James Wyatt, head of the D&D 'story team' and one of the lead 4E designers, is a long-time Ravenloft and MotRD fan, and had a close relationship with several of the old designers--Bill Connors dedicated Domains of Dread to him and his wife.
I'd like to see a return, in flavor at least, to ye olde 2nd edition boxed set, with all its info, its handouts, its maps, 3D lair models... That'd be neat.
Maybe not that early, although I wouldn't complain. But I suspect it'll come.
James Wyatt, head of the D&D 'story team' and one of the lead 4E designers, is a long-time Ravenloft and MotRD fan, and had a close relationship with several of the old designers--Bill Connors dedicated Domains of Dread to him and his wife.
As encouraging as that sounds, Wyatt is also half of the team that gave us "Expedition to Castle Ravenloft" and halfling Vistani.
There's a list of settings as long as my arm that didn't have a semi-official 3E adaptation. While we can expect some classics to be updated I expect a stronger demand for Dark Sun or others that have been left to the wayside.
Which is good because they'd only butcher Ravenloft.
And I prefer the idea of the Fraternity running the show.
Maybe for 5E.
Oh yes, there is definitely hope.
I'd like to see a return, in flavor at least, to ye olde 2nd edition boxed set, with all its info, its handouts, its maps, 3D lair models... That'd be neat.
Yes 2E was the best time to play Ravenloft. Man I miss those days even though they were only what 10 years ago?
Nope.
There's a list of settings as long as my arm that didn't have a semi-official 3E adaptation. While we can expect some classics to be updated I expect a stronger demand for Dark Sun or others that have been left to the wayside.
Which is good because they'd only butcher Ravenloft.
And I prefer the idea of the Fraternity running the show.
Maybe for 5E.
I am with you in thinking that WotC would only do a massacre job on Ravenloft like they did with that "Expedition" crap.
Two of the best books ever released for the main game in my opinion. Eberron will stay because it caters to the comic-book and manga lovers, as well as being so high fantasy that Elminster would choke.
Well, I rate settings on three scales: power-level, magic, and fantasy. The Realms is high in all three while Eberron is low-level but uber-high magic and fantasy while Ravenloft is low to mid-level, low-magic and low-fantasy (more fairy tale). I think Eberron caters more to a modern crowd who like their worlds logical and where things make sense. It's what a world might look like if there was ready access to magic unlike Greyhawk or the Realms where there's a tonn of magic but 90% of the populace never sees any of it. It's a world built from scratch more akin to Dark Sun and unlike the Greyhawk, the Realms, and even Ravenloft which are almost Europe with new place names and identical cultural development.
So my friend tells me, that Forgotten Realms will soon be discontinued, as well as all the novels and stuff, to make way for 4th edition. Apparently, they will be focusing exclusively on Eberron. While I don't know if there is any truth to this, as it was a rumor at GenCon, all I have to say is this:
BUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!
That is all.
So my friend tells me, that Forgotten Realms will soon be discontinued, as well as all the novels and stuff, to make way for 4th edition. Apparently, they will be focusing exclusively on Eberron. While I don't know if there is any truth to this, as it was a rumor at GenCon,
As the release schedule here still shows 16 Realms related items planned for 2007, I would consider the above an unsupported rumor at this time.
http://ww2.wizards.com/books/Wizards/Products/default.aspx
As the release schedule here still shows 16 Realms related items planned for 2007, I would consider the above an unsupported rumor at this time.
http://ww2.wizards.com/books/Wizards/Products/default.aspx
Indeed, and it is announced that the first setting to have support in 4e is FR.
Joël
Poor Ravenloft, its like the sack of kittens thrown into a river.
Sack of...?
That's not funny! 
Since it seems that money is the primary motivation for what gets published in D&D, I say we collectively flash our credit cards at the folks at WotC and tell them they'll see more if they print Ravenloft.
i look forward to a ravenloft game that can take the rules by the coin purse and bring a character from 1 -30, somthing forth edition promises.
ravenloft fans are the worst fans of any game setting hands down because we kill our own game, with what some people think ravenloft should be and what others think it might be... whatever!
i love the new taint system. i don't mind it being a low magic campaign setting, though i do enjoy the more heavily influenced fantasy in wizards veiw of it.
my last point is to let wizards get a shot to do somthing with it. i liked EtCR. butone book doesn't make the rest of the line, i want to see more before i pass judgement.
in regards to a ravenloft 4th edition i like many other fans can only hope. yet i find myself growing sick and tired of those purists who think the only good ravenloft was 2nd edition and white wolf's barly adequete attempt to the game. i will never buy another arthaus product again.
i look forward to a ravenloft game that can take the rules by the coin purse and bring a character from 1 -30, somthing forth edition promises.
ravenloft fans are the worst fans of any game setting hands down because we kill our own game, with what some people think ravenloft should be and what others think it might be... whatever!
i love the new taint system. i don't mind it being a low magic campaign setting, though i do enjoy the more heavily influenced fantasy in wizards veiw of it.
my last point is to let wizards get a shot to do somthing with it. i liked EtCR. butone book doesn't make the rest of the line, i want to see more before i pass judgement.
I don't see how you think we kill ravenloft by discussing it, making superb
offical-quality netbooks and fan material, and keeping it alive through all these years. But I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Sack of...?
Since it seems that money is the primary motivation for what gets published in D&D, I say we collectively flash our credit cards at the folks at WotC and tell them they'll see more if they print Ravenloft.
lol...
unfortunately, I don't think out Collective of Ravenloft is large enough to make wizards give a snort, much less a care. I personally will not be buying 4th edition until someone else in my group does, and I have time to look it over. I imagine the price will be somewhere close to 50-60 dollars a book.
Poor Ravenloft, its like the sack of kittens thrown into a river.
I like this game. I'll give it a try.
...
AHEM...
"Ravenloft is like the gagged and blindfolded prisoner crawling around a labyrinth in chains while the panting sounds get closer..."
in regards to a ravenloft 4th edition i like many other fans can only hope. yet i find myself growing sick and tired of those purists who think the only good ravenloft was 2nd edition and white wolf's barly adequete attempt to the game.
Surprising idea, since I thought there is more or less a consensus on the beauty of WW’s RL. Some people might not like parts of it, but as a whole, it’s considered great.
And while some people still play RL 2e, I think most of them agree the fluff of WW’s RL is great. I don’t see where you found those “2e purists”, as it’s been a while since I read a post going in that direction. Do you have examples of these “2e purist” posts?
i look forward to a ravenloft game that can take the rules by the coin purse and bring a character from 1 -30, somthing forth edition promises.
You do realize Ravenloft wasn’t made with epic in mind, do you?
Yes, I know a play-by-post epic experiment that seemed interesting and balanced, but most people here would not dare have epic players in Ravenloft. Question of balance vs darklord powers. Not unfeasible, but not obvious when talking about a RL game.
i love the new taint system.
You do realize taint isn’t part of the Ravenloft setting, do you? The Ravenloft setting already has suitable mechanics for corruption and path to darkness.
i don't mind it being a low magic campaign setting, though i do enjoy the more heavily influenced fantasy in wizards veiw of it.
Many people here would disagree with you on EtCR, I guess!
EtCR? A good fantasy adventure, IMHO.
EtCR is an accurate 3e conversion of I-6? Not so sure at all, as I feel it's too much focusing on the fiends, the weird and the abberations.
EtCR is to be considered part of the Ravenloft setting? Hell, no. It didn't take into account the WW 3e material available, making it nearly unusable in a Ravenloft setting game. The designers themselves admitted this adventure was NOT made with the RL setting in mind.
ravenloft fans are the worst fans of any game setting hands down because we kill our own game, with what some people think ravenloft should be and what others think it might be... whatever!
I just hope we are as entitled to our setting opinions, as you with your epic, taint, EtCR, and high fantasy views ;)
The “worst fans of any game setting” ? Funny comment.
my last point is to let wizards get a shot to do somthing with it. i liked EtCR. butone book doesn't make the rest of the line, i want to see more before i pass judgement.
On that, except EtCR, we agree. I'd like to see RL 4e, as everybody else here, with the right writers, who would keep the flavour of it.
Joël
Although I'm not really a fan of Taint. Too random and easily abused.
The PG attitude is something that is seriously bothering me. I'm tried of Hasbro's tobacco company attitude: "Screw the long-timers and the people who have been with us for years! Let's hook the kids!" It is throwing out good settings that need to be around that aren't all older child friendly. Of course, if things are supposed to be all PG with the new edition then their new cash cow, Eberron, will be discontinued since it's a PG-13 setting. I pray that someone who has the ability to do more than I reads this so something can be done to fix this serious problem. After all, some of my favorite 3rd edition products were the Book Of Vile Darkness and the Book of Exalted Deeds, both of which were for mature audiences.
Eh. 4th edition is so far turning out to be a fair bit darker than 3rd (the Point of Light can easily be applies to Ravenloft even if the "Light" is only dim) and the changes to Devil's almost screamed Ravenloft to me.
Not to mention, there were a lot of 3.5 books that were hardly PG (no one can tell me the Binder and its themes are family friendly).
Okay ETCR is laughable, and you cant really use the novels except to research fluff.
But hey its a start, especially which the new novels coming, which focus on new domains.
I think from wizards point of view this is a "testing the water" scenario. By seeing the success of these products and the interest it generates, will decide whether or not a new setting is composed.
Hopefully if they do rerelease it, they will have people like John W. Mangrum on the team.
So my friend tells me, that Forgotten Realms will soon be discontinued, as well as all the novels and stuff, to make way for 4th edition. Apparently, they will be focusing exclusively on Eberron. While I don't know if there is any truth to this, as it was a rumor at GenCon, all I have to say is...
Chris Perkins has stated that a 4th Edition Forgotten Realms work is planned for release in August 2008 (and has also stated that we will not be seeing much for Ravenloft).
Interview here (look on Page 4): http://au.gamespy.com/articles/819/819068p4.html
Although I'm not really a fan of Taint. Too random and easily abused.
I've been working on the taint mechanics a bit (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=923242), and I think it shapes up nicely. I've looked over the RL rules for fear and madness, and I found them a bit too complex. With taint, you get a save, then taint, then bad stuff if you get too much.
I'm not really a fan of mental illness in D&D full stop. I've got an argument for it in the taint thread, and I can't be bothered to repost it...
Chris Perkins has stated that a 4th Edition Forgotten Realms work is planned for release in August 2008 (and has also stated that we will not be seeing much for Ravenloft).
Interview here (look on Page 4): http://au.gamespy.com/articles/819/819068p4.html
Wow.... Now that D and D will just be a video game on a table top, I can just save myself the trouble, play real video games and just be satisfied with 3-3.5.
I'm not really a fan of mental illness in D&D full stop. I've got an argument for it in the taint thread, and I can't be bothered to repost it...
To each their own. I never cared for Taint because powers checks seemed to fulfill that role just fine.
Oh, and for the record, you get a save against Fear, Horror, and Madness in RL. They are complex, I agree. But so is Taint in its own ways.
*Bab-boom-tssssch!*
IMO this is what wotc is going to do.
1. 4e forgotten realms (it has the largest fan base of all the available 3.5 settings) we already know its a sure thing.
2. Eberron (this is wotc baby, its too new to let die out)
3. DragonLance (25th anniversery and movie support) i hope DL gets its time as i love the setting.
4.This is a tough one. assuming they do release a 4th setting it could be a few. Darksun, Ravenloft, Planescape,spelljammer.
maybe even greyhawk.
settings i don't think will get anymore support.
mystara - al-quadim- birthright- others not mentioned above.
this is why we need seperate companies working on the settings and wotc can just publish them.
After that it'll likely be Dark Sun or Planescape as they're the odd-man-out settings that haven't seen a 3E update so the fans will be ravenous for a book. I'm leaning towards Dark Sun because it's so very different it won't compete with either FR or Eberron but equal odds for Planescape as a big planar book will be usable for other campaign settings as well.
I can see an audience for a good 4E Dragonlance book as well, and with the animated movie coming out the cross-marketing would be keen. But they'd have to get it out late '08 to really hit that mark so it's not likely.
You can read about it on their forums in the general forums. Sorry I don't have a link. They also have alot of information regarding 4th edition in general.
Cheers.
As the release schedule here still shows 16 Realms related items planned for 2007, I would consider the above an unsupported rumor at this time.
http://ww2.wizards.com/books/Wizards/Products/default.aspx
Not to mention that the new FR4E book is due out in August 2008.
I don't know how many of you saw this, but the Fraternity of Shadows has released their "4th Edition Manifesto", pretty much stating that if Wizards does not release a 4th Edition Ravenloft, they will work on a conversion program that will convert major game play aspects (dark powers, fear, horror, madness, etc) into 4th Edition rules. So no fear! The ones in the shadows shall remain loyal to the cause...
You can read about it on their forums in the general forums. Sorry I don't have a link. They also have alot of information regarding 4th edition in general.
Cheers.
Even if they didn't convert it there would be nothing to fear. Just play with the stuff you have.
Wow.... Now that D and D will just be a video game on a table top, I can just save myself the trouble, play real video games and just be satisfied with 3-3.5.
Quoted for Truth. D&D died out a loooong time ago when WotC cut-out the real roleplaying game publishing companies.
Hmmmm, I imagined I was not the only one who thought the video game take on 4th edition was kind of twink. And it looks like I was right.... Maybe the whole video game aspect will go away if D&D Tactics (3.5 meet the 4th edition video game concept) does poorly.
Video games ripped off PnP games for the first ten years of their creation. Played Final Fantasy 1? Vancian magic, clerics, wizards, thieves, fighters, etc.
Here's the thing, video game RPGs and current PnP RPGs both come from the same source. Gary Gygax's l'il invention.
But while PnP RPGs reinvent themselves once a decade computer games can look back and go "what worked? what didn't?" after a year. They can try something new and revolutionary every year. And MMORPGs can update and improve while staying the same game. The evolution is much faster.
It's not that D&D is stealing from video games. It's that a good idea is just a good idea. They might have come up with it independently based on how things ran. Or they could have just skipped ahead three steps and testing and stolen something making it their own.
Of course, if you have specific complaints and examples of things being stolen from video games I'd like to hear it.
There are just to many reasons I do not want to see wizards taking on Ravenloft, as far as I am concerned its a sword sorcery product and I worked hard to get all the books before they were cut off from printing them so those are the ravenloft bibles to me.
wizards (in my opinion) butchered "expedition to castle ravenloft" blatantly going over all the books that "sword sorcery" worked so hard to build (and did such a great job, they will never be succeeded by any other work in my eyes. Jackie & Nicky did an amazing job!).
Again, I ask if EtCR was a 3.5 reprint of the 1e module? Wouldn't that mean they wouldn't use anything RL 3.x or even 2e because the original module came first?
Again, I ask if EtCR was a 3.5 reprint of the 1e module? Wouldn't that mean they wouldn't use anything RL 3.x or even 2e because the original module came first?
It is a remake of the 1e stand-alone module I6 Ravenloft that spawned the whole setting. It is the root and beginning of Ravenloft in real life and in the setting itself too. The whole campaign setting owes it's existence to I6. Castle Ravenloft is the beginning of Ravenloft. To me all the more reason to make it make sense. I firmly believe that it would have been much better had they made it fit more with Ravenloft lore.
So i think it would a have been great if they'd have looked at I6 and taken all that made it great, improved on the stuff that was not so great and maybe just maybe take a look at some of the material that followed in Ravenloft therafter for help/inspiration/material and maek damn sure that they don't contradict the most basic of it. If they take out much of which made I6 or the Ravenloft setting great they are doing it and you as the customer a disservice.
To quote Kain Darkwind on this thread:
That's what Expedition to Castle Ravenloft is. It's a stand-alone adventure with no baggage.
No, it isn't. From the second they named it Expedition to Castle Ravenloft instead of Expedition to Castle Generica de Vampirica it latched onto the 'baggage' of the former adventure. If it is going to use the name Ravenloft to increase its sales, it could at least have the decency to be true to the legacy it is invoking.It never claims to be part of the Ravenloft campaign setting. It's not tied to any setting; it can be dropped into FR, Eberron, or your home campaign. And, as has often been repeated elsewhere, the original I6: Castle Ravenloft didn't have any kind of setting tied to it. What this product is doing, it seems to me, is taking the adventure back to its most basic roots.
And rewriting those roots.Don't forget that WotC's constant goal is to attract new players to the game. Mostly kids. References to decades-old metaplots would be lost on new players, at least without lengthy explanation. Yes, you adore and treasure these things, but players new to the game would view them as extraneous and unnecessary. A book only has so many pages, and this is an adventure module, not a setting guide.
If that was the case, they could use a different name and a different vampire lord. If they were truly trying to attract new players to the game with this book, they wouldn't be shamelessly exploiting the fans of Ravenloft by invoking the name. You can't tell me the Expedition series is an attempt for new blood. 4e is an attempt for new blood. The expanding Complete series is an attempt for new blood. The Expedition series is a bullet aimed directly at older fans of the game. As such, they could better sell if they were more true to the settings which they draw from and if they were better adventures. It is sort of depressing thinking about how much better Shackled City is than the Expedition series.
And another good one:
Last I recall, D&D is a game. It's not a story. it's not a novel. Castle Ravenloft is written for people who think it would be really darn cool to hunt down a vampire in his own castle, and that's it. Anything else is just an embellishment. I don't know what Vistani are or why they're so cool, but you obviously know a great deal about them, so why can't you just put them in your game?
While he can certainly do this, I think one of the major issues that is really frustrating a lot of players, particularly those who've played for at least two full editions (like me), is the noted lack of interest/respect for the metastories that have existed in D&D since the mid 80s. It's as though these designers either don't care or are unaware of the influences of the past. Don't get me wrong, metastories should progress and I don't necessarily expect to agree with every single progression, but at least an awareness of what has come before is important if a designers going to bother to adopt a given setting. Otherwise, I'd prefer that the designers just create adventures that are stand alone and carry no baggage.
Then people would complain about how they spent $25 on something they could have just done themselves over said long weekend.
It had to have enough homages and tributes to still be the same rough mod but with enough new stuff that people would feel justified shelling out a hard day's pay for it. Especially if they already had a copy of I6, the RPGA silver reprint and/or House of Strahd.
Plus they wanted it to reflect 3.5 in the same way that the original reflected 1E.
I sucked, but 90% of the real problems just came from a difference of atmosphere and a failure to "get" what made the first module special.
Look guys i've been playing D&D for about 9 years and to be honest i don't like Wizards as a company.I loved TSR and it's AD&D because TSR were care less about money and more about quality.
I love how, as the years go on, new company names just get rotated through the same ol' rant.
"[Company that published D&D when I first started] was pure and pristine! [Company that publishes D&D now] is a bunch of thieves and villains!"
Why, wasn't so long ago that so-called "T$R" was the money-grubbing leech. Ah, nostaglia. It's almost sweet.
Accept certain inalienable truths: prices will rise; politicians will philander; you too will get old, and when you do you’ll fantasize that when you were young prices were reasonable, politicians were noble, and children respected their elders.
So perhaps we should add to that list "game companies will put out shoddy products that are undeserving of your hard earned coin"?
WotC canned those and brought us Eberron. I suppose to some that sort of maths makes sense.
To their credit, though, WotC has been gracious enough to let fans make products concerning those defunct settings. Of course, we don't do it for the money, but we do it just to keep the campaign settings going.
I will agree that T$R was in fact in it for hte money every bit as much as WotC, John's right on that.
Oy.
However, there is a lot that I find sketchy. They haven't decided if Bard will even be a class anymore, and I feel strongly that to remove it would be a mistake. Another thing that bothers me is that they state that "alignments will have a much reduced role" and paladins are no longer restricted to Lawful Good. One example was "an evil Paladin of Asmodeus" (who has finally ascended to godhood, btw). That, excuse my teenage slang, just sounds ghey. So, what, does that mean we can have Chaotic Neutral paladins? TRUE NEUTRAL?!? Who knows. And with evil paladins, will they be removing prestige classes like Blackguard?
I don't know about you, but I don't want to raise my players in a dark, gothic horror world with chaotic paladins, no-restriction alignments, and where there are no cheery fellows to brighten your day or tell you about that ancient cursed sword you just picked up that you thought was a holy avenger.:surrender
I love how, as the years go on, new company names just get rotated through the same ol' rant.
"[Company that published D&D when I first started] was pure and pristine! [Company that publishes D&D now] is a bunch of thieves and villains!"
Why, wasn't so long ago that so-called "T$R" was the money-grubbing leech. Ah, nostaglia. It's almost sweet.
I was going to reply with this, but since it would have been the third or forth time I've made the comment I decided not too...
Well, from the 4th Edition fact sheet, I'm seeing a few things I like, but most of it I don't. I like the idea of races feeling different, even if they are the same class (fighter is mentioned an innumerable amount of times...), and I like the fact that there will be fewer than 11 core classes. A lot of rules have been simplified, and some silly skills will be eliminated or combined (I mean... use rope? Come on). Magic items will have a lessened effect, which for low magic settings like ravenloft, is a good thing I guess.
However, there is a lot that I find sketchy. They haven't decided if Bard will even be a class anymore, and I feel strongly that to remove it would be a mistake. Another thing that bothers me is that they state that "alignments will have a much reduced role" and paladins are no longer restricted to Lawful Good. One example was "an evil Paladin of Asmodeus" (who has finally ascended to godhood, btw). That, excuse my teenage slang, just sounds ghey. So, what, does that mean we can have Chaotic Neutral paladins? TRUE NEUTRAL?!? Who knows. And with evil paladins, will they be removing prestige classes like Blackguard?
I don't know about you, but I don't want to raise my players in a dark, gothic horror world with chaotic paladins, no-restriction alignments, and where there are no cheery fellows to brighten your day or tell you about that ancient cursed sword you just picked up that you thought was a holy avenger.:surrender
Considering how little we know this is really premature.
We know they're changing alignments (likely dropping a few of the neutrals. I mean, what really makes NG that different?) and opening up paladins (they'll likely be lawful-restricted like knights) but more than that is vague and guesswork.
And as much as I loved bards they're not essential to the game or part of the big 4 (fighter, cleric, rogue, wizard). Heck, they weren't even really solidly in the game until 2E. And if they're not in the first PHB they'll likely be in the second.
You do realize Ravenloft wasn’t made with epic in mind, do you?
That's because it was constrained by what the rules in the basic PHB allowed. And the PHB only allowed for Level 20 characters. But with a PHB that allows for Level 30 characters, Ravenloft could quite easily be rebalanced to be more suitable for characters at all levels of play, including Epic Level. Nor would they have to cap Darklords and such as Level 20 max. Besides, guys like Azalin and Strahd absolutely SHOULD be Epic Level.
EtCR is to be considered part of the Ravenloft setting? Hell, no. It didn't take into account the WW 3e material available, making it nearly unusable in a Ravenloft setting game.
This is such a ridiculous complaint. They weren't writing an adventure for Arthaus. Of course it's not going to take that stuff into account. Nor are they going to require any potential buyers to go out and buy the Arthaus books just to play in it, as they wanted it to be useable to the widest possible audience. Would it have been nice if it were more Ravenloft? Sure. But it's an adventure book, not a sourcebook. And putting in pages and pages of world information is a waste of space in something that's supposed to be an adventure.
The designers themselves admitted this adventure was NOT made with the RL setting in mind.
Neither was I6.
That's because it was constrained by what the rules in the basic PHB allowed. And the PHB only allowed for Level 20 characters. But with a PHB that allows for Level 30 characters, Ravenloft could quite easily be rebalanced to be more suitable for characters at all levels of play, including Epic Level. Nor would they have to cap Darklords and such as Level 20 max. Besides, guys like Azalin and Strahd absolutely SHOULD be Epic Level.
Even with 30 levels it's not that kind of setting. Epic is included in the SRD and is open season for other developers. But Ravenloft works better at low to mid-levels, likely 1-20 in the new system.
It's in the level descriptions for 4E. 1-10 you save villages, 10-20 you save countries and 20-30 you save worlds. You can't fight aborted god-babies, travel between planes and confront armies of Balors in key battles for the Blood War when trapped in a demi-plane.
Ravenloft works with fear. The fear that there is always something bigger, stronger, tougher and deadlier than you. You can pull that fear out at low levels but it becomes tougher at high levels. And once you hit 15+ there's no more fear. You can teleport, freely raise the dead, stave of death to -40hp, disintegrate enemies, and more. While you can challenge parties, there's just less fear.
Much like the darklords the epic character has to work behind the scenes most of the time. They aren't openly smiting the undead horrors of the night and opposing the darklords (if they have any sense of self-preservation). To be so open and flashy in any setting--Ravenloft especially--invites someone a lot bigger to come and open the proverbial can. In RL these are often the darklords and/or their minions. Even a 50+ fighter would fall when faced with the legions of undead horrors Azalin commands across domains. Better to face the legions of the night without attracting the attention of beings that will invariably destroy these pawns.
Also remember that RL is a role-play setting first and foremost. Even epic characters RP and some of the best play in the epic strata is strictly role-playing. Take away the mechanics and level loses meaning. But if at the end of the day you still need some big, bad monster to scare your PCs, remember that monsters can advance just as the characters can. I'd loathe facing a 30 HD mist golem, no matter how high my level was.
Ravenloft works with fear. The fear that there is always something bigger, stronger, tougher and deadlier than you. You can pull that fear out at low levels but it becomes tougher at high levels. And once you hit 15+ there's no more fear. You can teleport, freely raise the dead, stave of death to -40hp, disintegrate enemies, and more. While you can challenge parties, there's just less fear.
That's a problem of the system, itself, one which they've stated they're hoping to correct for 4E. Basically the whole talk of the "sweet spot", where the game works out just right, and all encounters are challenges. They want to stretch that out across all 30 levels. If they can do that then a DM will always be able to find something to challenge the PC's with.
And even epic level characters still have things to fear in Ravenloft. Like having the domain borders closed on you when you've got a particularly nasty Darklord ticked at you. Or taking an extended vacation in Darkon. Or getting bit by a lycanthrope. And don't domains like Bluetspur and The Nightmare Lands seem like good places for Epic Level adventures? It'd be pretty sweet putting the PC"s up against Cthulhuesque horrors and such in Bluetspur.
This is such a ridiculous complaint. They weren't writing an adventure for Arthaus. Of course it's not going to take that stuff into account. Nor are they going to require any potential buyers to go out and buy the Arthaus books just to play in it, as they wanted it to be useable to the widest possible audience. Would it have been nice if it were more Ravenloft? Sure. But it's an adventure book, not a sourcebook. And putting in pages and pages of world information is a waste of space in something that's supposed to be an adventure.
Just to clarify something for you. I was replying to someone who wished that RL in 4e was to be influenced by EtCR.
So it wasn't a complaint, it was a simple fact.
On this, as ridiculous as it can seems to you, I think we basically say the same thing, you and me.
That's a problem of the system, itself, one which they've stated they're hoping to correct for 4E. Basically the whole talk of the "sweet spot", where the game works out just right, and all encounters are challenges. They want to stretch that out across all 30 levels. If they can do that then a DM will always be able to find something to challenge the PC's with.
Well if I may, count me in the list of people against it. As written, the system works perfectly (balance & all) and I would be against a rehash to accomodate the few people who want to play epic in RL, as the said rehash could unbalance the whole thing.
Now, that some chosen key NPC have two versions, one "normal" and one "epic", that I would not mind. But to boost everything in case a 27th level Paladin needs something to do, I'm not sure
And I have the same concern about the fear factor other people mentionned. Say what you want, but an epic caracter player will never fear as much as a 7th level player would.
Could work, but the risk of jeopardizing this whole unique setting are too high to be worth it, IMHO, FWIW.
Joël
Just to clarify something for you. I was replying to someone who wished that RL in 4e was to be influenced by EtCR.
So it wasn't a complaint, it was a simple fact.
On this, as ridiculous as it can seems to you, I think we basically say the same thing, you and me.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I just get sick and tired of reading complaints by people who seem to think that EtCR should've been a campaign setting book, or that it should've been in line with the Arthaus books (Were they even being published at the time it came out?). Would a campaign setting have been nice? Sure. But it was billed as an adventure, so it shouldn't have come as a surprise when they devoted pages to things which directly impacted the adventure, rather then using up pages and pages on describing the origins and culture of the Vistani.
Well if I may, count me in the list of people against it. As written, the system works perfectly (balance & all) and I would be against a rehash to accomodate the few people who want to play epic in RL, as the said rehash could unbalance the whole thing.
Agree to disagree, I guess. It made sense in 2E and 3E, where the upper limit was Level 20, and Epic Levels were an afterthought, but in 4E, Levels 21-30 will be fully integrated into the system. Running a Level 30 party in a 4E Ravenloft game ought to be about as difficult as running a Level 20 party in a 2E Ravenloft game.
Quite frankly, I think there are enough settings that offer plenty good epic level roleplaying. A party of adventurers reach level 20 in Ravenloft? Well then maybe they should find a way out of this terrible place called the Dread Realms, and head for something like Eberron or Forgotten Realms. Just a thought.
For outlanders, sure. Busting out would be the thing to do for them. But for natives? As hellish as it is, it's still home. And if you're the heroic type who adventures to protect the innocent, then being Level 21 isn't going to change that. You're still going to want to protect the natives of the Lands of the Mists.
That's a problem of the system, itself, one which they've stated they're hoping to correct for 4E. Basically the whole talk of the "sweet spot", where the game works out just right, and all encounters are challenges. They want to stretch that out across all 30 levels. If they can do that then a DM will always be able to find something to challenge the PC's with.
It’s not a sweet-spot problem. It’s options and power. No matter how you cut it, high level parties will have more equipment, powers and abilities. Challenges were never the problem as there’s always a bigger, scarier, nastier monster in 3E.
It’s the lack of humanity. The gothic archetype works best with an unassailable opponent targeted by frail, mortal beings. Everymen versus monsters.
That’s lost when you’ve saved the world and can kill dragons. You’re clearly no longer the everyman or weak. And the bad guy, to be that unassailable, just has to be that much more powerful.
The stakes just get too high to regularly do it without breaking the reality of the world.
Well if I may, count me in the list of people against it. As written, the system works perfectly (balance & all) and I would be against a rehash to accomodate the few people who want to play epic in RL, as the said rehash could unbalance the whole thing.
Not really… the game (3E) plays best between level 5-15. You’re not going to die from a single critical hit. You have enough spells and abilities to not run out and have to resort playing your character differently (wizard charging into melee or pulling out the crossbow).
But you’re also not going to be able to just wish problems away or dump a maximized disintegrate on them or charge in recklessly knowing the cleric has a delay death with your name on it.
And then there’s the EL system. It really breaks down at higher levels and things can either be way too hard or way to easy.
And I have the same concern about the fear factor other people mentionned. Say what you want, but an epic caracter player will never fear as much as a 7th level player would.
Could work, but the risk of jeopardizing this whole unique setting are too high to be worth it, IMHO, FWIW.
And even epic level characters still have things to fear in Ravenloft. Like having the domain borders closed on you when you've got a particularly nasty Darklord ticked at you. Or taking an extended vacation in Darkon. Or getting bit by a lycanthrope. And don't domains like Bluetspur and The Nightmare Lands seem like good places for Epic Level adventures? It'd be pretty sweet putting the PC"s up against Cthulhuesque horrors and such in Bluetspur.
Bit by a lycanthrope? Yeah, right. Name an epic level character that can’t blow a DC15 fort save out of the water. Even a wizard with a 12 con likely has a +7 for that, plus a quick casting of resistance and bear’s endurance while the cleric prepares a resurgence. 25% chance of failure with a reroll and likely other bonuses.
Nasty darklord. Who can still scary an epic party. Well, unfortunately, that narrows it down to three. And it’s not hard for epic characters to keep ahead of darklords. A quick teleport to the far side of the domain followed by nondetection, secure shelter, and invisibility sphere and you’re pretty much safe from anything.
And running from darklords hardly makes for an exciting campaign. Unless you’re always cleaving through lords there’s not going to be a lot of challenges. And once you hit level 22 or 23 (barely epic) you’re barely going to find any lords threatening.
Bluetspur can also break out the epic, but at that point (running around an uninhabited alien wasteleand fighting hideous freak-monsters) are you really still playing a Ravenloft game? You’ve moved from gothic to Lovecraft and that’s a big jump.
It’s not impossible to have a high-level or epic adventure in Ravenloft, but a campaign? Without restricting the PC’s abilities and equipment essentially making them non-epic? And without just playing darklord wack-a-mole?
Another option is the old "power at a price" schtick. Let a wizard grow into an epic character that could lay waste to domains with a few words. But every time they cast a lot of powerful spells (say level 6-epic) in a short time someone or something takes notice and tries to capture or kill them. A lich would likely send countless undead minions to take down this potential threat, and eventually spells run out. Yes the epic characters have power, but the price they have to pay for using it is high. Then there are the role-played implications. Folks aren't exactly going to be comfortable around someone that could slay them without breaking a sweat. Or they may attract the attention of those that would use such powerful beings. This is true in any campaign, but is especially so in Ravenloft where the bad guys have all the aces. And even the most powerful epic character will be brought low by a series of failed powers checks (the threat alone was enough to keep my players in line when I went epic in RL). This isn't terribly Gothic unless everyone is willing to put in the effort.
That's actually the approach I use in The Lost Journals and The Gothic Journals. Alexander Dreamfire has power, but if he's too blatant in its use he'll be hunted down and killed by things more powerful and/or more numerous than him. Then there's the fact others would try to use him as a pawn if they knew. Better that he pass himself off as something less, lest he be hunted to the ends of the Earth. What good can he do if he's dead or corrupted?
My reasoning is using say, Forgotten Realms as an example. It's very high magic heavy realm unlike RL, but looking over many of the main NPC caster's stats (though this may just be a mistake before the epic lvl spells were introduced in 3-3.5, but still even after the NPCs still don't have what it takes) I see they don't even one with a spellcraft high enough to cast nothing more than the lowest of epic spells. That is nothing to brush aside, but the realm is currently coming out of a depression of it's former state of high magic and there certainly isn't a lot of single mages going around tearing countries apart with the stroke of a solitary spell that requires a spellcraft that even a 50-60th lvl caster would be pressed to have. With the fall of Netheral, the decline of the elven empires, and other societies who perfected their study of the weave; most of the advanced art that has been lost and the current practitioners are trying to piece the old lore back together . Elven High Magic is circle magic which requires an elf to be already epic in lvls as a caster and well over middle age before the circle will consider to take them into training. They are very selective though and their numbers dwindle every century making them really the only practicing group of epic lvl spell casters in the setting to speak outside of the current event in the Year of the Lightning Storms where Blackstaff called together many casters to preform a circle ritual unlike Faerun has seen in a long time. You have to remember that Blackstaff was born into the height of the elven empire and has built his entire life of unearthing lost lore to that very day based on the study of high magic. The red wizards of Thay I feel will be next to have a break through in what they will probably call Thayian High magic, which is already built on circle magic.
So, RL has no society that caters to these studies outside the slim chance of a development in magic years upon years down the road in maybe Hazlik or one of the elven based domains, which is even slimer. This posses the question which leaves it up to the DM's: where are players going to find this unique and extremely rare training? Unless they are powerful outsiders or had brought the Nether Scrolls with them when they were enveloped by the mists I don't see it happening.
If epic spells are one of the things among the multitudes of concerns that have been been posted here reguarding epic lvl play that people are fearing their players having and will result in ruining the strangle hold of power the setting has over everyone through fear, horror and terror; then for once I'll even admit there is hardly any room epic spells in RL. If there it were to come into play on a very special and world changing event, it should be handled with extreme care and a result of an entire campaign of build up.
Agreed. Epic spells, if nothing else, should be disallowed in a Ravenloft setting except under very specific circumstances. This isn't even going into how the epic spells would be twisted by the Dark Powers. Or what the darklords would do if they sensed such powerful magic (perhaps they would automatically).
Ravenloft is often seen as the "world of evil" by many gamers. But if I were to bring Ravenloft to 4e I would remove that notion and instead present Ravenloft as the world of Fear, in its many manifestations. I would present an angle to the Dark Powers, unknowable as they are, as perhaps "collectors" of the multiverse's fears, thus bringing forth Ravenloft. To negotiate a compromise between the hardline Ravenloft fans and the new fans who thin Ravenloft is too dark, I would remove the concept of Ravenloft as a "prison plane" but still keep its isolated and unreachable nature in the Shadowfell. I would remove the current restrictions on magic (such as on divination), and instead put in certain dangers and "dramatic failures" if for example a spell doesn't work properly or fizzles.
Jester has made good points about how Ravenloft could be presented in 4e, especially how domain lords could now travel across domain borders with severely diminished powers (maybe an effect of the seeming disappearance of the ethereal plane). Finding Strahd in Egertus doesn't seem like a bad idea, but here for example he needs the earth of Barovia to survive or to only drink the blood of a Barovian even quench his thirst. This would actually spawn interesting interactions between the politics of the domains themselves.
Perhaps the default alignment would be "unaligned" or "no alignment" for ALL player characters (even paladins and yes the domain lords themselves).
One maxim to the success of viable D&D worlds is "If it works in D&D, then it works in _________." This of course is unacceptable to hardcore fundamentalist Ravenloft fans, so I propose an alternative: Ravenloft in 4e could maybe be the mature D&D setting, catering to mature gamers (in the tradition of Book of Vile Darkness and Book of Exalted Deeds). Its focus would be on mature themes, giving for example Hazlik the room he needs to feel open about his sexuality. Making Ravenloft a mature setting would of course require a reconfiguration in mood, allowing for example in-game mature language and situations to be played, perhaps even mature art (not adult art, mind you there's a difference) to be created for it.
The impending release of 4e has greatly affected by the way my own release of the Player's Guide to Ravenloft and the current downtime of the Midway Haven site. The original concept for the Player's Guide (and Midway Haven as a whole) was to present the fact that yes, Ravenloft is a world controlled heavily by the DM, but that the players and their characters should also have a fair fighting chance to know something about the world around them. I am absolutely sick of people who think that "4e is gonna suck," "oh I'm gonna hate 4e" and such. These aren't even anxieties anymore: they're just plain and vile direct attacks.
You can't fight aborted god-babies ... when trapped in a demi-plane.
Dammit, so that means I should take out the Atropal Scion from my Black Vault writeup then?
Bit by a lycanthrope? Yeah, right. Name an epic level character that can’t blow a DC15 fort save out of the water. Even a wizard with a 12 con likely has a +7 for that, plus a quick casting of resistance and bear’s endurance while the cleric prepares a resurgence. 25% chance of failure with a reroll and likely other bonuses.
True, biting wouldn't do it. A curse of vengeance spat at the PC by a dying lycanthropic villain, now... {evil laugh}
On a random note, this threat has almost 2500 views. Wow!
Sorry for anyone looking forward to 4e, but to me WOTC are turning D&D into the fast-food of role-playing. Quick-n-easy for the kids. A lot of the depth is being removed and the last elements of ROLE-play seem swept aside at the expense of more combat (as if D20 isn't combat focused enough). Yes, yes, roleplay vs rollplay is up the the GM, but the compact rules of 4e won't help IMHO, and that's all it is I suppose, my opinion
I also have a large collection of 3.5 rulebooks that is now collecting dust. I have no intention of adding a stack of 4E books next to them.
The final nail in the coffin is the fact that my girlfriend got me a reservation on a Nintendo Wii over the winter holidays. Once that arrives, my tabletop RPG days are more or less dead again.
I'll continue to run and play RPGs for years to come regardless of what is the latest version on the shelves. We're starting a new game this week of Star Wars using the old WEG D6 system. And I never upgraded my D&D games to 3.5, I'm just running plain 3e.
Besides White Wolf was cut off short by the loss of the rights to the setting thus 3rd edition was unfinished and will require 2e conversion or DM interpretation to expand the mists throughout 3e. So if you have to do that for 3e it will not be too bad to do it for 4e. Although a new sourcebook would rock for Ravenloft. A new one every halloween would definitly rock! Wotc used ravenloft the last 2 years to release novels, EtCR, unhallowed minatures, and future novels this year so I think their is a future for Ravenloft although maybe not in the fashion of the Eberron or Forgotten Realms.
I found it again a week later and saw you responded to my post piece by piece, and I had missed the opportunity for a good debate. I wondered if it was too late to respond so I pondered it till now, and since its so old I won't go on quoting my own quotes about it. it wastes your time reading and my time writing. I'll only complete a rebuttal of the idea that you present.
in my post i make reference to RL being a barely adequate attempt to the game by white wolf. i also mention my disdain for the RL fan base by calling them purists. this conclusion was reached in part by reading some of the posts on your own site in the FoS. i can't site specific posts for a few reasons, namely the apt laziness on my part to scroll through the various posts read through the years on other boards and the fact that you as well as i know that RL fans are very picky in what's right in their own game. its their given right of course to be that picky, but i still stand that everybody thinks they have a concept on what RL should be and almost no one is in agreement. And only a quarter of those are right. we can learn much from the greyhawk fans. they just want their home world on a book. lol
you say you see all sorts of beauty and great work in the creation from arthaus on RL this caught me completely off guard, were we looking at the same book?! so i grabbed my copy of the RL campaign setting. well, the writing in all seemed in order perhaps that's what Joel was talking about. its really is well written and all, it was well written before ... then i flip to the artwork. so i will agree that the writing stands. i won't bring that up at all. (but then again coming from its roots, the writing is the easy part) i will cite pages or artistic abortions that riddle the book like liver spots on an old man. ( not mentioning talon, he's one of the top three in this book, but the others are a waste.) this parts interactive Joel, grab the campaign setting with me and lets flip to pages, 9,15,69,89,217 now lets flip the gazetteer 3. though i like none of the art in that book and many others I'm sure you can see the frustration coming from an artist. coming from a dm i could have stood less artwork and perhaps maps from previous second edition games. the maps of the castles previous encounters that may be relevant, cities, sewers, all that would have been welcome instead of whatever the hell they were trying. i understand they may not have had the budget to hire real artists because they may be a small publishing company but why not give up on that and just do plain sensible maps?
i mention that i thought that RL should have the dynamic capability to hit levels 1-30 you say that RL was never meant to be played in any epic format. begrudgingly i agree as the game stands now its not mente for that at all, this problem was foreseen by arthaus as well which is why they refocused their attempt to make it less of a weekend in hell and more a stable setting. they, like me saw the fact that you couldn't play a continuos game as a problem. and its the sort of problem that overcomplicates a setting to become obsolete. as a more stable setting is the real issue to destroy the darklords? perhaps, not that would be meta gaming. lol.
I mention the taint system as a replacement for fear madness and horror because as in 2nd edition and 3rd edition. Its vague enough where its something a dm can manage and I think this is just one of those things that's more opinion driven then most basically the same way of getting the same thing accomplished.
then we get to a total difference in opinion wizards EtCR Vs everything on RL. we are in agreement it is a good fantasy adventure. a good interpretation of I-6? not exactly and I'm not ready to jump on it for the changes they made "halfling vistani" "Eva hag" and the like, nor am i willing to dismiss the spider/werewolf/bat monsters hybrid that strahd made in 2nd edition. so I'll chalk those up to being equal those regards. we must always remember the sources of RL pre arthaus to respond to how much fantasy should be in a ravenloft setting. and could EtCR even be part of the ravenloft setting? with a good Dm its possible to use the maps/monsters and the like. its also possible to put a little bit of RL into other existing campaigns but reading the book you already knew this. just because it takes none of the material from WW isn't exactly a bad thing. but then again we are putting our own biased into that last sentence, your approval of their work and my disdain for it. if wizards chose to revamp the setting and offer encounter maps, full color illustrations that are a better quality then most of everything WW had to offer. hands down. and they did it with one book. they kept the flavor of a fantasy/horror setting rather then minor fantasy/low magic/ frustrating lack of playability to keep flavor.
the last statement regards the RL fan base myself included. i called them the worst fans of any game setting. and i feel this deserves an explanation because i also put myself in that equasion. i love "my" RL I'm sure you love "your" RL I'm also sure that you would cringe to see what type of 2 games i make using the RL setting, and how they evolved. its a strength of RL as its dynamic, it also becomes its weakness as there is no clinical definite in the game something most products thrive on. its delicate, so much so that you can't have full fledged caster both divine and arcane to blunder through, or any high lever character for that matter. this frailty is the worst weakness of RL, but that's going off topic. Once we all agree and what is RL and go forward with the basics, we can indulge on our own versions. the fans should unite.
thank you,
panos k
Apparently she got the exact model mixed up and instead of a Wii, I have a DS Lite.
Not that I'm complaining, of course.
...
No need to send out a search party. I'll be all right.
I applaud wizards of the coast for reclaiming Ravenloft rights. While I am disappointed that there is no confirmed reports of continuing Ravenloft in 4th edition they're renewed vigor in publishing two novels (Not to mention the great short story "Before I wake" that was released in Halloween awhile back) gives me hope. Perhaps... (and this is just a theory) they are waiting to see how many people respond to Ravenloft. What killed me when White Wolf had it was how many times I looked on a shelf and saw Ravenloft books just sitting there unbought. While any actual wizards of the coast book was bought no matter how lame.
Ravenloft is a wonderful setting. Filled with suspense, drama, and intense storyline. Most D&D players however are Hack and Slashers... little else. They don't want to delve deep into character development or walk morally ambiguous lines with dreadful consequences. They just want to bash in the door and beat the bad guy. Face it... most people like that don't recieve Ravenloft well. But the diehards... the fans. You. Me. That guy sitting in the corner playing with his miniatures. We are the ones who can decide wether Ravenloft gets renewed and resurrected. Here's how...
1) Buy the novels- I don't care how much you hate Wizards of the coast. I don't care if you read them. I don't even care if you don't like the things. BUY THEM! If money is what they need to see to revive the ambience that is ravenloft let's spend like the Recession was over. Buy them as gifts, buy them as summerreading, buy them as coasters... it doesn't matter. Buy them!
2) Buy or download 4th edition- A minor point but important. If forth tanks it will be the end of D&D as we know it. Get it... no matter if you want it or not. All new settings and rules will be in Forth so if Ravenloft ever does come back it comes back to a worthwhile system. Support it all the way and until Ravenloft 4th comes out... just make your own.
3) When it does come out... don't criticize it.- I don't know why but we have a habit of driving everyone away from our favorite settings by opening our big mouths. I don't know how many times I heard someone rag on the White Wolf version of Ravenloft. News flash guys... if you tell your friend it sucks he won't get it and then he won't play it and if he don't play it no new fans are made. Quit longing for the good old days. Suffer through some of the crap and just support your campaign. You know how Forgotten Realms got so popular? Support. You don't hear Forgotten fans ragging on an adventure or a campaign setting supplement because they support it like the freakin' nazi army. Let's rally around the flag and support our game!
Is Ravenloft 2nd edition the best? Yes. Is 3.0 and 3.5 ravenloft a pale comparison? No! It had a style all it's own. It isn't a copy of Ravenloft it was a NEW ravenloft. So Soth ran away thanks to Hickman and them. Forget those witches and they're undead Darth vader. We need a new Ravenloft. We need something new and fresh. So Expedition wasn't as awesome as the orginal? Who cares make your own rules throw in some Heroes of Horror supplement and Libris Mortis and you got something descent. Through in Denizens of Dread and you got something awesome (Thank you Mountain Garou) The truth is we can improve on what they screw up. We can rebuild. We have the technology!
Let's do it. Support your game. Vote Ravenloft in 2008! God bless Barovia! (or at least save us from it)
I'm out!
and what if in the future Ravenloft we could be monsters (vampires, shapeshifter, nobles mummies...)!!!???
"October will also see the Domains of Dread return to D&D, with the long-time Ravenloft concept being folded into the core now."
I can't tell you that, but I hope you're wrong, too. I want to see Ravenloft as a self-contained campaign setting, again. And there're some core things (like Dragonborn) which I DON'T want to see in Ravenloft.
Sounds to me as though Ravenloft will be created to be 100% compatible with core 4E rules and therefore usable as a flavour in any 4E campaign or as a separate setting. That doesn't sound so bad because I think of Ravenloft as a style or theme of game first and foremost, and as a geographical setting second.
As for Dragonborn, I'm sure they will put them in, but in you don't want them in your Ravenloft, then they don't appear there.
Brace yourself, old-timers, but... why do we even need to hold onto the "extraplanar prison" conceptualization of Ravenloft? What if Ravenloft is just the world itself, with no arbitrary boundaries?
4e has very few mechanics that need to be constrained by the Dark Powers. Quick, cheap teleports? One ritual, easily removed. Evil detection? Nonexistent. Summoning? Ditto, or very nearly so.
What if the Dark Powers are simply fundamental aspects of the world? What if curses and descent into Darklord status happen for the same reasons that gravity - or "regular" magic - happens?
What if the Darklords are natives of this plane, not extraplanar prisoners, who are anchored to the land by their own power and their own evil?
In other words... for 4e, why not pick up, examine, and question all the "special case" exceptions Ravenloft made for the rules, and see what you really, truly need for, not just a Domain, but a World of Dread?
Oh and by the way, thanks alot WotC for deleting all of our seperate forums and merging it into a 554 pg. list. I love browsing through that to check on my ravenloft. Jerkwads...
Sack of...?
Since it seems that money is the primary motivation for what gets published in D&D, I say we collectively flash our credit cards at the folks at WotC and tell them they'll see more if they print Ravenloft.
there is no need to "flash the cash!" WotC has made so much money off of "Gamer Crack" aka Magic the Gathering that they paid over 30 million for TSR, up front and in cash. WtoC can afford to throw away money on games that make very little money, like five rings and Avalon hill games. And remember the guys making 4th ED grew up with 2ed ED, I expect to see Ravonloft... one day
this is coming from an old school ravenloft fan, but i think 4th edition hs much to offer to ressurect the old ravenloft line, however you may see it, races... new rules and all.
this little bit is just for the races part. but i tried and sorta achived (in my own eyes) a place and background for most of the new races and where they could be found. either you try to merge with the new edition or you don't but i think how they handle dark sun is going to be a defining factor as to how they treat future settings including ravenloft.
what i would love to see in print is a shadowfell book with a whole section dedicated to running a domains of dread setting, with some classic domians, some new ones and some paragon paths treasure and epic destinies that tie into the game
warforged: lamordia. living constructs that are almost golem like? sure thing here.
tieflings:nova vaasa, i say nova vassa because of the dark lord, tristan comes from a curse line, so why not take the fluff step and continue?
shiftersboth long tooth and claw: valacan, verbrek. valacan is where baron von kharkov is, so the feline shifters to the left, and wolfish shifters to the right in verbrek.
humans: all over. nuff said.
dwarves: lamordia, barovia, darkon.
dragonborn: sithicus. since sithicus is more or less based on the dragonlance setting with native draconians, this seemed the best fit.
eladrin:darkon, shadow rift, sithicus
elves: sithicus, darkon
half elves: kartakass, sithicus, darkon, shadow rift
goliaths: sithicus, darkon, markovia
half orc: markovia, darkon,
those are some examples, im sure others can figure out common sense reasons to find other raaces and shuffle them through the core.
=]
and they just added vistani for me inclluding a little blurb on how to make classic humaan vistana nice.