Café de Nuit

Since you are all trapped in the mists as I am, I have decided to send my minions to make "inquiries" in nearby domains. One must set fire to the neighbor's hamlets first, to ensure that you have attained the proper submission and respect for power from your neighbors that one deserves....

I was curious just how many of you actually play Ravenloft with the "new" 3.0-3.5 or whatever rules? since most of the Ravenloft products came out using the 2nd edition rules I would assume that most fans started playing/collecting Ravenloft there. If not then how can you possibly understand the Demiplane of Dread with only a few wizards of the coast volumes to darken your shelves?
Do you spend most of your time delivering edicts to your scribes to translate your vast 2nd edit. libraries into 3.WHATEVER rubbish only to have a newer edition come out to vex you? what a waste of parchment (and of flayed slaves' skins to make said parchment.)

I think the "new" rules look like rotted entrails that any reasonable ghoul would leave untouched. I refuse to part with my 2nd edition ways and view anyone who does so as a heretic. I assume the Castle Ravenloft product mentioned as coming in the future on Amazon will be in a 4.5 or some other ridiculous version of the rules to make it equally purile as the rest that have been printed since the Dark Conjunction and loss of TSR, a noble ruling faction in my eyes (well, my darkened eye sockets) unlike the current usurpers.


I disdain change and it seems to me that the Dark Powers will forever torture me with it. The artwork in the newer books in particular seems very adolescent to me in comparison to the grim and facinating pictures that graced the covers and interiors of the 2nd edition works. I have sent several of my horrors to slay the infidel defiling 'artists' in question.

Am I the only one who still is a true practitioner of the older, darker necromancies? It seems to me by my casual perusal of the posts on this board that many fools may have converted to this newer lesser faith.

Chill out, eldritch. Ravenloft's Ravenloft: what rules it's played by doesn't alter the setting's quality.



{tap tap tap bang bang bang!}

Sorry about the hammering noises, folks ... just putting up a "Do Not Feed The Troll" sign.

It is getting rather difficult these days to still find players (or DMs for that matter) that are willing and know how to play by the 2nd Edition rules. I tried to remain pure but have since given in.

And the artwork in the 3.X material does not bother me at all - I get the books for the text, not the pictures. They could give it to me in a handwritten manuscript and I still probably wouldn't complain about it! Just keep the new material coming - please!

actually I exude a neitherworldly cold from my being at all times so I always 'chill out' so to speak.
Merely putting forth my strong opinion on the matter, and asking other sentient beings how they view things. Sometimes I forget my un-natural strength when I put forth my bony claw to offer a proverbial friendly handshake. Is it my fault that those who accept my grip wither and die? Alas, no offense meant to devotees of the most recent incarnation of the dread realms. Mere curiosity for now. I will send undead legions to attack later if I deem you a threat.

I assume that you do indeed play the newer rules then? which do you prefer if you did play the old rules? If you prefer the newer rules, do you find it exasperating that most of the Ravenloft material is 2nd edition? How do you remedy this conundrum?

So we can understand what you mean (and take you seriously), what is it in 3e that you think is broken / was better in 2e?

Joël

Given that the 3.X products are 80% fluff and 20% rules it's a but silly to ignore what is otherwise excellent text and background because you perfer THAC0 to BAB.

I can't take "3E is terrible!" arguments too seriously. I've simply been playing D&D too long and remember the same argument and complaints after AD&D Second Edition came out.
Really, rules are just something to smooth the story and prevent DM corruption, keeps things random and fair. They don't run the game, they just keep it moving smoothly. They're not the engine or even the wheels of the game-car but the shock absorbers.

As I am mostly unfamiliar with the newer rules it is most difficult to answer your question.
Suffice it to say after two decades of playing AD&D rules and a more than a dozen years with the 2nd edition rules (which in my view just improved, not drastically changed the existing rules) it is nearly impossible for me not to read the newer stuff as gobboldy guck. Not to mention that a scant handful of products came out before they had to change it yet again to a newer updated rules system. And I hear they plan to change it again (in fact, I am unsure which 'new' rules are even the most current.) Hardly reassuring to any old gamers that the newer stuff is worth its salt.

It is the drastic departure from the familiar rules that I was used to that keeps me from purchasing newer dungeon and dragons and similar products. I only have been collecting the newer books to complete my ravenloft collection and for the background information on the dread realms contained therein.

As far as I grasp in the newer stuff you can just add templates to whatever creature you have, say- you need a dragon O.K. add that template, but you want it to be undead add that template too, now for kicks add a spellcaster's template and voila you have your newly created beastie? I much prefer when a vampire was a vampire and each nasty had their own entry in a monstrous compendium and was fairly universal across the realms. That is what gave ravenloft a unique touch is that these monsters weren't quite as the players were expecting in the MC's but had some added powers (for a price in Ravenloft of course,) instead of DMs creating nilly willy pandimonium by creating hobgoblin/liche/ogre mages by simply slapping another template on.

eldritch wrote:As I am mostly unfamiliar with the newer rules it is most difficult to answer your question.
Suffice it to say after two decades of playing AD&D rules and a more than a dozen years with the 2nd edition rules (which in my view just improved, not drastically changed the existing rules) it is nearly impossible for me not to read the newer stuff as gobboldy guck. Not to mention that a scant handful of products came out before they had to change it yet again to a newer updated rules system. And I hear they plan to change it again (in fact, I am unsure which 'new' rules are even the most current.) Hardly reassuring to any old gamers that the newer stuff is worth its salt.

It is the drastic departure from the familiar rules that I was used to that keeps me from purchasing newer dungeon and dragons and similar products. I only have been collecting the newer books to complete my ravenloft collection and for the background information on the dread realms contained therein.

As far as I grasp in the newer stuff you can just add templates to whatever creature you have, say- you need a dragon O.K. add that template, but you want it to be undead add that template too, now for kicks add a spellcaster's template and voila you have your newly created beastie? I much prefer when a vampire was a vampire and each nasty had their own entry in a monstrous compendium and was fairly universal across the realms. That is what gave ravenloft a unique touch is that these monsters weren't quite as the players were expecting in the MC's but had some added powers (for a price in Ravenloft of course,) instead of DMs creating nilly willy pandimonium by creating hobgoblin/liche/ogre mages by simply slapping another template on.

Not to rain on your parade or anything, but I believe that Ravenloft, more specifically the Van Richten's Guides, precipitated the creation of Templates.

Plus, if people'd stuck to the rule that a vampire is a vampire, Ravenloft would never exist in the first place.

eldritch wrote:As I am mostly unfamiliar with the newer rules it is most difficult to answer your question.

Next time, may I suggest you read a little more on these new Ravenloft rules before making this kind of statement?

This said, to answer one of your questions, many DMs adapt 2e stuff to 3e without sweating too much.

Joël

Drinnik Shoehorn wrote:
Not to rain on your parade or anything, but I believe that Ravenloft, more specifically the Van Richten's Guides, precipitated the creation of Templates.

Perhaps you are correct and one did lead to the other but I think it has gone far far away from what used to be simple to understand rules; and to my understanding much of the original Ravenloft material including the VRG's would be irrelevant in the newer rules. What about vampiric age progression or ghostly power levels etc. in the New rules? did they through away everything but the name of the game? it seems so to me.

Drinnik Shoehorn wrote: Plus, if people'd stuck to the rule that a vampire is a vampire, Ravenloft would never exist in the first place.

I thought I touched on that in the following excerpt:

eldritch wrote:That is what gave ravenloft a unique touch is that these monsters weren't quite as the players were expecting in the MC's but had some added powers (for a price in Ravenloft of course,) instead of DMs creating nilly willy pandimonium by creating hobgoblin/liche/ogre mages by simply slapping another template on.

Ravenloft was a little different from the other campains because the monsters (and everything else) wasn't quite as it appeared to be. But it still wasn't a major departure from the rules in other AD&D worlds in general.

The abrupt change in rules is why I even posted in the first place and the questions asked were:

eldritch wrote: I assume that you do indeed play the newer rules then? which do you prefer if you did play the old rules? If you prefer the newer rules, do you find it exasperating that most of the Ravenloft material is 2nd edition? How do you remedy this conundrum?

Basically how do you play a campain setting in ravenloft with the new rules when at least 85% of the ravenloft material was printed using the 2nd edition format? Do you just use the new books and use the rest for background? it seems to me that much of the flavor has been lost.

I wanted to know what old gamers thought about the switch and if they had experience in both which did they prefer, or if you are a new ravenloft gamer what do you think about all of the older products in the 2nd edit.?

Joël of the Fraternity wrote:

eldritch wrote:As I am mostly unfamiliar with the newer rules it is most difficult to answer your question.

Next time, may I suggest you read a little more on these new Ravenloft rules before making this kind of statement?

This said, to answer one of your questions, many DMs adapt 2e stuff to 3e without sweating too much.

Joël

That is just it; I view it as "Hear Ye, Hear Ye! the native language is hereby changed to gobbledy gook and english will no longer be used."
I am of the type that won't go and buy a new english-into-gobbledy gook book (or in this case a 3e book like a new DM's Guide or Player's Handbook) just to still play the game I always have been playing. I think they change it up just to provide sales because now all the books you have are garbage and you need this one...

I have no use for the new rules and much lament their use in D&D products in general. To me its as if the new owners wanted to retain the fans by buying the rights to the names etc. but really just wanted to install their own game mechanic rather than improve on anything in the old rules.

That said, I am curious to the thoughts and feelings of others who have done just that- converted their old Ravenloft into the new (is it better? worse? just did it to conform to the current products?)

eldritch wrote:

Drinnik Shoehorn wrote:
Not to rain on your parade or anything, but I believe that Ravenloft, more specifically the Van Richten's Guides, precipitated the creation of Templates.

Perhaps you are correct and one did lead to the other but I think it has gone far far away from what used to be simple to understand rules; and to my understanding much of the original Ravenloft material including the VRG's would be irrelevant in the newer rules. What about vampiric age progression or ghostly power levels etc. in the New rules? did they through away everything but the name of the game? it seems so to me.

In the RL3E book, you've got tables for Vampire aging (non template), new abilities to add to the ghost Template and rules for various ranks of ghost (they changed their names from magnitudes, my personal grumble), new rules for the created (a template, yes, but a good one), a template for ancient dead, rules for fiends, rules for the Vistani, rules for creating hags, new abilities to add to the fiendishly complex Lycanthrope template, new abilities for liches...

They've taken the spirit of 2nd Ed and wrapped it in 3rd Ed rules. They had to, to keep the line alive, to keep the game fresh.

Seriously, what 3rd ed Ravenloft books have you read? Because it sounds like none.

Let's see... Of the top of my head...

2nd edition: THACO, Saves, Bend bars/Lift gates, initiative...

Roll high, roll low, use the D20, use the 100% dice, use the D10, etc.

Yes, it was much simpler back then...

3e edition: I just can't figure out what they mean in those new books: Roll a D20, higher is better...
No, actually I can, I've read the book!

Patrick
(Sigh)
PS: Except for one or two books (you know wich ones) out of 19 (?) in 3rd edition, it was a very good run. Good enough that I started buying and using them while running my last 2E campaign.

PSS: I apologize in advance to the Frat.

Jonathan Winters wrote:Let's see... Of the top of my head...

2nd edition: THACO, Saves, Bend bars/Lift gates, initiative...

Roll high, roll low, use the D20, use the 100% dice, use the D10, etc.

Yes, it was much simpler back then...

3e edition: I just can't figure out what they mean in those new books: Roll a D20, higher is better...
No, actually I can, I've read the book!

Patrick
(Sigh)
PS: Except for one or two books (you know wich ones) out of 19 (?) in 3rd edition, it was a very good run. Good enough that I started buying and using them while running my last 2E campaign.

PSS: I apologize in advance to the Frat.

I'm playing in a 2nd Ed Skills and Powers camapaign at the moment.

My head hurts.

Drinnik Shoehorn wrote: In the RL3E book, you've got tables for Vampire aging (non template), new abilities to add to the ghost Template and rules for various ranks of ghost (they changed their names from magnitudes, my personal grumble), new rules for the created (a template, yes, but a good one), a template for ancient dead, rules for fiends, rules for the Vistani, rules for creating hags, new abilities to add to the fiendishly complex Lycanthrope template, new abilities for liches...

They've taken the spirit of 2nd Ed and wrapped it in 3rd Ed rules. They had to, to keep the line alive, to keep the game fresh.

Seriously, what 3rd ed Ravenloft books have you read? Because it sounds like none.

Interesting. Actually I have read one or two of the Gazeteers and have glanced at (flipped through the pages) the other fifteen or so 3e RL books I have purchased lately. I must admit that I skip any 3e game errata and just read the fluff.

so far noone has attempted to answer my basic thrust with this thread: which do you like better and why? I am looking for a comparison between the two (as obviously I lack 3e experience) Is it hard to covert all of the data from 2nd? how would you do NPCs that aren't included in the newer books but have backgrounds and stats in the old? do Dms really try to convert all of the Ravenloft 2e or do they just look wistfully back and reminisce about the good old days?