ETCR author chat log

[Matthew L. Martin]

And there it is, by making her a hag we define the metaphysics of the setting.

When WW made her a priest, at least she was unaffiliated.

Actually, Eva's been a cleric since I6.

(And of course it casts Tepest in whole new and incoherent light.)

Compare what I quoted above with the Hala myth and hag lore from Gaz V.

But this is really just a thought experiment, nothing more. Unlike some of my other musings, this one won't even become a Dread Possibility.

Matthew L. Martin

[cure]

Compare what I quoted above with the Hala myth and hag lore from Gaz V.

I am sure that it fits all too well! Which is to say our three hags of Tepest are now logically on par with Madame Eva and the other sister Vistani Hags who have the run of Ravenloft for Strahd's founding ritual is the birthing and binding ritual of Ravenloft itself. But for whatever reason they, despite being pure Vistani (which is now to say Hag) are imprisoned, while their weave sisters are held by no bounds, save the obligation to keep moving.

Invidia has a darklord and a dukkar who are Vistani peversions (half-breeds). Sithicus's new ruler is a Vistani peversion, a Vistani who kills her mother and becomes a bound shadow. Now Tepest's darklords are some sort of Vistani peversion too. Or rather the Vistani are more powerful, unbound peversion of them!

And the Dark Power are no doubt tales that the Hags weave and that witless scholars weave at their behest, to better conceal the monsters that the 'Vistani' sisters are.

Why is Azalin never about with a lethal array of spells when you need him? Hell, I would even settle for his pet dragon.

- - -

Yes, just ignore it, it was all bad dream, like Lord of Necropolis (only less well conceived?).

- - -

It does clear up a couple matters related to Jacqueline Montarri however. Where is her head? Eva's sisters ate it of course. And how does Eva return from her beheading? Her sisters brew her up in a pot of course. Everything you loved about Tepest, only with a Barovian sauce.

[Mangrum]

Keep in mind that in EtCR, where Eva is a hag, Ravenloft is just a castle in Barovia and none of the rest of that stuff exists in the first place.

You're comparing apples and oranges and getting angry over it to boot. Just kick back and relax that death grip on canon.

[Dion of the Fraternity]

I'd like to rant for a moment.

One of the main reasons why I haven't commented on EtCR is the book-bashing. "Oh no, the authors are idiots because they never included 3e stuff." "Eva a hag? That's stupid!" "I'm not gonna buy this book because it doesn't conform to canon." "It's not Gothic horror like Ravenloft is supposed to be, it's just fantasy horror." etc., etc., etc.

What if I said I liked how it was written, I liked how they have the new delve format applied, and I liked the fact that even if it didn't fit "canon Ravenloft," I'd play it anyway? Does that make me a "traitor" to the campaign setting as a whole? I would still love the campaign setting, I would still continue to support the campaign setting, but I'm personally getting a little bit irritated about people griping about so small a matter as saying "it doesn't fit canon."

[cure]

Exposing an unexpected secret concerning a mysterious matter that makes some sense of the mystery while at the same time deepening it would be most welcome. Van Ritchen's Guide to the Vistani aimed at such and broadly succeeded.

Trashing what we know about the Vistani and draining the mystery out of them so that we can have a sword fight with them is quite another matter. Recall where the last got Rudolph, a curse that shaped his entire life and perhaps his death too.

I am willing to believe that much of the product has merit.

The problem is that it is an official publication which individually we accept or ignore as we will, but that as a community we are going to have to come to terms with as some of it amounts to a very significant fly in our ointment.

The classe changes that we basically rejected in 3e (druids going mad/becoming evil because of sink holes and so forth) were really quite technical in nature compared to the thematic change on offer here.

I would like to read Lord of Necropolis, but I accept that a definition of the Dark Powers would be a serious blow to our creativity going forward.

Well, making Eva and fellow rauni hags strikes me as being terribly wrong both looking back (continuity) and looking forward (creativity) and my vote is that this official suggestion be studiously ignored by us as a community in our development of the setting.

Perhaps the case for ignoring the suggestion is self-evident and it is not worth the bother of making it.

Perhaps not. And in that case I am willing to entertain explanations as to why Eva as a hag is a brilliant new arc that we should welcome. To my eye the author's failed to offer such however.

[HuManBing]

I would agree with some of the sentiment here. EtCR is not meant to be a continuation of White Wolf's work. Strictly speaking, it's not even meant to be a continuation of 2nd ed. work - it's set chronologically way back in I6 and it is beholden to no campaign setting.

That said, my own personal feeling is that the adventure would best be served by incorporation into a preexisting Ravenloft campaign. I might question the decision to split it from the Ravenloft background, but that was a decision for the authors to make and the end result is a good generic D&D adventure. I'm thinking of keeping the 3.5 converstion of the castle itself for an upcoming runthrough.

Even if you hate the encounters as they fit into a Strahd adventure, the format (I find) is well done and modular to the point that you can pick and drop them into other adventures. On their own, they are well suited for other locales in Ravenloft's extended setting.

All that having been said, I wonder at the decision to have one version of Strahd on the cover (closer to the 2nd ed., except he looks even more shrivelled and decrepit) and another version on the inside (which strikes me as strongly resembling Brad Pitt as the vampire Louis from Interview). For first-time players it might well be confusing, especially where they might have seen Clyde Caldwell's earlier famous paintings of Strahd. Plus, I hate Brad Pitt

Bottom line is this is a good generic D&D adventure. I wish they'd do more Ravenloft stuff, but can't force them to. And even if they refuse to do more Ravenloft stuff, adventures like these are full of material ripe for the wholesale pillaging for my own Ravenloft adventures.

[midnightcat]

Keep in mind that in EtCR, where Eva is a hag, Ravenloft is just a castle in Barovia and none of the rest of that stuff exists in the first place.

You're comparing apples and oranges and getting angry over it to boot. Just kick back and relax that death grip on canon.

I kind of agree with you. Then again I can take the good or bad out of alot of the White Wolf's Ravenloft Books. we all know how much Champions of darkness, and Heroes of light is hated around here. I prefer the Vistani perented in the 2nd editon , and 3rd editon setting so I just keep them that way. It not like I cna't alter things if I run the adeventure.

[Jester of the FoS]

I kinda laugh at how everyone was convinced this would be a great product and bring dozens of new people into Ravenloft. We were going to get so many newcomers and people curious about Ravenloft we had to write a book for newcomers and Weekends in Hell (better include lots of fiends and aberrations ).

Now it's released we're ranting about how it isn't 'Gothic' enough and that they made, *gasp*, changes to a 20 year-old product.
Meanwhile, other message boards are filled with people commenting on how to use this in their own settings (and Ptolus and Dragonlance) or how they already knew and enjoyed the original.

My only gripe with the book is the endless templates and specialty monsters (something I got tired of in 2E, the fifty different sub-breeds of everything) and feats where a source is not listed and no description for reading out to the players is supplies. How the ******** am I supposed to tell the party what it looks like when I don't even know?!
Least I don't have to worry about them guessing what it's statblock is like...

[alhoon]

What if I said I liked how it was written, I liked how they have the new delve format applied, and I liked the fact that even if it didn't fit "canon Ravenloft," I'd play it anyway?

That's enough for me. I will buy and enjoy this adventure. I like D&D too after all. I will still play in Ravenloft as it is from the WWolf books, as a campaign world, with Vistani with strange powers etc. I will also play this as a stand alone since it sound cool. The way I play homebrew worlds etc.

Bottom line is this is a good generic D&D adventure. I wish they'd do more Ravenloft stuff, but can't force them to.

That's what was promised, that's what we got

Just a quick rant: They made a Ravenloft adventure and they didn't include Toben the Many?!? Or even the Telling Man? How is that possible?

Oh, wait... they didn't make a Ravenloft adventure. They published a D&D adventure named "Expedition to Castle Ravenloft"

[tec-goblin]

Yep, I just realized it doesn't even have the Ravenloft sign on it.
Well, as far as I've read, it's a great adventure. Even in my group where the suspension of disbelief quickly falls if the adversaries do not actually have GREAT plans about killing the players, it can work with minor adjustments. I'll just play it in modern, so the adjustments will be more than minor, but it's still lovely.
I have to admit that I liked City of the Spider Queen. And it needed so many modifications to fit my game and become smarter, even though it was an FR game. Reading this adventure now, I see it's miles better, for sheer playability, smart NPCs, mood and everything. So I love it.

I still think that vistani with no evil eye and working too much as Stradh's lackeys is boring, but that's just a minor think. If you play it in Ravenloft, that's the easiest thing to correct (the whole "we are going to kill Stradh, who's CR<=15" is a lot worst).

[Joël of the FoS]

FYI, WotC just released all the maps in this book, Check here : http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ag/20061031a

Joël

[Jester of the FoS]

I am very happy about that, although it would have been nice if the map kep points had been left off.

[tec-goblin]

Me too, but, grace to my little changes in the maps (where some opponents don't really start there, and some simply don't exist) they are GREAT help for my game.

[Jester of the FoS]

If I'm ever going to print out the maps I'll just hit photoshop and cut squares or edit shots and remove as many of the obvious dots as possible.

[Jakob]

Ok, I bought it in Milano last week. I had a cold this week, so I had time to read it.

I liked it.
It's not canon? Who cares. I see the adventure as it is: a "what if...?"
More precisely: "What if I6 was published in 3.5E?"

I can just ignore Castle Ravenloft when I run my Ravenloft campaign.

That's it: a good adventure of fantasy horror, as I6 was back when I was... Err... Two years old?

My only regret about it? Sissy Strahd.

EDIT
This explains it quite well:

we wanted to make sure the adventure still felt like D&D (and not d20 Gothic), which is why there are elves in the woods as well