Café de Nuit

alhoon wrote:Ahh... Lysa Von Zarovich. A Vampire (with generic uberpowerful vampire stats of course, but more ranting on that subject can be found in the previous post). But Tatyana's Reincarnation? I can't say that I like it. It is of course just an alternative but it gives the wrong vibe IMO. Tatayana should be a pure soul ... and not Strahd's cousin.


EDIT: I love the new Dementlieu! It is a brand new domain though. Renaming it to something else and nobody would notice.

Making a character potentially lust after their niece is certainly a choice.

One which is especially odd in this book as they've tried to remove everything they deem problematic, but incest is OK?

Drinnik Shoehorn wrote:Making a character potentially lust after their niece is certainly a choice.

One which is especially odd in this book as they've tried to remove everything they deem problematic, but incest is OK?

Lyssa is Sturm's (Strahd's older brother) granddaughter so it is Strahd's grandniece, though still incestious and problematic. Problematic how?

Her grandfather Sturm was a survivor of the events of Castle Ravenloft that shapped the Demiplane. Sturm was born in 312 BC making him 39 at the time of Strahd's transformation. So Lyssa's, Von Zarovich parent would have already be born or was born around that time. We also know that the first reincarnation of Tatyana, Marina, met Strahd in 400 BC so 49 years later. By then I am sure that Anna von Zarovich and Tod von Zarovich would have already had given birth to Lyssa and that she would be around "Marina's" age, so it would not be possible for her to be Tatyana's reincarnation as there was also a reincarnation around her age at that time.

Mephisto wrote:

Drinnik Shoehorn wrote:Making a character potentially lust after their niece is certainly a choice.

One which is especially odd in this book as they've tried to remove everything they deem problematic, but incest is OK?

Lyssa is Sturm's (Strahd's older brother) granddaughter so it is Strahd's grandniece, though still incestious and problematic. Problematic how?

Her grandfather Sturm was a survivor of the events of Castle Ravenloft that shapped the Demiplane. Sturm was born in 312 BC making him 39 at the time of Strahd's transformation. So Lyssa's, Von Zarovich parent would have already be born or was born around that time. We also know that the first reincarnation of Tatyana, Marina, met Strahd in 400 BC so 49 years later. By then I am sure that Anna von Zarovich and Tod von Zarovich would have already had given birth to Lyssa and that she would be around "Marina's" age, so it would not be possible for her to be Tatyana's reincarnation as there was also a reincarnation around her age at that time.

But knowing that would require doing some research and being a barely competent writer, so, you know...

Mephisto wrote:

Drinnik Shoehorn wrote:Making a character potentially lust after their niece is certainly a choice.

One which is especially odd in this book as they've tried to remove everything they deem problematic, but incest is OK?

Lyssa is Sturm's (Strahd's older brother) granddaughter so it is Strahd's grandniece, though still incestious and problematic. Problematic how?

Her grandfather Sturm was a survivor of the events of Castle Ravenloft that shapped the Demiplane. Sturm was born in 312 BC making him 39 at the time of Strahd's transformation. So Lyssa's, Von Zarovich parent would have already be born or was born around that time. We also know that the first reincarnation of Tatyana, Marina, met Strahd in 400 BC so 49 years later. By then I am sure that Anna von Zarovich and Tod von Zarovich would have already had given birth to Lyssa and that she would be around "Marina's" age, so it would not be possible for her to be Tatyana's reincarnation as there was also a reincarnation around her age at that time.

1) That timeline has no meaning for the world presented in this book, which deliberately makes everything stuck in 735, a nightmare realm that overrides fixed logic, and open to the DM doing whatever they want.
2) Lyssa's birth date is already messed up, since Gaz I places it at 525, Gaz I and CotN:V's call her Sturm's grandaughter and Anna and Tod's daughter, while the black box bloodline says Anna was born in 630. Anna's not supposed to be Sturm's daughter, but his descendent. So either it's a different Anna in the black box who married a different Tod, or the dates and number of generations between Lyssa and Sturm don't match up.
3) Why couldn't there be more than one "Tatyana" at once? I think her being born as twins was another possibility in the book, if I'm not mistaken.
4) Incest has a more narrow definition now than it once did, particularly among noble lines trying to match up "nobles" to "nobles" in a small available gene pool.
5) It's icky, regardless, but horror is icky sometimes.

Drinnik Shoehorn wrote:But knowing that would require doing some research and being a barely competent writer, so, you know...

Bingo! Either way, it is indeed rather cringey that Lyssa is an option for Tatyana's reincarnation. That's the exact sort of problematic item that WotC seems to be crusading against in this book. Good to know that it's in there despite what appears to be their best attempt at sanitizing.

— onmyoji

Mephisto wrote:

Drinnik Shoehorn wrote:Making a character potentially lust after their niece is certainly a choice.

One which is especially odd in this book as they've tried to remove everything they deem problematic, but incest is OK?

Lyssa is Sturm's (Strahd's older brother) granddaughter so it is Strahd's grandniece, though still incestious and problematic. Problematic how?

Her grandfather Sturm was a survivor of the events of Castle Ravenloft that shapped the Demiplane. Sturm was born in 312 BC making him 39 at the time of Strahd's transformation. So Lyssa's, Von Zarovich parent would have already be born or was born around that time. We also know that the first reincarnation of Tatyana, Marina, met Strahd in 400 BC so 49 years later. By then I am sure that Anna von Zarovich and Tod von Zarovich would have already had given birth to Lyssa and that she would be around "Marina's" age, so it would not be possible for her to be Tatyana's reincarnation as there was also a reincarnation around her age at that time.

First thing first: When we start with things like "But it's his brother's grand-daughter!" it still rings a bell for me and in a bad way.

Second, the assumption that the people that wrote a line for Lyssa were aware/cared about Sturm is in my opinion, false. They go for the shock value.

Third, the book by design choice strays away from declaring anything as canonical! We are given tables to roll what happened to Azalin and why he did what he did for example. There's is, so far, no canonical explanation of what happened. The non-canon Lord of the Necropolis version is given the same chance to have been the reason as Azalin trying to escape the mists. I assure you, the same happens here. You are given choices and Lyssa is shown as one, with the DM given the option to use that choice or use a different one.

Forth, by the same account, many of the suggested reincarnations should not be possible as they come from a very different range of "Canonical" events.

Fifth, man, that's impressive knowledge of the von Zarovich family tree dude! Respect.


Anyway, the main issue I have with vampiring Tatyana is ... Vampiric Tatyana. She was a pure soul, not a powerhungry monster like Strahd.

alhoon wrote:Anyway, the main issue I have with vampiring Tatyana is ... Vampiric Tatyana. She was a pure soul, not a powerhungry monster like Strahd.

Didn't stop Strahd from turning Ireena into a vampire during our CoS run. I'd imagine a lot of players have it similarly. Though you're right in that if she's a vampire from the get-go, there's a lot of potential narrative depth that is wasted. If she's already a vampire, there's nowhere near as much at risk in something like CoS.

Sigh. It's like the flaws of this book just won't stop revealing themselves......

— onmyoji

alhoon wrote:Fifth, man, that's impressive knowledge of the von Zarovich family tree dude! Respect.

Sorry to disappoint you but the only thing I remembered was that Lyssa was Sturm's grandaughter, and and that around that time Strahd met Tatyana's first reincarnation (from I, Strahd),the rest (dates, parents etc) were found in Mistipedia.

Gonzoron of the FoS wrote: 1) That timeline has no meaning for the world presented in this book, which deliberately makes everything stuck in 735, a nightmare realm that overrides fixed logic, and open to the DM doing whatever they want.

For the reboot, yes anything has no meaning, as someone wrote, the VRGtR canon is to have no canon. Having everything stuck in 735 reminds me of Castle Tristenoira were the whole Castle defies time as everything repeats itself around the life on the most tragic events of the darklords life. But for that there is meaning for this, as also some kind of ghostly repetition cycle of those events (and even that involves different times or else what is the point?). I was disappointed to have Forlorn's darklord being His story from Castles Forlorn by Lisa Smedman was always one of my favourite darklord background stories. I remember reading it when I was 13 and was both fascinated and horrified by it.

Gonzoron of the FoS wrote:2) Lyssa's birth date is already messed up, since Gaz I places it at 525, Gaz I and CotN:V's call her Sturm's grandaughter and Anna and Tod's daughter, while the black box bloodline says Anna was born in 630. Anna's not supposed to be Sturm's daughter, but his descendent. So either it's a different Anna in the black box who married a different Tod, or the dates and number of generations between Lyssa and Sturm don't match up.

In the black box bloodlines, they have messed up many dates, even from events from the Who's Doomed section of the same product. You only have to compare some dates from the bloodlines to the Who's Doomed section to find out that probably bloodlines is full of typo's. I follow up the Thought's of Darkness story of Lyssa's background, it is the original after all . Makes her beef with Strahd more personal, having been raised to despise him. What I always thought as weird was the way she has achieved greater age status and powers. Is she the only vampire to ever being attacked by a ghosts aging power? I would like to have it better explained than a game mechanic that happens to work on vampires.

Gonzoron of the FoS wrote:3) Why couldn't there be more than one "Tatyana" at once? I think her being born as twins was another possibility in the book, if I'm not mistaken.

I believe as was mentioned before any possibility is possible in VRGtR. But I believe the theme of a reincarnation means the soul resides in one individual in a time-space. An exception would be, if a reincarnated individual somehow managed to time travel or came from another plane of existance, thus being in the same time-space as another reincarnated individual (someting that I am already woking on, for something totally different for QtR 28).

onmyoji wrote:

alhoon wrote:Anyway, the main issue I have with vampiring Tatyana is ... Vampiric Tatyana. She was a pure soul, not a powerhungry monster like Strahd.

Didn't stop Strahd from turning Ireena into a vampire during our CoS run.

I wouldn't personaly make Ireena into a vampire cause then Strahd would have overcomed his curse, which is Tatyana's reincarnation always slipping away.

Mephisto wrote:I wouldn't personally make Ireena into a vampire cause then Strahd would have overcomed his curse, which is Tatyana's reincarnation always slipping away.

I wasn't DMing, but that campaign was exclusively according to the 5E canon. My DM at the time (now my player) had no knowledge whatsoever of anything Ravenloft that was written outside of Curse of Strahd. It was definitely a traumatic "failing forward" moment in the campaign that was extremely effective for establishing our narrative.

— onmyoji

onmyoji wrote:I wasn't DMing, but that campaign was exclusively according to the 5E canon. My DM at the time (now my player) had no knowledge whatsoever of anything Ravenloft that was written outside of Curse of Strahd. It was definitely a traumatic "failing forward" moment in the campaign that was extremely effective for establishing our narrative.

In 5e CoS it writes In Mistipedia it writes "Her tomb in the crypts of Castle Ravenloft is labelled "Wife," (Taken from 2e Roots of Evil). Mistipedia Speculation: so it is likely that she wed Strahd von Zarovich before her death.

The Mistipedia speculation is what it is, a speculation.

I am in favour of the 5e explenation as this is Strahd's goal propably So his curse is not broken.

Agreed. The curse isn’t broken. For my players, it’s a lot easier since I’m going against traditional Ravenloft lore and siding with VotM,, in which Tatyana makes it out of the Mists. I’m extending this to say that she COMPLETELY escapes and Strahd’s search for her reincarnation is nothing more than a curse/prison of his own making. And the dark powers have no problem whatsoever adding fuel to that fire.

Either way, by definition (in my campaign anyway), there are no actual Tatyana reincarnations. And never were. Though that’s not to say she won’t still play an extremely important part in the plot.

— onmyoji

Ahh... Viktra Mordenheim. Child prodigy. Self taught.
uses spy stats with additions, so she has 12 intelligence. None of these additions are "20 intelligence" or knowledges.


Wizards of the Coast: Would it be so hard to drop a "Scholar" NPC in the bestiary, and use that template for Van Richten, Viktra, Gennifer (that is now a druid despite her pic showing her using magic that fits much more to arcane magic) and all the other crazy scientists, gruff detectives, archivists, book-keepers that make their books with human skin and douse it in human blood to keep it fresh and plot-device-for-monster-hunting scholars?!?

Come on! Literally every 10 pages there's at least a reference to someone as "spy" or "druid" or "assassin" or something with intelligence in the low teens or 12 when that person is presented as a brilliant scholar.

alhoon wrote:Come on! Literally every 10 pages there's at least a reference to someone as "spy" or "druid" or "assassin" or something with intelligence in the low teens or 12 when that person is presented as a brilliant scholar.

This is called lazy development, you have all characters including darklords as generic monster stats and maybe dropping off some extra powers. I expected it would be generic since I saw the generic brain in the jar monster appearing, but honestly I never thought it would be that bad. Even if I don't create adventures with the 5e system meaning if I had the book it would be useless for me in that account, I still believe they should have made stats for the NPC's in the book. At least there would be a reason for older fans to buy it in case they played 5e and didn't want to have to convert all these characters. I remember the first time I opened the Secrets of the Dread Realms book, (since I wasn't acustomed to 3e) I would look all these stats and be like "wow!... thats a lot of work". But also how the powers were presented in 3e would make you want to play with that system. So since then everything I make is for 3e, even if it takes a lot more time to create NPC's.

It completely misses the point to say “use x monster stats” because Darklords were never just “x monster” and that was because the had done something so heinous as to become a darklord, that their darklord powers elevated them above the normal ranks of their kind.

As far as I can see, the only extra powers these new interpretations have are Jacqueline’s lack of fashion sense and Lukas’ ability to be memory-holed by Disney.

Drinnik Shoehorn wrote:As far as I can see, the only extra powers these new interpretations have are Jacqueline’s lack of fashion sense and Lukas’ ability to be memory-holed by Disney.