VRG to the Mists

[Jester of the FoS]

As long as you hold to the idea that dungeon crawls are bad, long story-based campaigns are good, munchkins and powergamers are pure evil and that role-playing is the only true way to salvation then, maybe, no one will criticize you for your non-canon ideas and suggestions.

Nice straw man, Jester. No one said any of that.

Not in this thread, no. So far this has been a reasonably civil discussion on differing views and opinion on a work.
Or as civil as a discussion can be when its soul purpose is to tear apart a book. No worse than a newspaper critic’s though…

My post, however, was a response to the statement that these boards tend to be open to ideas, the general assumption that we aren’t critical of others and are open to the wildest flights of imagination. Something that sadly isn’t always true as many hold very elitist attitudes towards different styles of gameplay. A similar sentiment can been seen on Dragonlance boards, another setting where there is a distinct style and emphasis on story and character over “kewl lewt” and combat. The idea being that our gaming has "evolved" from those immature players who enjoy combat, monty haul games or crossover tales where Strahd fights the Predator and a few Aliens.

How can something be continuous and living if it doesn't do anything new?

Given the number of domains that are still underdetailed, the material that never got updated between editions, the secret societies, artifacts, NPCs and other material hinted at in previous books, and meta-plot developments that had been set up, do you seriously think there was a lack of possible new material that could have and should have been addressed before VRGttMists?

Quite true, but that is not a decision the authors were able to make. They have to make a living and that entails writing the books they’re given.
I wouldn’t have chosen that book either and the Fraternity decided to focused on Gazetteers for our first net-projects as well.

But sooner or later we will have to do something new -perhaps with a land or perhaps with an NPC- and someone, somewhere is going to take umbrage because our version doesn’t fit with theirs. I know at least one person from the message boards who is going to look at the forthcoming Timor gaz and scowl at what I wrote.

Forgotten Realms is continous and living, and is always coming out with new stuff, but they don't hobble the setting every other book.

Hobble is a strong word. Kinda. I think…
But there are good Realms products and bad Realms products and ones so terrible everyone shudders and ignores them. I was turned off the setting for the better part of a decade after I tried to read Darkwalker on Moonsae.

They can’t all be winners…

However, comparing a small niche setting with a flagship book is a bad example. The average quality of a Realms book will always be higher because the stakes are; far more sales rely on putting out Realms books that don't suck. And people still complain.
In a niche setting that will never have the best writers in the company assigned to it and never have the best editors and developers working on it, there will always be a higher ration of bad books to good.

This is even more so when the setting is licenced and a short-term project at best.

How does it contradict canon?
(Other than Sal which, as pointed out, would have been corrected before the book saw print.)

The garbled, impossible Mistways jump to mind.

Still only a single error on a topic that has received very limited attention. And far less worse than some of the glaring timeline mistakes that have been cropping up since the Black Box.

All it does -at worst- is break away from the traditional tenants of the setting.

No, at best, it consciously breaks away from the traditional tenets (not tenants) of the setting - something I'd question in any case. At worst (or, in reality, rather), it ignores or never noticed these design concepts, damages the setting in the long-run, gets a number of things flatly wrong, provides nothing truly new, trampling previous work, and solidly defines setting elements that should remain mysterious.

You mean like Domains of Dread when it decides to dump the Gothic Fantasy style for Fantasy Horror? Or Ravenloft Third Edition which discards the long-used concept of outsider player characters and escape form a demiplane?

I can understand people not liking what is a different approach to the world, but this is tearing apart a book to the same extent as CoD!

Good. The books are in the same league.

Ouch.
The ‘loft has seen some spectacularly bad books with little redeeming or useful qualities. Forged of Darkness and Requiem spring to mind. I’d judge Mists in the bottom ten but hardly in the same league with CoD.
The same sport maybe. Bench warming with HoL perhaps…

This is a very interesting thread, especially give how everyone loved VRGtMists when it was first released. There was some debate on whether or not power checks were failed but nary a negative word. And people raved about Oubliettes and the Fugued. Now they're jumping at the chance to sink teeth into it.

I agree that the initial reaction was overwhelmingly positive. I suspect that this was because, with the cancellation of the line, people were thrilled to eke out one last bit of Ravenloft material before the flow cut off. But, I read the PDF and was surprised no-one else saw any problems with it.

However, I think you overstate the amount of criticism in this thread. There's been just as much (if not more) continued support of VRGttMists as criticism.

Looking back after my initial posts I was surprised by the support it had received. You are right that the book received an otherwise warmer welcome than it might have otherwise gotten. However, any negativity is still an abrupt paradigm shift from how it was reviewed. Joel even started this thread special to hear the negative review, curious at what any complaint could be.

Personally I think the authors did the best they could. They were assigned the book and had to write it. Then an author dropped out and someone new had to come in.
This book could have very easily turned into a tome on Mist Horrors and Mist Ferrymen. Instead we get a book on powers that can be used to modify a variety of creatures -add spice to many a beast- and an explanation for Richten Haus (a domain without a lord that has been around for years!)

It’s not great, but it’s a testament to the writer’s that it’s as bearable as it is.

Yes, it certainly does say something about the authors and editors involved that Van Richten's Guide to the Mists came out like it did. Just not something good.

Chris Nichols

I’m not a great writer. I would say I’m passable; at best above average. And I would have no idea how to turn “VanRichten’s Guide to the Mists” into a decent book. Oubliettes alone would never have occurred to me and I’d likely never had moved from the obvious: Mist horrors and Mist ferrymen, with possibly a transient golem to break things up.
Even before the book saw light there were concerns on the subject (this is probably another reason the reviews were so positive. People were simply surprised at the range of topics).
It’s a terrible idea for a VRG. It’s setting-specific with no outside use. It deals with subjects better left obfuscated. It isn’t iconic to the genre. It lacks any elements of tragedy, romance, personality or the gothic.

It was a book doomed from the very start.

But it’s not totally and completely useless, and that’s better than it could have been.

[Jester of the FoS]

Okay, pausing here for a moment.

This is a heady topic and strong opinions are involved. We all care deeply about Ravenloft and are more receptive to percieved slights and problems.

This is an interesting discussion and much needed. VRGttM has lived in a nice bubble of instant-nostalgia and it's good to bring it down and re-examine it. However, it is very, very important to keep things civil and friendly.

I respect Chris and I respect his opinion, otherwise I wouldn't bother to debate the issue and would have blown it off.

There are still good points to be made but the longer we proceed the more we may edge over the line seperating involved debate and heated argument.

So mind the line people and remember we'll still respect you in the morning.

---edit---

two other points:
1) I enjoy playing devil's advocate; I find that after enough points have been blow away you have a nice middleground left almost everyone accepts.
2) I'm not called 'jester' just because of my strange choice in hats and fondness for shoes with bells.
So don't take anything too seriously. Leads to, like, ulcers and wrinkles.

[Jonathan Winters]

I have been away from the boards for a few days.

I will try to write something longer and more meaningful later on, because there are a LOT of opinions being thrown all over the place at the moment (which is not a bad thing, mind you).

Maybe the VRGttM topic is not the main problem here. I wonder if it might not be a symptom of something else: As someone mentioned elsewhere, interest in RL is dwindling on the FoS and everywhere else for that matter (exception being EtCRL, which is not really RL as we know it, if you know what I mean) (and I have no clue how accurate this info is). We also have the whole ‘’To Ret-con or not to Ret-con’’ topic which is stirring up a lot of debates.

I just want to address the fact that these boards are pretty civil when it comes to voicing out opinions. I don’t really remember anybody being insulted by board members. Yes, maybe there is a bit of FR-bashing (or Eberron, or whatever), but I think people are usually reminded to behave or reminded that different styles of gaming are just that: Different styles of gaming. You don’t have to play if you don’t like it.

The only “incident” I can think of is when someone started bashing RL 3e while admitting to have never read any books on 3e. (sigh)

And a good example of this, is also when I TOTALLY misread something, commented on it (in a civil manner) and all I got as an answer was something along the lines of: ‘’why?’’ To which I re-read the thing, and apologized for having misread it.

These are pretty good boards. I have seen (and stopped going to) much, much worse.

Just my two cents about “free speech” on these boards.

Patrick

[Mangrum]

We work with the knowledge that everything we do could perfectly well disappear the next time that Ravenloft changes hands and takes on new management

As of Champions of Darkness, that was the attitude we had to work under too. I had material ret-conned before I was even completely out the door.

[Mangrum]

You mean like Domains of Dread when it decides to dump the Gothic Fantasy style for Fantasy Horror? Or Ravenloft Third Edition which discards the long-used concept of outsider player characters and escape form a demiplane?

With all due respect, what the hell are you talking about? Could you show me, for example, where R3E discarded the concept of outsider player characters? Feel free to skip past all the places where it specifically addresses them, of course.

[Jester of the FoS]

You mean like Domains of Dread when it decides to dump the Gothic Fantasy style for Fantasy Horror? Or Ravenloft Third Edition which discards the long-used concept of outsider player characters and escape form a demiplane?

With all due respect, what the hell are you talking about? Could you show me, for example, where R3E discarded the concept of outsider player characters? Feel free to skip past all the places where it specifically addresses them, of course.

In the early versions of the campaign setting it was assumed most (if not all) players would be visitors from other worlds. The setting emphasised that it was a crossover setting, a nexus where Dragonlance met Greyhawk and Mystra. The land was small shadowy pocket-dimension in a much larger multiverse.
In RL3E the emphasis was much more on native characters who were born there, had a stake in the world and though it worth fight for. It also viewed the world as a whole instead of a piece-mail creation. It tended to view the world as a whole and dared to deal with such topics as trade, politics and economics instead of having each land be a self-contained bubble.

There have been comments (mostly on other message boards) where Ravenloft's 3E line has been criticized for breaking away from the crossover-feel of older settings. And there has been a general shift away from “weekends in hell”.
They have not been ignored, and there was a small section on WiH in the RL: DMG, but they seem less apart of the world now.

It’s a change in the setting. It is a break from how things were done and how the world was viewed. It’s not bad and it’s not good. It was just a change.
So I don’t feel it’s appropriate to criticize any book simply for changing things, adding a new perspective or giving a few new options. The changes themselves can be criticized and torn to shreds, but that things changed should not.

[Mangrum]

Here's my suggestion:

Actually go back and compare the number of "outlander" NPCs who appeared in the setting in 2E with the number that appear in 3E.

You might be surprised to discover that all 3E does is directly state something that was the case all along.

You might also want to consider the wisdom of using "discarding the concept" and "shift in emphasis" as synonyms.

[Igor the Henchman]

Here's my suggestion:

Actually go back and compare the number of "outlander" NPCs who appeared in the setting in 2E with the number that appear in 3E.

You might be surprised to discover that all 3E does is directly state something that was the case all along.

You might also want to consider the wisdom of using "discarding the concept" and "shift in emphasis" as synonyms.

Oh, do cut Jester some slack. His point wasn't even about outlanders or RL3E.

[Nathan of the FoS]

Thread participants,

I think we're approaching the point where heat > light in this discussion--perhaps we should let the topic cool a bit?

[Jester of the FoS]

The NPCs are a good point. Quite a few are natives. Unless you start to count darklords.
But for every vanRichten there is a Gondegal.

[Rucht Lilavivat]

Wow. Who knew that a single post could spark all this?

I that means that everyone here is still passionate about Ravenloft, eh?

[alhoon]

Thread participants,

I think we're approaching the point where heat > light in this discussion--perhaps we should let the topic cool a bit?

I'm actually afraid that we are past that point Nathan.

We should all take the hint from Rucht.

On Topic: I liked the Requiem idea of making undead chars for Ravenloft! The rules were just... not that good. The system with the monster classes in Libris Mortis is better IMO.

To Jester: I respectfully disagree on the "For every Van Richten there is a Gondegal" There are a couple of Gondegal but nowhere near the Van Richten, the twins, Van Richten assistants etc.