as disapointed as I am, I am also happy...
why yoou ask, becuse they admit something wasn't that good as is. I can homebrew a bad ravenloft... I want them to publish an awsome one.
I imagin they went too far with the whole play dark moneters (vampire, werewolves, ect) and fetl that they lost the feel... don't put out books just to put out books, put out quiltiy
Heroes of Shadow
Heroes of the Feywild (if it's scheduled for this year)
The Shadowfell box set
Monster Vault 2
etc.
However... the Ravenloft campaign setting was by far the product I was most excited about for the entire year... and was something that I've been hoping and wishing for since 4e started.
I couldn't be in greater dissapointment about this cancellation, or in greater agreement with Cyber-Dave's comments. We, the actual Ravenloft fans, do not some seperate stand-alone game that is different just to be different and only partially-compatible with the rest of D&D. We want a fleshed-out fully-functional, fully-compatible Ravenloft... like the Ravenloft from back in AD&D 2nd editon that I grew up with (only with revised stats and such to make it fit with 4e.)
Why in all the Hells would the developers think that we want some stand-alone game?
P.S. I did actually like the idea of having rules for playing Vampires, Werewolves, and Ghosts... but I'd like those to just be new classes or themes (like the vampire class in Heroes of Shadow) and they need not neccessarily be connected to Ravenloft, per se.
No, they really shouldn't. They should make a 4e D&D Ravenloft Campaign setting ASAP... because, really, allong with Planescape and Dark Sun it is pretty much the coolest campaign setting ever.
I have never played Ravenloft. The two Dark Sun books are the only two campaign books so far that I'll buy. If Ravenloft is even half as interesting as Dark Sun is, I would undoubtedly buy them as well. Therefor it is unhappy that they feel the (possible) need to create another boxed game like Gamma World (though I have no bad feelings against Gamma World). I am sure there are other game settings for D&D that would fit better into the boxed setting idea, especially since there are people questioning the wise judgement of delaying Ravenloft (and thus the new setting for the year).
Ravenloft is horror.......
don't care for DS... like the Realms so the neveriwtner book is a go, but RAvenloft would be buying too..
I don't fully understand the attraction of Ravenloft as a whole campaign setting, as it seems more suited for a series of adventures, like it started out as. But I do understand it's popularity.
I know that WoTC puts money into developing products that sell. If say the upcoming Fortune cards have horrible sales, they will go away.
All the stuff to make a home Ravenloft campaign exist. Strahd has been statted out in Open Grave, and they have mentioned that Ravenloft is now part of the Shadowfell. Perhaps more will be expanded on in the upcoming Shadowfell boxed set.
However, I think for those really wanting more Ravenloft support consider this. Show WoTC the interest in it. Start creating your own Ravenloft inspired content, and share it. If it's good, people will talk about it. If it seems to have a big enough following, WoTC will pay attention.
You've got nothing to lose, and everything to gain.
Ravenloft is about horror, not just dark monsters. Ravenloft was never about being the horror, it was about surviving the horror, hopefully with your sanity and morality intact. The latter less likely. Raveloft was a place of horror because you had "ordinary" (well, for adventurers) humans, elves, etc. being picked up from their home worlds and transported to a realm ruled not by gods, but by Dark Powers. And each of these Domains was under the jurisdiction of a Dark Lord, all of whom were monsters in almost every sense of the word.
Ravenloft was scary. Somehow, the idea of PCs (especially a whole party of them) being a part of the horror does not make for very horrifying gameplay. In fact I specifically remember 2e sources that said if your character became a vampire, you IMMEDIATELY became an NPC, no ifs, and, or buts. And infected lycanthropes were ALWAYS under DM control during their transformations. No exceptions.
I'll admit to being curious about Ravenloft 4e. It was the setting that I first played D&D with. While I had never the interest nor inclination to ever return to it, there was a special place in my heart for it. I am saddened to see it go. And while I was not vitriolically angry about vampire/werewolf PCs in RL, I did strongly wonder..."why?"
No, they really shouldn't. They should make a 4e D&D Ravenloft Campaign setting ASAP... because, really, allong with Planescape and Dark Sun it is pretty much the coolest campaign setting ever.
No that would be Dragonlance. Ravenloft was good for what it was, but it was a place to visit, not make a full campaign out of. Great for halloween 24 hour games.
No, that would be Planescape, Dark Sun, and Ravenloft. Dragonlance was blech. I didn't even like it as a place to visit...
I am personally confused that all the old-school Ravenloft grognards were excited about playing vampires and werewolves in a Ravenloft setting. I only played Ravenloft in 2nd ed, but my reaction to that was....."WHAT?"
Ravenloft is about horror, not just dark monsters. Ravenloft was never about being the horror, it was about surviving the horror, hopefully with your sanity and morality intact. The latter less likely. Raveloft was a place of horror because you had "ordinary" (well, for adventurers) humans, elves, etc. being picked up from their home worlds and transported to a realm ruled not by gods, but by Dark Powers. And each of these Domains was under the jurisdiction of a Dark Lord, all of whom were monsters in almost every sense of the word.
Ravenloft was scary. Somehow, the idea of PCs (especially a whole party of them) being a part of the horror does not make for very horrifying gameplay. In fact I specifically remember 2e sources that said if your character became a vampire, you IMMEDIATELY became an NPC, no ifs, and, or buts. And infected lycanthropes were ALWAYS under DM control during their transformations. No exceptions.
I'll admit to being curious about Ravenloft 4e. It was the setting that I first played D&D with. While I had never the interest nor inclination to ever return to it, there was a special place in my heart for it. I am saddened to see it go. And while I was not vitriolically angry about vampire/werewolf PCs in RL, I did strongly wonder..."why?"
Your memory seems to be a little spotty (or else mine is). The assumption that your character would automatically become an NPC was based on D&D 2e assumptions, not Ravenloft assumptions. In fact, if I remember correctly, via a splat book Ravenloft introduced the idea that you could continue to play your character as a vampire, a monster trying to retain some semblance of its humanity in a monstrous place. There was a 2e splat book that had rules for PC vampires (and other undead) in it. Now, if the new Ravenloft was a complete monster mash, and not a horror survival setting, I would have been upset. But, rolling in monstrous PC classes into the setting in order to allow character who are trying to not only survive the monsters around them, but their own monstrous instincts as well, just seemed like a logical extension of the 2e Ravenloft campaign setting. I mean, it was the setting that introduced vampires and other undead as PC options, and had a novel in which the main character was an elf vampire trying to retain its humanity...
I don't personally care for vampires, so I know why there is no appeal for Ravenloft myself.
I don't fully understand the attraction of Ravenloft as a whole campaign setting, as it seems more suited for a series of adventures, like it started out as. But I do understand it's popularity.
I know that WoTC puts money into developing products that sell. If say the upcoming Fortune cards have horrible sales, they will go away.
All the stuff to make a home Ravenloft campaign exist. Strahd has been statted out in Open Grave, and they have mentioned that Ravenloft is now part of the Shadowfell. Perhaps more will be expanded on in the upcoming Shadowfell boxed set.
However, I think for those really wanting more Ravenloft support consider this. Show WoTC the interest in it. Start creating your own Ravenloft inspired content, and share it. If it's good, people will talk about it. If it seems to have a big enough following, WoTC will pay attention.
You've got nothing to lose, and everything to gain.
This +1
But I have a feeling that Cyber_Dave doesnt realize that if it is ever released as a setting it is going to use the Shadowfell taint cards. At which Cyber_Dave will throw a tremendous fit about
I don't personally care for vampires, so I know why there is no appeal for Ravenloft myself.
I don't fully understand the attraction of Ravenloft as a whole campaign setting, as it seems more suited for a series of adventures, like it started out as. But I do understand it's popularity.
I know that WoTC puts money into developing products that sell. If say the upcoming Fortune cards have horrible sales, they will go away.
All the stuff to make a home Ravenloft campaign exist. Strahd has been statted out in Open Grave, and they have mentioned that Ravenloft is now part of the Shadowfell. Perhaps more will be expanded on in the upcoming Shadowfell boxed set.
However, I think for those really wanting more Ravenloft support consider this. Show WoTC the interest in it. Start creating your own Ravenloft inspired content, and share it. If it's good, people will talk about it. If it seems to have a big enough following, WoTC will pay attention.
You've got nothing to lose, and everything to gain.
This +1
But I have a feeling that Cyber_Dave doesnt realize that if it is ever released as a setting it is going to use the Shadowfell taint cards. At which Cyber_Dave will throw a tremendous fit about
I'm willing to put up with that, if it's combined with actually doing something.
Your memory seems to be a little spotty (or else mine is). The assumption that your character would automatically become an NPC was based on D&D 2e assumptions, not Ravenloft assumptions. In fact, if I remember correctly, via a splat book Ravenloft introduced the idea that you could continue to play your character as a vampire, a monster trying to retain some semblance of its humanity in a monstrous place. There was a 2e splat book that had rules for PC vampires (and other undead) in it. Now, if the new Ravenloft was a complete monster mash, and not a horror survival setting, I would have been upset. But, rolling in monstrous PC classes into the setting in order to allow character who are trying to not only survive the monsters around them, but their own monstrous instincts as well, just seemed like a logical extension of the 2e Ravenloft campaign setting. I mean, it was the setting that introduced vampires and other undead as PC options, and had a novel in which the main character was an elf vampire trying to retain its humanity...
what I was going to say
No, they really shouldn't. They should make a 4e D&D Ravenloft Campaign setting ASAP... because, really, allong with Planescape and Dark Sun it is pretty much the coolest campaign setting ever.
No that would be Dragonlance. Ravenloft was good for what it was, but it was a place to visit, not make a full campaign out of. Great for halloween 24 hour games.
No, that would be Planescape, Dark Sun, and Ravenloft. Dragonlance was blech. I didn't even like it as a place to visit...
Never played any of them. But 4th ed Dark Sun is Spiffy. And the Dragonlance books were fun, when I was a teenager. Now that I'm an adult, I can't even read them. If that is any indication of the Campaign world itself, I think I could do without it, honestly.
This +1
But I have a feeling that Cyber_Dave doesnt realize that if it is ever released as a setting it is going to use the Shadowfell taint cards. At which Cyber_Dave will throw a tremendous fit about
They do have a lot of products on the horizon that can be used to build a home-brew Ravenloft game. And, I will be buying all those products. I doubt I will get a chance to DM Ravenloft any time soon (as I am currently DMing Dark Sun), but when my Dark Sun game wraps up I will probably end up DMing a Ravenloft game. But, none of that stops me from wanting an actual Ravenloft Campaign Guide.
And I have no issue with the "taint" cards that have been described as being a part of the Shadowfell boxed set; as far as I can tell, WotC has said that they will be releasing a complete deck of suck cards in the boxed set. My issue with cards stems from a randomized collectible distribution model which is "balanced" (or rather, imbalanced) along a rarity scheme. Cards, as a physical artifact, can be quite useful in a game. I have actually made homemade cards for all of the powers that my shifter scout has (in the game I am playing, not DMing). Now, if they releasing the "taint" cards via such a distribution model, you would then be right; I would, under those circumstances, shout to high hell.
This +1
But I have a feeling that Cyber_Dave doesnt realize that if it is ever released as a setting it is going to use the Shadowfell taint cards. At which Cyber_Dave will throw a tremendous fit about
They do have a lot of products on the horizon that can be used to build a home-brew Ravenloft game. And, I will be buying all those products. I doubt I will get a chance to DM Ravenloft any time soon (as I am currently DMing Dark Sun), but when my Dark Sun game wraps up I will probably end up DMing a Ravenloft game. But, none of that stops me from wanting an actual Ravenloft Campaign Guide.
And I have no issue with the "taint" cards that have been described as being a part of the Shadowfell boxed set; as far as I can tell, WotC has said that they will be releasing a complete deck of suck cards in the boxed set. My issue with cards stems from a randomized collectible distribution model which is "balanced" (or rather, imbalanced) along a rarity scheme. Cards, as a physical artifact, can be quite useful in a game. I have actually made homemade cards for all of the powers that my shifter scout has (in the game I am playing, not DMing). Now, if they releasing the "taint" cards via such a distribution model, you would then be right; I would, under those circumstances, shout to high hell.
So you prefer a living card game schema (all cards provided in boxed sets instead of in random boosters) vs collectible cards?
I can dig that.
So you prefer a living card game schema (all cards provided in boxed sets instead of in random boosters) vs collectible cards?
I can dig that.
I don't really know what a "living card game" is. But, insofar as you describe it, my answer is yes.
So you prefer a living card game schema (all cards provided in boxed sets instead of in random boosters) vs collectible cards?
I can dig that.
I don't really know what a "living card game" is. But, insofar as you describe it, my answer is yes.
This is a living card game.
However if they released all the Fortune Cards as a singlde deck, then what's to stop someone from buying several decks, and then putting together an all rare deck?
The DM seeing them pull the same card 40% of the time. Then telling him to shelve his deck for cheating...
As in you use the whole deck as part of the rules...
However if they released all the Fortune Cards as a singlde deck, then what's to stop someone from buying several decks, and then putting together an all rare deck?
The DM seeing them pull the same card 40% of the time. Then telling him to shelve his deck for cheating...
As in you use the whole deck as part of the rules...
Well so much for being able to make a custom deck.
I guess that means no new campaign setting for 2011?
see you in Neverwinter the undead city of skilled hands where once the former god of justice Tyr showed up during the Time of Troubles..
I am personally confused that all the old-school Ravenloft grognards were excited about playing vampires and werewolves in a Ravenloft setting. I only played Ravenloft in 2nd ed, but my reaction to that was....."WHAT?"
Ravenloft is about horror, not just dark monsters. Ravenloft was never about being the horror, it was about surviving the horror, hopefully with your sanity and morality intact. The latter less likely. Raveloft was a place of horror because you had "ordinary" (well, for adventurers) humans, elves, etc. being picked up from their home worlds and transported to a realm ruled not by gods, but by Dark Powers. And each of these Domains was under the jurisdiction of a Dark Lord, all of whom were monsters in almost every sense of the word.
Ravenloft was scary. Somehow, the idea of PCs (especially a whole party of them) being a part of the horror does not make for very horrifying gameplay. In fact I specifically remember 2e sources that said if your character became a vampire, you IMMEDIATELY became an NPC, no ifs, and, or buts. And infected lycanthropes were ALWAYS under DM control during their transformations. No exceptions.
I'll admit to being curious about Ravenloft 4e. It was the setting that I first played D&D with. While I had never the interest nor inclination to ever return to it, there was a special place in my heart for it. I am saddened to see it go. And while I was not vitriolically angry about vampire/werewolf PCs in RL, I did strongly wonder..."why?"
Your memory seems to be a little spotty (or else mine is). The assumption that your character would automatically become an NPC was based on D&D 2e assumptions, not Ravenloft assumptions. In fact, if I remember correctly, via a splat book Ravenloft introduced the idea that you could continue to play your character as a vampire, a monster trying to retain some semblance of its humanity in a monstrous place. There was a 2e splat book that had rules for PC vampires (and other undead) in it. Now, if the new Ravenloft was a complete monster mash, and not a horror survival setting, I would have been upset. But, rolling in monstrous PC classes into the setting in order to allow character who are trying to not only survive the monsters around them, but their own monstrous instincts as well, just seemed like a logical extension of the 2e Ravenloft campaign setting. I mean, it was the setting that introduced vampires and other undead as PC options, and had a novel in which the main character was an elf vampire trying to retain its humanity...
I am going off 2nd ed info, I never picked it up for 3e, although my understanding was that White Wolf did a good job.
The only 2e Ravenloft book still in my possession is Van Richten's Guide Compliation 1, which states that although a vampire may fight his urges and not immediately become evil, a PC vampire still immediately becomes an NPC...
But I have a feeling that Cyber_Dave doesnt realize that if it is ever released as a setting it is going to use the Shadowfell taint cards. At which Cyber_Dave will throw a tremendous fit about
Of course he would. Why did you think he wanted to see this released?
The Setting was pushed back, not canceled.
It would have been (And hopefully still is) a separate, stand alone project that used the 4th edition rules, with some additions. (Fear cards and such)
Boxed set.
I am not surprised at the delay, but on the whole it wasn't a D&D project per sey, though it would/will be compatible.
I'll chime in and say I'm disappointed with the cancellation. However, I could wait a year or two for a superior product.But I have a feeling that Cyber_Dave doesnt realize that if it is ever released as a setting it is going to use the Shadowfell taint cards. At which Cyber_Dave will throw a tremendous fit about
Of course he would. Why did you think he wanted to see this released?
We have been over this. And, I want to see it released because I love Ravenloft.
I am going off 2nd ed info, I never picked it up for 3e, although my understanding was that White Wolf did a good job.
The only 2e Ravenloft book still in my possession is Van Richten's Guide Compliation 1, which states that although a vampire may fight his urges and not immediately become evil, a PC vampire still immediately becomes an NPC...
There is a 2e splat book that has rules for PC undead characters in it, including PC vampires. Everything I said to you in my last post stands. Though, its not really a big surprise to hear that various 2e source-books contradicted each other.
I am going off 2nd ed info, I never picked it up for 3e, although my understanding was that White Wolf did a good job.
The only 2e Ravenloft book still in my possession is Van Richten's Guide Compliation 1, which states that although a vampire may fight his urges and not immediately become evil, a PC vampire still immediately becomes an NPC...
There is a 2e splat book that has rules for PC undead characters in it, including PC vampires. Everything I said to you in my last post stands. Though, its not really a big surprise to hear that various 2e source-books contradicted each other.
But even then, it was the exception and not the rule. Ravenloft was horror, not monster mash. Most of the modules and adventures I remember reading, and almost all of the boxed set info I read was stuff that would not be as threatening (or at the very least, not as scary) to a PC who had already shuffled loose the mortal coil.
In Ravenloft, one's life, one's very soul was in danger. The horrible, nameless dread just doesn't seem as terrifying if you're already a part of it.
Again, I don't agree. And, everything I said in my last few posts still stands. Ravenloft introduced the first splat books that allowed players to play undead. The Ravenloft novels included a series written about an elven vampire trying to maintain its humanity. Is the setting a monster mash? No. But, the setting did encompass a particular type of horror, the type written from the perspective of the monster. You could be the vampire trying to fight to keep its soul in the face of a ravenous thirst. In that vein, it makes a lot of sense to include monster classes in the setting. In fact, one of my favorite characters was a vampire bard (plagued by amnesia, terrible nightmares, and a female mute ghost that would follow him around) in a Ravenloft game...
On top of all this, 4th edition has so far shown that it is a system that draws from what came before, and adds on to what that material was. So even for that which was not new, to have "monster" races and classes makes sense within the purview of this edition.
I am going off 2nd ed info, I never picked it up for 3e, although my understanding was that White Wolf did a good job.
The only 2e Ravenloft book still in my possession is Van Richten's Guide Compliation 1, which states that although a vampire may fight his urges and not immediately become evil, a PC vampire still immediately becomes an NPC...
There is a 2e splat book that has rules for PC undead characters in it, including PC vampires. Everything I said to you in my last post stands. Though, its not really a big surprise to hear that various 2e source-books contradicted each other.
The 2e product is called Requiem: The Grim Harvest. You can play all sorts of undead.
now you see this whole line of thought is the problem, and why I feel it was pushed back... becuse everyone is right...and everyone is wrong.
see way back when ravon loft was a 1 off adventure (castil ravenloft) it was a vampire movie mod... then the setting came along and the whole idea of the dark powers and the mist, and the domains made it a very gothic horror setting that emphasied not being the monster but fighting it.
but rpgers will be rpgers and it got influenced by WoD with the whole fighting the evil with a monster trying to fight his own evil... witch was great, and yes grim harvest had PC undead and stuff... but alot of people who liked the old feel ignored it.
Forget edtion wars, the rl wars were int eh same edtion... I know many people that think X and Y supplment have no place in the setting.
then came 3e and WW got the rights (since atlest some of the setting was inspired by them it made sense) then the rights reverted, and if I remeber right in 3.5 we got a wotc ravonloft...
so 3 diffrent feels for TSR ravenloft (Orginal mod, early setting, late setting) the wight wolf feel (kinda in the middle of early setting and late setting), and Wotc feel (more orginal mod, early setting)... so what do tehy go with?
I know I have played under DMs who would make you an npc the second you got turned, I know others that would let you play vampires... how do you make the setting work for all of them...
Now remember only 2 books and a mod... so, you can't even start with gothic horror, and move on to monster pc in later suplimants...there are no more...
Back in the old days, ravenloft was somewhere that people got sucked into and tried to get out of. You did indeed "just visit".
Later versions, however, introduced the idea of native characters and played down the idea of visitors (mainly it was bad guys who got sucked in and not heroes).
So when people want to make a campaign of the ravenloft setting, it is likely they are referring to characters who call the domains of darkness their home. They actually seek to make a difference to that place and not to somehow escape it.
***
Ravenloft remained one of the more popular settings for a few reasons.
1. It actually needed heroes, as opposed to the usual loot hunting "adventurer".
2. The odds were set against the heroes and just surviving was an achievement.
3. The "bad guys" were exceptionally detailed and figuring them out was key to success.
4. Actions came with consequences and decisions the pc's made felt like they had real weight.
5. The god present actually needed faith to follow (she was very quiet).
It was well worth playing and provided a great many memorable moments.
WotC is just a big tease. I bet it's marketing department is composed of sexy women in bikinies.
Or maybe they cancelled it because it gives me throwback memories of a certain soap opera called Dark Shadows... and they are reading my mind ....eeeeek
Neverwinter seems okay. A continuation of Forgotten Realms- cool. Still need Planescape, Dragon Lance, Ravenloft and even silly Spell Jammer. They made it clear at DDX that they have no intention of doing a campaign setting yearly.
One note- a personal taste but I HATE the new campaign book format of Dark Sun. I preferred the Player's Guide and Campaign Guide.
It was by far the neatest thing on your future product roster. I mean, I hear talk about it not being ready yet, about wanting to make it something completely new and different... really!? Ravenloft was a D&D campaign setting. Those of us who are fans of Ravenloft want a D&D 4e campaign setting. We don't want a completely different game that is not compatible with 4e. We don't want a separate game that is "completely new and different." I am very sad to have seen this product canceled. Along with the Heroes of Sword and Spell (god it would have been nice to own a bridge between pre-E classes and E-classes) it was one of the products I was most excited about. I still see some nice 4e products on the horizon (Heroes of Shadow and the Shadowfell boxed set, for example), but I am a very unhappy camper due to this news.
I know this is a week late, but... yeah...
I would have loved to see Ravenloft follow the same format as Gamma World; simply because I'd love to see a release like Gamma World yearly. I'd also like to see Ravenloft as a campaign setting for 4E. I wouldn't want to see both though and I'm guessing neither did Wizards. Neverwinter seems okay. A continuation of Forgotten Realms- cool. Still need Planescape, Dragon Lance, Ravenloft and even silly Spell Jammer. They made it clear at DDX that they have no intention of doing a campaign setting yearly. One note- a personal taste but I HATE the new campaign book format of Dark Sun. I preferred the Player's Guide and Campaign Guide.
Interestingly enough, the campaign guide with the player content in it is what will get me to buy the Dark Sun Campaign Guide. The monsters being separate means I also have to get the Monsters (because more pre-made monsters rock). So in all, they will be the first two campaign specific books that I will get both of. I skipped the Forgotten Realms and Ebberon Campaign Guides because I am not planning on running those worlds, so the only reason that I would get the books is for the monsters (not a good reason, in my estimation).
Personally, I'd like a Campaign book, a Player's book and a Monster Book for each Campaign world. Mainly so I could get the Player options and the cool monsters and leave the campaign world in the dust.
I would have loved to see Ravenloft follow the same format as Gamma World; simply because I'd love to see a release like Gamma World yearly. I'd also like to see Ravenloft as a campaign setting for 4E. I wouldn't want to see both though and I'm guessing neither did Wizards. Neverwinter seems okay. A continuation of Forgotten Realms- cool. Still need Planescape, Dragon Lance, Ravenloft and even silly Spell Jammer. They made it clear at DDX that they have no intention of doing a campaign setting yearly. One note- a personal taste but I HATE the new campaign book format of Dark Sun. I preferred the Player's Guide and Campaign Guide.
Eh, 3 people (including myself) are both players and DM's, we much prefered being able to pick up 1 book (or 2, i guess, not sure if the MB ever got the DS update) than having to get 3.
Of course, DS campaign never happened as the DM was waiting for the CB to get its DS update.
I would have loved to see Ravenloft follow the same format as Gamma World; simply because I'd love to see a release like Gamma World yearly. I'd also like to see Ravenloft as a campaign setting for 4E. I wouldn't want to see both though and I'm guessing neither did Wizards. Neverwinter seems okay. A continuation of Forgotten Realms- cool. Still need Planescape, Dragon Lance, Ravenloft and even silly Spell Jammer. They made it clear at DDX that they have no intention of doing a campaign setting yearly. One note- a personal taste but I HATE the new campaign book format of Dark Sun. I preferred the Player's Guide and Campaign Guide.
Eh, 3 people (including myself) are both players and DM's, we much prefered being able to pick up 1 book (or 2, i guess, not sure if the MB ever got the DS update) than having to get 3.
Of course, DS campaign never happened as the DM was waiting for the CB to get its DS update.
Dont mind paying for 2 books. The creature catalogue is cool. So, in the end, I'd pay for 3 books. The campaign guides had a lot more crunch to them and more history in it.
As to the dark powers, well, they were pretty mysterious and may even have been considered a force for good. They did, after all, apparently keep some of the most evil entities imprisoned in what was a rather unpleasant environment for them. It may even be that the dark powers granted and supported the abilities that good aligned characters called upon....their nature and alignment was very mysterious.
Still, seeing as this topic has returned to life, i thought i may ponder the question of why such a significant setting vanished as it did from the 4th edition lineup. Is it the case that any campaign just doesnt make the money and if so, surely they could be released in some way as E-books or online material.
Ravenloft has a lot of potential for offering a gritty setting for 4th edition that may well appeal to a lot of folks who liked the Grit of Paizo settings in comparison to the cinematic "action hero" style. Is it perhaps being held back in anticipation of 5th edition like some sort of "knockout punch" for when that is released?
What are the odds Ravenloft 5e will be completed by the time 6th edition rolls around?
What is there left to fight?