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

Bedrockgames said:

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.

Click to expand...

Paul Farquhar said:

1901. 14 years after Dracula was published.

Click to expand...

Remathilis said:

I mean, who even remembers who Gabriel John Utterson is

Click to expand...

Remathilis said:

The first third of Frankenstein is the Doctor preparing to raise the monster. The resurrection happens off camera and we're told about it. The monster then comes and says what has happened to him since his rebirth (about another third of the book) where he is the protagonist. Then the last third is the monsters ultimatum and the Doctor accepting and later rejecting it, and the fallout from it. The monster only appears again at the end once the Doctor is dead. Like Dracula, his shadow is much longer than his screentime.

Click to expand...

Remathilis said:

Jekyll is a essentially mystery because him being the same person as Hyde was the twist at the end of the murder mystery. And Phantom is written like a true crime novella with the Persian (an oft omitted character in adaptations) coming in and basically giving Erik's whole story right before the finale. (It helps that Gaston Leroux was a journalist primarily and much of the original serial is written like witness testimony).

Click to expand...

Remathilis said:

All of this to say I think the earlier Ravenloft novels had more in common with the Universal or Hammer style of monsters storytelling than the source materials. I mean, who even remembers who Gabriel John Utterson is...

Click to expand...

Paul Farquhar said:

Me. He was the narrator.

Click to expand...

Paul Farquhar said:

1901. 14 years after Dracula was published.

Click to expand...

Remathilis said:

The resurrection happens off camera and we're told about it. The monster then comes and says what has happened to him since his rebirth (about another third of the book) where he is the protagonist.

Click to expand...

It was on a dreary night of November, that I beheld the accomplishment of my toils. With an anxiety that almost amounted to agony, I collected the instruments of life around me, that I might infuse a spark of being into the lifeless thing that lay at my feet. It was already one in the morning; the rain pattered dismally against the panes, and my candle was nearly burnt out, when, by the glimmer of the half-extinguished light, I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open; it breathed hard, and a convulsive motion agitated its limbs.

How can I describe my emotions at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pains and care I had endeavoured to form? His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful!—Great God! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun white sockets in which they were set, his shrivelled complexion, and straight black lips.

Click to expand...

....I started from my sleep with horror; a cold dew covered my forehead, my teeth chattered, and every limb became convulsed; when, by the dim and yellow light of the moon, as it forced its way through the window-shutters, I beheld the wretch—the miserable monster whom I had created. He held up the curtain of the bed; and his eyes, if eyes they may be called, were fixed on me. His jaws opened, and he muttered some inarticulate sounds, while a grin wrinkled his cheeks. He might have spoken, but I did not hear; one hand was stretched out, seemingly to detain me, but I escaped, and rushed down stairs. I took refuge in the court-yard belonging to the house which I inhabited; where I remained during the rest of the night, walking up and down in the greatest agitation, listening attentively, catching and fearing each sound as if it were to announce the approach of the demoniacal corpse to which I had so miserably given life.

Click to expand...

I collected bones from charnel houses; and disturbed, with profane fingers, the tremendous secrets of the human frame. In a solitary chamber, or rather cell, at the top of the house, and separated from all the other apartments by a gallery and staircase, I kept my workshop of filthy creation; my eyeballs were starting from their sockets in attending to the details of my employment. The dissecting room and the slaughter-house furnished many of my materials; and often did my human nature turn with loathing from my occupation, whilst, still urged on by an eagerness which perpetually increased, I brought my work near to a conclusion.

Click to expand...

Remathilis said:

I mean, who even remembers who Gabriel John Utterson is...

Click to expand...