream spell (called Ivana's Whisper). The idea is that the bard will receive a gift (a flower with a certain aroma) that he'll breath in and then when he sleeps, Ivana will contact him in the dream (using the pre-recorded voice lines) to give him his mission and the specifics of how he'll accomplish it.

But then this got me thinking: Isn't there another poisoner lady who can do something similar? And is this sort of thing 2e/3e Ivana's style or not? The bard's already met Nostalia and the Jongleur, why not have Nostalia show up in Vor Ziyden (where the party's at) and try to discretely give this order? And, what's the major difference between Ilsabet Obour and Ivana Boritsi in their poisoning styles and characterization anyway? My thoughts drifted to Ilsabet because, in my map of the Core, Kislova borders Dorvinia and Barovia, and I was also wondering if the whole "Ivana can replicate poisons of up to 7th level" was a trait that I should give to another poisoner like Ilsabet. Plus, I looked at Ivana's 5e deal of "I am not acknowledged as the girlboss that I am" and was reminded of Ilsabet's ordeal with everyone thinking her to just be Baron Peto's wife and nothing more, robbing her of her acknowledgement. So, what's the difference between the two Darklords? What separates Ilsabet from Ivana? And should one have that ability or both or none?

[tomokaicho]

Well hol' up there a second. You are mixing different versions of Ivana, then asking for a comparison to Ilsabet. Not easy. Have you read Baroness of Blood? Besides a bit of poison use, Ilsabet doesn't come across to me as similar to Ivana at all.

[Mephisto of the FoS]

tomokaicho is right you are mixing the new version with the old, the new version sounds more like her mother Camille who could create any poison effect imaginable, while Ivana is poisonous herself. The new version sounds also more like Batman's Poison Ivy than one of the Italian Renaissance Borgias (a surname being a toponymic from the town of Borja, then in the Crown of Aragon, in Spain). Especially Lucrezia Borgia who is often portrayed as a femme fatale in many artworks, novels and films. In 2e Darklords the story told in Borca about the Headless Horseman illustrates Ivana similar to Countess Bathory. Since she is a dabbler of alchemy the Bathory theme is also appropriate but using more mundane alchemy not as supernatural as in 5e.

As for Baroness of Blood I read it many years ago don't remember much except that Ilsabet Obour's sole focus is vengeance which makes her a really different character than Ivana, who has already avenged herself by killing her mother. Also Ilsabet Obour was raised by her father not to be empathetic while we know that 2e/3e Ivana's father loved his daughter and her mother was the one responsible for the darkness within her, although she and Ivan have been described as the Dark Twins both being born in the same night, which could indicate that she was born evil. The thing with Ivana is the change of character she has in her background, at first she is portrayed as a naive young girl who after being "betrayed" by her lover and her mother, turns evil. In 5e both her father and mother were damaged goods not appreciating her because she is a woman.

In 2e/3e Camille was already a darklord when she gave birth to Ivana, I guess with a mother like that Ivana was always "evil" but didn't display it until she was triggered, she uses the same ruse now playing the role of a benevolent ruler, protector of her realm from Vlad Drakov's Falkovnia and supporting the arts, while at the same time she is a ruthless controlling manipulator known to leave a string of dead lovers and husbands, giving her the name The Black Widow. Now why would someone want to make a relationship with a person known by that name perplexes me. Probably the people who get involved with her are either blinded by greed, vanity or even codependency, wanting to be her lovers, seeing only a rich charming beautiful confident (even traumatised) young woman instead of the dark predator that she is.

I myself prefer the 2e/3e version taking darklordship from her mother with the help of her best friend Nostalia Romaine, I really like the story of how she entrapped her mother (found in the 2e Ravenloft Monstrous Compedium II).

As for Ivan I prefer the masterful poisoner 2e/3e version of him but his 5e aspects (the clockwork toy maker) could be incorporated in his Playroom in the Degravo estate, this Craft (clockmaking) skill could be a bonus skill, a gift of the Dark Powers.

[Mistmaster]

Evil is never born, it is made, Mephisto. Ivana was an innocent young woman until she choose to follow the wrong path. Her mother however guided her to that path.

[Mephisto of the FoS]

Evil is never born, it is made, Mephisto. Ivana was an innocent young woman until she choose to follow the wrong path. Her mother however guided her to that path.

I will argue that in romantic fiction and gothic horror evil can be born, in real life the concept of duality between Good and Evil is more complex. In human beings, ‘good’ and ‘evil’ are fluid. People can be a combination of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ qualities. What we usually define as evil are people who can’t sense other people’s emotions or suffering, can’t see the world from other people’s perspectives, and so have no sense of their rights. Other human beings are just objects to them, which is what makes their brutality and cruelty possible.

Good and Evil are philosophical and religious concepts, differing views also exist as to why evil might arise. In the originally Persian religion of Zoroastrianism, the world is a battle ground between the god Ahura Mazda and the malignant spirit Angra Mainyu. The final resolution of the struggle between good and evil was supposed to occur on a day of Judgement, in which all beings that have lived will be led across a bridge of fire, and those who are evil will be cast down forever. In Afghan belief, angels and saints are beings sent to help us achieve the path towards goodness. In cultures with Manichaean and Abrahamic religious influence, evil is perceived as the dualistic antagonistic opposite of good, in which good should prevail and evil should be defeated.

In cultures with Buddhist spiritual influence, both good and evil are perceived as part of an antagonistic duality that itself must be overcome through achieving Śūnyatā meaning emptiness in the sense of recognition of good and evil being two opposing principles but not a reality, emptying the duality of them, and achieving a oneness.

Many religious and philosophical traditions claim that evil behavior is an aberration that results from the imperfect human condition (e.g. "The Fall of Man"). Sometimes, evil is attributed to the existence of free will and human agency. Some argue that evil itself is ultimately based in an ignorance of truth. A variety of Enlightenment thinkers have alleged the opposite, by suggesting that evil is learned as a consequence of tyrannical social structures. In 2007, Philip Zimbardo suggested that people may act in evil ways as a result of a collective identity. This hypothesis, based on his previous experience from the Stanford prison experiment, was published in the book The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil.

For instance Malocchio Aderre was born evil why not also Ivan and Ivana or Dominic D'Honaire, this is fiction and gothic fantasy after all.

[Mistmaster]

Evil is never born, it is made, Mephisto. Ivana was an innocent young woman until she choose to follow the wrong path. Her mother however guided her to that path.

I will argue that in romantic fiction and gothic horror evil can be born, in real life the concept of duality between Good and Evil is more complex. In human beings, ‘good’ and ‘evil’ are fluid. People can be a combination of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ qualities. What we usually define as evil are people who can’t sense other people’s emotions or suffering, can’t see the world from other people’s perspectives, and so have no sense of their rights. Other human beings are just objects to them, which is what makes their brutality and cruelty possible.

Good and Evil are philosophical and religious concepts, differing views also exist as to why evil might arise. In the originally Persian religion of Zoroastrianism, the world is a battle ground between the god Ahura Mazda and the malignant spirit Angra Mainyu. The final resolution of the struggle between good and evil was supposed to occur on a day of Judgement, in which all beings that have lived will be led across a bridge of fire, and those who are evil will be cast down forever. In Afghan belief, angels and saints are beings sent to help us achieve the path towards goodness. In cultures with Manichaean and Abrahamic religious influence, evil is perceived as the dualistic antagonistic opposite of good, in which good should prevail and evil should be defeated.

In cultures with Buddhist spiritual influence, both good and evil are perceived as part of an antagonistic duality that itself must be overcome through achieving Śūnyatā meaning emptiness in the sense of recognition of good and evil being two opposing principles but not a reality, emptying the duality of them, and achieving a oneness.

Many religious and philosophical traditions claim that evil behavior is an aberration that results from the imperfect human condition (e.g. "The Fall of Man"). Sometimes, evil is attributed to the existence of free will and human agency. Some argue that evil itself is ultimately based in an ignorance of truth. A variety of Enlightenment thinkers have alleged the opposite, by suggesting that evil is learned as a consequence of tyrannical social structures. In 2007, Philip Zimbardo suggested that people may act in evil ways as a result of a collective identity. This hypothesis, based on his previous experience from the Stanford prison experiment, was published in the book The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil.

For instance Malocchio Aderre was born evil why not also Ivan and Ivana or Dominic D'Honaire, this is fiction and gothic fantasy after all.

True enought, but my Malocchio Aderre for example is an innocent child in spite of being a Cambion. I suppose its a matter of taste.

[Speedwagon]

Ok, this definitely helps clear some stuff up. And yeah, my bad on my part for not being more clear with my question. I guess what I was asking was: is 2e/3e Ivana anything like Ilsabet, and if so, what's the difference between the two? Is 5e Ivana anything like Ilsabet, and if so, what's the difference between the two? And what's Ilsabet like exactly (as I've not read Baroness of Blood yet and I've only read the Undead Sea Scrolls write-up on her)? Seems like Mephisto and Tomokaicho have answered the first two questions so I appreciate the help on that front! I want to use both ladies in my campaign (especially since my Kislova is part of the Core and bordering Barovia and Dorvinia) but I didn't want them to feel redundant upon one another. We've got mummy Darklords like Ankhtepot and Tiyet but they both feel significantly different from one another in personality, background and current sketch, so that's what I was concerned with.

[The Lesser Evil]

As depicted in the novel, Ilsabet Obour's character is more deeply embedded in her dynasty, which has ruled Kislova on the Material Plane for many generations. For the most part, her wrath was focused on Baron Peto Casse of Sundel, whom led an invasion to conquer Kislova after Kislova failed an invasion to take over Sundel. Her father, Baron Janosk Obour, offered his life as sacrifice in return for sparing his allies and family. Peto would have spared his life anyway, but Janosk wanted to save face for his family in the eyes of his subjects while entrusting his revenge to Ilsabet. So entrusted with that duty, Ilsabet's damnation chiefly came in the actions she took to fulfill her vengeance, both in testing out poisons and the machinations she arranged to get to where she is- that is marrying Peto and then murdering him to regain control of Kislova after she had a child. As such, Ilsabet has more of a familial/dynastic pride that Ivana seems to lack (mostly caring only about herself.) Ilsabet also lacks Ivana's general misandry.

Though still highly manipulative, Ilsabet is less of a temptress than Ivana for a couple of reasons. First, she did not grow up especially attractive, having a mousy, plain appearance contracted a lingering wasting disease that killed her biological mother early on but that Ilsabet herself survived. Ilsabet's increased attractiveness seemed to come as a consequence of murdering her victims (specifically the pain and fear they felt as they died)- this also seemed to temporarily improve her health and alleviate the pain/symptoms of her disease. Secondly, whereas Ivana has no current long term romantic engagements, Ilsabet is already spoken for, both legally in terms of her marriage to Peto and in her own mind to her tutor in education, alchemy, and poisonmaking and longtime crush Lord Jorani.

We don't get to see too much what happens with Ilsabet and Kislova after the land is swallowed up by the Mists other than a short epilogue. However, her darklord curse seems to be multifaceted. First, she will never be able to rule of her own authority, though beloved by the people of Kislova. No matter what fate happens to Peto, time resets each day such that he is alive but bedridden. Also, their son Lekai vanished into the Mists after Sagra took the child and ran away with him. Ilsabet found Sagra's corpse after the latter fell to her death, but Lekai was never found. Thirdly, the realm is haunted by monsters- such as vampires and werewolves- that never existed in Kislova before, whereas Ilsabet herself may be haunted by the misty ghosts of those she's killed (it happens a few times throughout the book even prior to the realm being totally snatched by the Mists.)

Also less of a curse and more the direct results of her own actions, Lord Jorani is by her side, but as an alchemical vampire he lacks much of the personality he once had. Alchemical vampires is a term one of the BoS netbooks used for the vampire-like artificial creations Ilsabet had made using alchemy. She had accidentally killed Jorani in the process of killing Peto and then revived Jorani as one of her creations. Oh, and the creation of alchemical vampires is another difference between her and Ivana, though Ilabet only created 3 in the novel (two have gone wild and roaming the wilderness by the end of the book). However theoretically Ilsabet should be able to make more.

You can read more about Ilsabet and the other Baroness of Blood characters in the Mistipedia.

Edit: This comparison was between Ilsabet and the 2e/3e Ivana.

[The Lesser Evil]

Ok, this definitely helps clear some stuff up. And yeah, my bad on my part for not being more clear with my question. I guess what I was asking was: is 2e/3e Ivana anything like Ilsabet, and if so, what's the difference between the two? Is 5e Ivana anything like Ilsabet, and if so, what's the difference between the two? And what's Ilsabet like exactly (as I've not read Baroness of Blood yet and I've only read the Undead Sea Scrolls write-up on her)? Seems like Mephisto and Tomokaicho have answered the first two questions so I appreciate the help on that front! I want to use both ladies in my campaign (especially since my Kislova is part of the Core and bordering Barovia and Dorvinia) but I didn't want them to feel redundant upon one another. We've got mummy Darklords like Ankhtepot and Tiyet but they both feel significantly different from one another in personality, background and current sketch, so that's what I was concerned with.

Ilsabet and 5e Ivana are both more alike than Ilsabet and 2e/3e Ivana are, in that 5e Ivana is more generally scheming, power-thirsty, and ambition with the themes of misandry, seduction, and comfort-seeking toned down. Ilsabet is also scheming, power-thirsty, and ambitious, though she seems to have more of a preoccupation with dynasty than 5e Ivana does. Ilsabet had generally positive feelings with her father and indeed went about her revenge plot in part due to her father's last request of her, whereas Klaus always derided Ivana's ability to lead or achieve. Ilsabet also had a secret affair with her much older tutor Jorani while at the same time being married to Peto Casse, the primary target of her wrath. On the other hand, 5e Ivana may be a bit less generally sadistic than Ilsabet is in the joy she takes in trying out her poisons, enacting punishments, etc.

5e Ivana and Ilsabet curses are somewhat inversions of each other. 5e Ivana struggles to gain recognition of her talents, but Ilsabet is widely loved by the people. Ivana owns everything so long as her father's will is never found, but Ilsabet only rules by proxy of her paralyzed husband. 5e Ivana finds her family's necessary politicking and management tedious. But I don't recall any of that sentiment for Ilsabet- she was raised to be ruthless and embedded in her social environment as I understand her. And there's no other major rival for Ilsabet mentioned like Ivana has in Ivan Dilisnya). On the other hand, Ilsabet and Kislovan society in general have to deal with many unnatural threats that didn't used to exist in her native world.

Both Ilsabet and 5e Ivana are creators of life in a sense, though 5e Ivana seems more adept. Ilsabet has her alchemical vampires (and animate dead, if you go with giving her wizard levels like the Book of Souls article) whereas 5e Ivana has a greater variety in her plants (plus whatever spell effects she can duplicate with her potions). Both are great alchemists and poisonmakers, of course.

[tomokaicho]

I will argue that in romantic fiction and gothic horror evil can be born

In real life, "the bad seed" is a literal thing that exists and is observable. The only question is whether its "evil" or mental illness. Some people are just born bad.

[Mistmaster]

I will argue that in romantic fiction and gothic horror evil can be born

In real life, "the bad seed" is a literal thing that exists and is observable. The only question is whether its "evil" or mental illness. Some people are just born bad.

It's sociopathy, and it's tied to alot of external causes. No kid is born bad.

[Speedwagon]

Ok, I definitely think I understand Ilsabet and the various versions of Ivana better, so I appreciate the rundown, The Lesser Evil. And I'm also quite interested in the morality discussion with Mistmaster and Mephisto/Tomokaicho on the side, so I'm grateful to the help so far! I hope Kislova gets covered by the FoS in a Gazetteer at some point, I really need to read Baroness of Blood...

[Mephisto of the FoS]

It's sociopathy, and it's tied to a lot of external causes. No kid is born bad.

There are some who say that "sociopaths are made and psychopaths are born," but this characterisation may be too far broad. While it is true that psychopathy is believed to have genetic components (perhaps caused by the underdevelopment of the parts of the brain that regulate emotion and impulsiveness), there are clearly other factors that contribute to the behavioural disorder. Psychopaths often have a history of an unstable family life and/or were raised in neighbourhoods prone to violence. That is that people who are considered as psychopaths probably have a genetic disposition towards bad behaviour which can be developed into anti-social behaviour in combination with environmental factors while sociopathy is only developed by behavioural/ environmental factors. Clinically both terms are unofficial and termed as anti-social personality disorder.

[Mistmaster]

It's sociopathy, and it's tied to a lot of external causes. No kid is born bad.

There are some who say that "sociopaths are made and psychopaths are born," but this characterisation may be too far broad. While it is true that psychopathy is believed to have genetic components (perhaps caused by the underdevelopment of the parts of the brain that regulate emotion and impulsiveness), there are clearly other factors that contribute to the behavioural disorder. Psychopaths often have a history of an unstable family life and/or were raised in neighbourhoods prone to violence. That is that people who are considered as psychopaths probably have a genetic disposition towards bad behaviour which can be developed into anti-social behaviour in combination with environmental factors while sociopathy is only developed by behavioural/ environmental factors. Clinically both terms are unofficial and termed as anti-social personality disorder.

True enought. Still, I like to avert the bad seed trope.

[tomokaicho]

True enought. Still, I like to avert the bad seed trope.

Some of the Darklords are the bad seed trope by canon, however. I'm not sold that it applies to Ivana. Dominic d'Honaire is definitely a bad seed. Dr. Frantisek Markov tortured animals as a child, which is a huge red flag that he is a bad seed. Adam is a supernaturally bad seed, on account of the evil spirit that animates his body. Inza Magdova Kulchevich was born evil for some reason, so another bad seed. Malocchio Aderre is a literal demon.