WolfKook wrote:As we keep discussing the design goals, we should also start thinking on the special elements and rules (No play rules, but "world" mechanics) that define the Demiplane of Dread and make it different from the rest. With this I mean global things which affect everybody within the setting. These include (But are no limited to):
- Prophecies (The Hyskosa Hexad, ToUD)
Is there anything missing? (If so, feel free to include it).
My views, point by point.
Paths of Corruption
This has been a pretty big mechanic in previous versions of Ravenloft. Messing with them is no small matter: first, are they needed? Assuming yes, what is their purpose in the game? Is there another way to reach the same goal more easily? Should they be mandatory or optional?
According to the Black Box, the original design goal for Powers Checks was to convey the "poetic justice" element of Ravenloft, and at the same time to discourage evil acts from PCs, as failing too many results in the world shunning you as a monster, or even becoming imprisoned as a Darklord (Domains of Dread even had a percentage roll mechanic to see if you got to keep playing your character at each corruption stage). In short, it was introduced as a "punishment" mechanic.
During 3E days, punishment mechanics have been growing less and less popular (for good or for ill), and the purpose began to evolve. The mechanic started to turn into a "PC customization tool". DMs welcomed failed Powers Checks as an opportunity to get creative on an original Corruption Path, and players welcomed the extra interesting detail it brought to their hero. I personally had one player who came into my Ravenloft game who looked forward to fail Powers Checks and earn eternal damnation. Where the game originally used the Powers Checks to discourage evil actions, this player saw an opportunity to make his hero more interesting and tragic. Echoes of that were felt in accessories such as Champions of Darkness, where the players get an option of playing "darker hereos", with a Corruption path already under way.
But then, how does one handle the increase of monstrous appearence, or the fact that the character ends up being removed from play (to the chagrin of the player)?
In my current campaign, I'm actually experimenting with doing away with the Powers Checks altogether. Surprisingly, this has improved my game in subtle ways. First benefit, it takes a load off my fatigued DM brain. I don't have to plan out Corruption paths, and risk player dissapointment if I end up twisting a PC in a way her player doesn't like. This leaves the PC customization task entirely in the players' hands.
Another benefit is better mutual understanding between players and DM. In previous Ravenloft games, I often had some players (from the WoD crowd) assume the actual goal of the campaign was failing as many powers checks as possible. When I explained it didn't work that way, they were confused as to why it was there - since I couldn't very well answer "to punish you if you get out of line, you cretins", they had me stumped. Other players assumed that, because such a mechanic was in place, the DM was supposed to catch the PCs red-handed whenever he could and gleefully dole out the punishment. When my game turned out different, it was their turn to be confused. Since I did away with the Powers checks altogether, the players just focus on playing their characters as they feel and enjoy the current adventure. And I don't have to explain the rules and their purpose anymore.
Domains
I think domains are great. They provide setting flavor, guidelines for atmosphere, and adventure ideas. Some confusion comes from the different behavior of certain domains and unclear design goals for some of them, however. Some domain have a "home world" feel. They are places the PCs, especially natives, feel rather at home. When horror comes a-knocking, it is seen as a disturbing element, one the heroes must deal with so life returns to normal. Other domains are a nightmare prison that the PCs want to spend as little time as possible in. Some are very darklord-centric. Others not very much so. Some are very diverse in adventure possibilities ("rich"). Others are more limited and less customizable from the DM point of view ("clunky").
Should all domains be treated exactly the same, mechanic-wise? Should there be a distinction of role? Of mood? I don't really know, its a big question that requires a lot of common thought and diverse input.
Alternatively, previous iterations of the game assumed that whatever wasn't Mists in Ravenloft was automatically a domain. Metagaming question: does every square inch of land need a Darklord to rule over it? If yes, the setting veers towards "Gazetteer" mentality, where every spot of land eventually gets developed in great detail (such as the Core now, and Souragne, and Zherisia thanks to Fraternity Gazetteers).
If, on the other hand, you assume there are patches of territory (perhaps great patches of territory) that are unruled, you get the "points of light" mentality, where detailing is reserved for a few vital crossroads spots (ruled domains), while most of the setting is left for the DM to fill with whatever he or she needs for the next adventure (unclaimed lands).
Darklords.
Personally, I like the darklord concept as it has existed from the start. I think it works well, oozes of gothic atmosphere and provides for memorable villains. I have been dissapointed in the way many of the darklords have been written, however. Not guys like Strahd or Azalin, but smaller riff-raff like Ivana Boritsi or Dominic D'Honaire.
In my opinion, every darklord should be usable as a major adventure villain. Some are perfect for that. Others, forgive me for saying this, just aren't suited for villain duty in actual adventures. At all. I mean, they can be perfect as antagonists in novels, no questions asked. But a gaming table has its own caprices.
You meet Gabrielle Aderre at a tavern. She tries to seduce you into helping her with the Invidian resistance thing. You sense she's not telling you everything. You refuse. You follow her to see where she lives. You confront her. Big fight with lots of minions. Choice A: total party kill. Don't mess with the darklords, kids. Choice B: Players are sensible enough to retreat (not all players I've seen are that smart). Choice C: Couple of lucky hits on the Big Bad wolfwere minion, a Slow spell effect on Gabby, Crit, Crit, Sneak attack, and she's down. Choice D: She's unbeatable! She never fails her saving throw! She's got infinite hit points! Nothing can destroy a darklord! Never!
So yeah, there's a problem there. Game products kinda market darklords to be this ultimate terrifying evil, but then give them weak abilities and low-hit points-builds. Some even have no fighting prowess to speak of. Which is all right if your players hardly ever decide to draw swords (and a such a rare playing group you must have!)
The Vistani
I've said it before, I said it again: make them a playable race, already! For having already played a full-blooded vistana character in a play-by-post game back on the Kargatane site, take it from me: its loads of fun. LOADS of fun. You get to act mysterious and savvy, and call the other PCs "giorgios".
Plus, come on: the vistani have got to be the most over-detailed race this setting has, what with the Dukkars, Van Richten guides, Verteig (sp?), pacts with darklords and weird abilities. They got more attention from fans than all the non-human races combined! But you can't play them, and I don't quite grasp the reason why. You get a Half-Vistana substitute. Why a substitute? Why not the real thing? All those weird abilities they have - they can be rituals.
Say this: Mist Travel. Level 6 ritual. Components: specially enchanted Vardo, six vistani working in unison, must be performed on a foggy night. Knowledge: Arcana or Knowledge: Nature check. Or somesuch. Nothing gamebreaking at all.
The Dark Powers
From a design point of view, the dark powers are... less of a concern, I think. In previous iterations, they, as well as their MotRD equivelent the Red Death, are this unseen, unfathmoable presence the players never see. They have a very weak table presence during a game.
Waitaminute... Hey kids! New Igor word, right here:
Table Presence. Concerns any sort of game element. Determines the amount of attention the element receives during your average game session. Strong Table-Presence elements tend to be vital, recurring mechanics. Elements with weak table presence are obscure game mechanics and fluff details. For instance: death and dying rules have a strong table presence in most games. Details on Falkovnian grain import-exports usually have a weak table presence. The term can be used selectively to different types of game. For example, Goblin fighting stats have a strong table presence in adventures featuring lots of goblins, and a weak table presence in adventures that don't feature them at all.
The Dark Powers seem to have a constant Table Presence of 0.
This might mean they aren't such a vital game element. Unless you retool them so they are more prominent (but then, you'd have to define them more), you could conceivably not worry about them until the very end. Concentrate on creating the best possible setting, then adapt the Dark Powers lore to suit it. Add it at the end, like the little cherry on top.