D&D General New Ravenloft Novel Heir of Strahd Coming Soon

81NuC9OAgjL._SL1500_.jpg


Random House announced a new Ravenloft novel from author Delilah S. Dawson. Heir of Strahd is scheduled for a release on May 13, 2025. From the sales solicitation:

A party of adventurers must brave the horrors of Ravenloft in this official Dungeons & Dragons novel!

Five strangers armed with steel and magic awaken in a mist-shrouded land, with no memory of how they arrived: Rotrog, a prideful orcish wizard; Chivarion, a sardonic drow barbarian; Alishai, an embittered tiefling paladin; Kah, a skittish kenku cleric; and Fielle, a sunny human artificer.

After they barely survive a nightmarish welcome to the realm of Barovia, a carriage arrives bearing an invitation:

Fairest Friends,

I pray you accept my humble Hospitality and dine with me tonight at Castle Ravenloft. It is rare we receive Visitors, and I do so Endeavor to Make your Acquaintance. The Carriage shall bear you to the Castle safely, and I await your Arrival with Pleasure.

Your host,
Strahd von Zarovich

With no alternative, and determined to find their way home, the strangers accept the summons and travel to the forbidding manor of the mysterious count. But all is not well at Castle Ravenloft. To survive the twisted enigmas of Strahd and his haunted home, the adventurers must confront the dark secrets in their own hearts and find a way to shift from strangers to comrades—before the mists of Barovia claim them forever.

The book is available to preorder now on Amazon in hardcover, Kindle, and Audible audio book.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Darryl Mott

Darryl Mott

To be fair, Ravenloft novels have often heavily featured Strahd. And while he isn't the protagonist of Dracula, he gets plenty of moments of dialogue and action (the whole opening is Harker being his guest at Dracula's Castle). So you get a lot of Dracula at the start. But that is a fair point. I don't think the issue is how much screen time Strahd gets or not (some Gothic Horror the villains looms, some the villain is the focus). It is more about the attitude. [SNIP]
I'm pointing out that most of your classic Gothic monster novels (not the movies, the original novels) are surprisingly monster lite. Dracula is most active in the Transylvania section, but by the time he's in Fairfax he's mostly a looming MacGuffin. Frankenstein's monster is likewise only a character for a rather small portion of the story (although the Doctor is present throughout and he's the real monster). Jekyll and Hyde is a mystery novel, Phantom of the Opera is a crime novel. Both have their stories revealed only at the end and told by outside witnesses. I think it's fairer to say the classic Gothic monster is rarely a character in their own stories. By that measure, I have no problem with the story focusing on the protagonists and letting Strahd be a looming threat rather than the focus.

The rest of your post was just opinion and I feel no need to engage with.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I mean, have to READ Dracula? It's a all written as journal entries and news snippets from the protagonists. Dracula barely is in the second half of the novel.
Yes, with the group monster hunting in the England part its as close to a D&D party as I can think of in these type of stories, but I have never seen a promotional blurb for Dracula as being about something like how the quirky characters of the group must face their own inner secrets and find a way to go from being strangers to comrades.
 



I'm pointing out that most of your classic Gothic monster novels (not the movies, the original novels) are surprisingly monster lite. Dracula is most active in the Transylvania section, but by the time he's in Fairfax he's mostly a looming MacGuffin. Frankenstein's monster is likewise only a character for a rather small portion of the story (although the Doctor is present throughout and he's the real monster). Jekyll and Hyde is a mystery novel, Phantom of the Opera is a crime novel. Both have their stories revealed only at the end and told by outside witnesses. I think it's fairer to say the classic Gothic monster is rarely a character in their own stories. By that measure, I have no problem with the story focusing on the protagonists and letting Strahd be a looming threat rather than the focus.

The rest of your post was just opinion and I feel no need to engage with.

I wasn't disagreeing with your point that horror and gothic horror don't need to spend a lot of page count on the villain. And I am fine with a story that focuses on the protagonist, and while I think Dracula largely does so, I think that early section at the castle is pretty important. Now it has been about 14 years since I last read Dracula (it is actually about time for me to read it again). SO possible I am misremembering. But with Frankenstein, I think you are overstating. I just read it again last spring and while I am sure I am not remembering everything exactly perfectly, the monster gets a substantial section of the book, to the point that we hear his complete side of the story. Also his ability to tell his side of the story is one of the things that inspired Anne Rice to do Interview With the Vampire the way she did. I do agree, the real monster is the Doctor, though both are villains (the monster has murdered a child, let a woman take the blame get executed, killed Henry, then Elizabeth, etc).

Jeckyll and Hyde is usually still considered a gothic horror novel by many people, and that debate aside, it was definitely an influence on the Ravenloft Setting. And the bad guy is a pretty prominent figure. Again, I think I read this around the time I last read Dracula so I am going by memory here. It has been ages since I read Phantom of the Opera (not since I was in high school). I think a lot of people still consider that a gothic horror work too (I mean a lot of books fit into more than one genre). At the very least it had a big influence on horror cinema. I recall Erik being a prominent character but I don't honestly recall how much time he gets on the page.

Either way, I wasn't really disagreeing with you. Villains can loom in gothic horror or any kind of horror. I was just quibbling over things like Frankenstein. I do think the villains matter a lot in gothic horror. I don't think every Ravenloft book needs to focus on the villains. Something like Knight of the Black Rose was emulating monster rallies. So there it made sense. But Ravenloft has kind of overplayed Strahd and I wouldn't have any issue with them putting him more in the background as a looming character. To me the issue is more about the Joss Whedon vibe I am getting from the cover. I also think you can focus on multiple protagonists (Dracula does an excellent job of featuring what could be termed an adventuring party). Generally I think it works better to focus on one or two, but that can work.
 

I enjoyed The Fallbacks - had a nice blend of recognizable, likable D&D party characters and tropes with a few unique hooks. I particularly liked the Cleric who prayed to whichever God he felt was likely to answer him for a given situation and negotiate with them.

Someone loved Benny from The Mummy.

the mummy GIF
 

Yes, with the group monster hunting in the England part its as close to a D&D party as I can think of in these type of stories, but I have never seen a promotional blurb for Dracula as being about something like how the quirky characters of the group must face their own inner secrets and find a way to go from being strangers to comrades.
Yet that's basically the whole middle of Dracula. Much of the Lucy saga is character drama over horror especially when the three suitors all get involved. The horror aspect picks up again when Mina is bit and it becomes a race against time.

Put another way
Screenshot_20250310-132451.png
 


Yet that's basically the whole middle of Dracula. Much of the Lucy saga is character drama over horror especially when the three suitors all get involved. The horror aspect picks up again when Mina is bit and it becomes a race against time.

Put another way
View attachment 399162
My question when I read the Lucy transfusion sequences I’d ’when did blood type’ become a known thing. It feels like it would be an important factor
 


Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top