Which Borders do You Close?

[DeepShadow of FoS]

The concept of border closure has become an increasingly unworkable relic of the game, IMO. How many border closures are used on a regular basis in your games? I can't believe Ivana would risk the fallout of the constant traffic in and out of Borca. Nor Hazlik, nor even Strahd. The only border closure I've ever used is the Lamordian blizzard when Adam gets truly mad, and even that's rare IMC. How about you?

[Strahdsbuddy]

I will admit to never closing a border in any of my games, though I have players that tend to stick around until the job is done, so i never had to railroad them into a situation like that. As you say, Lamordian border closure is almost an involuntary thing, and that really adds to Adam as a character imo.

The more spectacular border closures seem grossly out of place. In a land of subtle horror, blatant shows of power would fit better in a more high-fantasy setting. Hazlik's rivals in Thay are probably more likely to defend their realms with walls of fire than he is. Darkon is probably the only one that makes much sense because the walking dead are such an integral part of the domain's history, mythology and culture. In fact, I'd say they are no different than Falkovnia's or Verbrek's patrolled borders; they are the agents of the darklord doing his bidding.

I daresay DS is correct: border closures are not necessary.

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

I've used Borca's and that's it. And it was only to demonstrate: a) that darklords exist, b) that they can close their borders, and c) that the Carnival can circumvent them.

IMHO, they shouldn't just be dumped, but they should be used very, very rarely. Like most DL's probably have used them once, instinctively, just to see how they work, and have maybe never used them again. The less the DL cares about their domain, the more often they might be used for personal reasons. The more the DL cares about the domain, the more often they'd be used to protect the domain. Hence, since Azalin sees himself as the ultimate king, and must protect his kingdom, he's used them against the Falkovnians many times, but would rarely use it against a personal enemy. Since Adam doesn't care about his domain, it happens based on his mood alone.

[DeepShadow of FoS]

Darkon is probably the only one that makes much sense because the walking dead are such an integral part of the domain's history, mythology and culture. In fact, I'd say they are no different than Falkovnia's or Verbrek's patrolled borders; they are the agents of the darklord doing his bidding.

What a beautifully ironic example: the undead of Darkon ARE just the DL's agents doing his bidding. Darkon's actual border closure since the black box has always been the memory swapping. Remember, border closure is supposed to keep people in, not out.

[DeepShadow of FoS]

I've used Borca's and that's it. And it was only to demonstrate: a) that darklords exist, b) that they can close their borders, and c) that the Carnival can circumvent them.

Ah, that's right! Okay, I now recall other situations where I used it, but they were all island domains. I have an easier time using the border closure when border traffic is minimal.

[Resonant Curse]

Some of the domain closures are less of a hazard and thus somehwat more useable. I don't really see a problem with Harkon Lukas using his for example. And some uses for very brief periods of time (such as Soth using his in Spectre of the Black Rose to block the spy from crossing the border) work well. Soths again was a relatively unobtrusive one in that it hits everyone at once, so aside from a lingering feeling, it doesn't really disrupt anything. Those two are the easist I can think of to use without frying the local peasants' brains with "Where did that huge wall of fire come from?!?!?" type situations.

[Vlad]

I never use them, come to think of it. Usually my PCs stick around, wanting to end it. Only one occasion comes to mind in which Strahd could have closed the borders to get them, but at that time he could have knowledge of the part my PCs will play in Roots of Evil (through his Vistani) to let them go. I don't think it's a good tool to let them go in the way the DM wants to let them go. Let them flee if they are afraid, that's horror, right? You can accomplish the sense of being unable to flee without using heavy handed mechanisms (like secret agents of that lord, if applicble).

If I would use one, then only the mists, or the simple 'you return from where you came' (without telling them directly of course). Not one of the fantasy-kinds (rats, fire, skeletons, etc)

[Joël of the FoS]

I used it once, when Godefroy closed his border to neutralize Death's Horsemen currently active on his domain.

Was used as a plot device, and I never used it before, nor plan to in the future. A relic of the past? Perhaps, but it is interesting when used rarely, for all the reasons above, and because it is used rarely.

Joël

[Scipion_Emilien]

The only time I close a border was in Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, and the game was in the Forgotten realms, so technically I never close a border in Ravenloft.

As for the concept in itself, there something that bug me. While they give domain a flavor (and DM a tool), they make the world a lot more static. For example, you can't do invasion (if the lord care a little about his domain) because he will close the domain as long as it is needed to repel the invaders.

I am still wondering if that's a good or bad thing.

[Vlad]

As for the concept in itself, there something that bug me. While they give domain a flavor (and DM a tool), they make the world a lot more static. For example, you can't do invasion (if the lord care a little about his domain) because he will close the domain as long as it is needed to repel the invaders.
.

Doesn't it only apply to people leaving the domain? That would make the border closure not an attack preventer, but could cause an invasion to become very lethal when something goed wrong and there is no way to flee.

[Manofevil]

Isn't that the reason why all of Drakov's invasions failed?

[Vlad]

Isn't that the reason why all of Drakov's invasions failed?

No, I thought it was because all fallen Falkovnian soldiers turned against their comrades. I don't think Drakov ever contemplates withdrawal.

[Ryan Naylor]

Vlad is right: closing the borders stops people getting out, not in. It says so in both the Black Box and Domains of Dread. If you look at the effects, most of them say they fade if you turn back into the domain as well. And peasants have learnt that the borders are cursed places and avoid living near them as well.

In my campaigns (over 15 years), I've closed the borders for Gundarak, Forlorn, Falkovnia and Paridon; generally when the PCs have done something to really annoy the darklord and it wouldn't make sense for him not to close the borders to stop them escaping. Or to stop the Fang of the Nosferatu getting away. Of course, the darklord has to stay angry and focused to keep the borders closed, so if they can out-cat-and-mouse him, they can eventually escape when he loses interest.

It's a tool. Don't use it if you don't want to, but it still has its place in RL.

[Strahdsbuddy]

Are the effects of a closed border noticeable from outside the domain? For instance, would residents of Immol watch fearfully from their church belfry while the fires raged in the Hazlani frontier? Or is it only obvious to those who are trapped? Forlorn's border closing is invisible from both sides, which seems a little unfair. How does a player know to stop running towards Kartakass before he is catatonic on the border?

This isn't a video game. The nature of the game is such that the PCs are really moving as fast as the DM wishes. The players don't tell the DM how close to the border they are. Honestly, the PCs can only hide from the darklord if the DM wills it. What is the difference between a supernatural event on a border that prevents escape, and the appearance of another threat, even the darklord himself? They're both heavy-handed DM devices to keep the players int he place where the action is, but I can see certain border closures getting a raised eyebrow from PCs who would instantly feel railroaded. It is the sort of thing that is front and center in criticism of the setting: the players feel like they aren't in control of their own characters.

I think Ivana's "border closure" is effective, not because it traps the player, but because it is a viable show of force. I think the prowling Verbreker wolves are actually spookier than any sort of supernatural occurrence. The Mists are enough of a vehicle if changing the party's direction is important enough to the story, IMO.

[High Priest Mikhal]

Closed domain borders would be noticeable if they have obvious effects. Otherwise there's no real way to know (which is unfair, but that's the point in Gothic horror where the villains hold the real power). They also work both ways; no way in, no way out. Outsiders with the Good or Evil descriptors have reality wrinkles that override domain borders and certain domains can't bar creatures immune to their effects by fiat of their type (constructs, elementals, oozes, plants, and undead could pass through Borca's closed borders because they're creature types immune to poison, fire elementals can pass through Hazlan's closed border, etc.).

They're also ultimately DM tools, as Strahdsbuddy points out. Ravenloft is a game as much about consequences as anything else; using closed borders to railroad players is not why they exist. Using them to further the story is. If the players have deliberately antagonized a darklord, that's a pretty good reason to close the borders. They can't be allowed to just run amok. But to close them just to force players to stay with an adventure that's grown boring? That's not a good reason.