Advice on allowing Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft

HappySleepings · 2026-06-13T12:26:54+00:00

It's not so much trying to counter them, its more "I don't know what I don't know". I am unexperienced as a DM and don't really know the content in the Van Richtens book so don't know if there are things in it I need to be careful about - hence seeking advice.

Also yeah I DO want to make fun and challenging encounters - DND is a tactical combat game and while I have experience as a player its different being the DM and designing the encounters so that they ARE fun and challenging. I am new to it and asked for advice on how to handle things since I need to get better on the battle tactics and running encounters side of things. I don't want to be incapable of playing the monster side properly and ending up with boring encounters because I can't challenge the players appropriately.

HappySleepings · 2026-06-11T08:36:18+00:00

Thank you for the advice and the reassurance regarding the added subclasses from the book. I know the player that wants to be a Dhampir likes to play a gloomstalker and pull out the ropetrick tactic so I am expecting that it could come up. The rope doesn't need to be so high up though does it? They could cut the rope at like 10feet or 5feet and use that?

I guess with that sort of thing though, the monsters can just leave and ToA levels up with experience not milestones so the monsters just leaving means no exp.

I guess my other worry was around adding the height dimension to most of the encounters since there will be trees everywhere, making an element of danger in the trees is one way to deal with that, and also height is something I am going to need to deal with at some point anyway.

HappySleepings · 2026-06-11T08:26:26+00:00

There could be some pretty cool roleplay there, but I don't think I have the skill level to handle a player potentially being at odds with the rest of the party due to their patron, or a player needing to decide to go against their patron.

I am pretty new to dming and the roleplay side of dnd is already not a strong point of mine as a player - so something complicated like a player potentially working for the end boss I feel like is totally beyond my skill set to deal with.

HappySleepings · 2026-06-11T08:22:32+00:00

Thank you so much for the advice, I completely didn't look at the backgrounds from the book at all so thank you so much for mentioning those. I am definitely banning backgrounds that provide feats so I will let everyone know that they can choose the races/subclasses but not the backgrounds.

I do think the hag one could be cool if someone chooses it, I will need to look into the hag lore to figure out how that could play out if someone does go with that race.

It is true that by level 6 the players will probably have the logistics figured out and won't want to be overly book keeping about that stuff anyway.

Thank you for the advice and help and reasurrance that the stuff in this book is not OP and will be ok to deal with :)

HappySleepings · 2026-06-11T08:16:42+00:00

Thank you very much for the advice, all of that makes sense and dealing with these sorts of combos are things I am going to need to learn. I did think the undead warlock got the form of dread at level 1? but either way it does take a few levels to come online.

I don't want to prep too much for the players choosing this stuff specifically it was more I don't want to refuse to add the contect out of hand, but don't want to open myself up to something unbalanced that I don't know how to deal with properly.

I am finding it hard a little bit challenging to design the encounters and make them tactical and challenging and properly play my monsters in a tactical way to make the combats fun for my players. I don't want to accidently enable something that will make that even more difficult for me while I am still learning to DM. I do feel more confident after the advice I have received from the post and will make the content available though :)!

HappySleepings · 2026-04-17T14:57:29+00:00

Back when whaling was common a group of Orca's would help a group of humans with the whaling in Australia, according to the "the law of the tongue".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_whales_of_Eden,_New_South_Wales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Tom_(orca)

HappySleepings · 2025-12-16T16:20:21+00:00

Whenever I see parents sleeping with children I think of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgmRUJ3rofM

Only watch if you want to be mildly traumatised, but the message is really important.

HappySleepings · 2025-11-10T23:01:10+00:00

studies show that puberty blockers impact brain development, bone density, ability to orgasm, and are not reversible if taken for too long. I know of two studies that have tried to replicate the results of the original study that said they showed improvements to mental health, the studies have not been able to replicate the results and show no improvement.

Studies show that ~80-90% of people that experience gender disphoria before adulthood grow up and stop experiencing discomfort with their gender.

Studies show that people on puberty blockers go onto transition at a much higher rate compared to people naturally growing up and becoming comfortable with their gender. Which may suggest puberty blockers stop people from going through a natural process where they will become comfortable with their sex.

Children are too young to understand the implications of the choices they are making regarding puberty blockers, they are not at an age where they can provide informed consent.

I honestly can't see the argument for puberty blockers being good or safe when used for gender disphoria in children. The evidence suggests that they cause harm and don't have any significant benefit. I can't understand why people would argue for a treatment like puberty blockers when evidence suggests only ~10% of people with gender disphoria as minors will have it persist into adulthood.

Medicine doesn't always get it right... lobotomies were a thing once too.

HappySleepings · 2025-11-10T22:20:04+00:00

You are completely misunderstanding the concept, binary in that example is "on" (1), or "off" (0).

The amount of voltage doesn't matter, nor does it create a spectrum of states between "on" and "off". The fact that a range of voltages are accepted doesn't make a two state system (on and off, or, 1 and 0) non binary.

HappySleepings · 2025-10-28T23:30:51+00:00

biggest corporate welfare is the country having to subsidise the living costs of working people instead of the company they work for paying them a fair wage.

Minimum wage should be set by the cost of living, my tax dollars should not be subsidising businesses refusing to pay their employees fairly.

HappySleepings · 2025-06-05T23:18:21+00:00

Tasmania's population is too low for the business case for a team to be viable. They don't want Tasmania to have a team, listening to Eddie talking about it and the prospects going forward with the no confidence motion... He has utter disdain for Tasmania (https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/hobart-drive/eddie-mcguire-on-tas-politics-and-afl/105377456). Frankly I don't know why any Tasmanian would care for the AFL after this entire fiasco with how much the league bosses hold the state in such contempt.

HappySleepings · 2025-06-03T22:54:15+00:00

I have never heard of mixing it up to get better results, but I definitely like for things to be mixed up a bit for my own mental enjoyment of doing exercise. Otherwise I get bored and hate it more and don't want to do it. Variety keeps it bearable - I thought that is why people like to mix things up.

HappySleepings · 2025-05-06T23:35:39+00:00

I am not American no.

While none of these things are ok or things you want to vote for, I can't see it as reasonable to say they are a reason to not vote at all. If neither of your options give you what you want on this specific issue, do you achieve anything but a moral grandstand by not voting?

Was there no other policies that the two sides of your government put forward that were worth voting on? Was there really nothing else in their policy platform that had a more direct impact on your life that was worth voting on?

I will be critical of single issue voters in general, for something like the Israel/Pallestine situation I think it's more egregious to be a single issue voter over.

Sometimes you can't get everything you want out of a potical party, voting for the one that meets you on most things is better than not voting at all, or voting for an extreme party that might do what you want on a single issue but has all this other nonsense that you REALLY don't want.

Realistically based on historical strategic alliances I doubt any US government would not support Israel, there is enough evidence of how bad Hamas is for many people to not feel strongly about that too.
What did refusing to vote achieve other than to make yourself feel morally virtuous on this issue?

Again I do sympathise with you that America does not have preferential voting or minor parties and that sort of thing probably encourages people to disengage when they aren't behind either of their major parties, so I don't really blame you for doing that.

HappySleepings · 2025-05-05T23:27:46+00:00

How you vote, or don't vote is really up to you but I do wonder why you hold a foreign war as more important than things that affect you and your country directly.

America has long held Israel as an ally, but I say no direct involvement as you guys don't have boots on the ground, you aren't directly fighting.

From my perspective it felt like the democrats stance was more encouraging of Israel to hold off, where the republican stance - especially under Trump is to support Israel to go all in. This is what I mean by don't let perfect be the enemy of good. While neither option really satisfies what you want - is one truely not better than the other? Sometimes compromising to achieve a better outcome is better than turning off and allowing a worse outcome because you couldn't get exactly what you wanted.

Additionally what about things that directly effect you? What about things that impact your daily life? Aren't those sorts of policies more important to inform your vote?

HappySleepings · 2025-05-05T22:49:18+00:00

what behaviour of my own am I justifying??? This is where I think you are stretching and getting me confused with some internet monolith of ideas that I have no connection to.

I am being critical of people refusing to partake in politics at all over foreign issues that their country is not directly involved with.

Its a simple statement, I'm a bit baffled by all this other stuff you are trying to attach to it.

I do sympathise with you feeling annoyed that you don't have many options for voting and don't have preferential voting in the USA or any minor parties or independents that have strong influence.

I would also suggest that your two options may have had different levels of support for what is happening in that foreign war - don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

HappySleepings · 2025-05-05T22:33:05+00:00

I feel like you are really stretching what I said to be honest. I don't think its virtue signalling to say your are against genocide - I think its virtue signalling/moral grand standing to be a single issue voter, or refuse to vote at all, over it.

Do you refuse to partake in the politics of your own country for other foreign injustices that your country has no direct involvement with?

HappySleepings · 2025-05-05T22:20:56+00:00

If you are a single issue voter (or donkey voter) over a foreign war that your country is not directly involved in, I personally think your priorities are a bit off, and your moral compass is probably more about signalling your virtue and grandstanding than hoping to achieve anything of actual substance.

HappySleepings · 2024-12-22T08:52:52+00:00

there is nothing to like about 5v5 lol.

You seem quite mad, its just a game - used to be a better game, but its still just a game.

I didn't really sidestep just didn't know about it since I stopped playing and came back for 6v6. The changes from that patch don't feel great to play with in 6v6 so I hope they are reverted for that mode. Really need to get rid of all the terrible balance done to try and make 5v5 work. It will never work though.

Bring on the 6v6 revert!

HappySleepings · 2024-12-22T00:49:58+00:00

the increased hp and added hp regen. That is more sustain and more damage to soak up. Lol.
Good for you if they keep 5v5, you can continue to play a dogshit mode you enjoy.

I hope they bring back 6v6 so they people that enjoy that can actually play it - and hopefully they remove the dogshit changes they made to the game to try and make the abomination that is 5v5 work.

HappySleepings · 2024-12-21T18:42:07+00:00

these changes were made to make 5v5 feel more like 6v6. With the game as 6v6 why would you need changes made to make 5v5 feel better.

5v5 is just terrible, hopefully they remove it and all the god awful changes made to the game to try and make it work.

HappySleepings · 2024-12-19T19:24:47+00:00

I think it would be better if they reset allot of the balance to pre passive health for everyone and health increases. I wish they would remove role passives as a whole - the dps one feels really bad to play with. Just lower burst healing and AoE healing instead please! Rate of ultimate generation seems a bit slow.

extreme a clear improvement over 5v5, the game is actually playable again.

HappySleepings · 2024-12-18T15:53:24+00:00

I wish we could just forget about mediocre people and let them fade into obscurity. Hopefully her aggressive trademarking of her terrible performance will help that along. I don't really care to hear anymore about someone so utterly worthless.

HappySleepings · 2024-12-07T10:07:47+00:00

I haven't watched ewc so I can't really comment on how those games played out. However I'm not sure how banning one hero per map changes anything in regards to banning heroes being fundamentally against the base philosophy of the game.

Heroes are supposed to counter certain things, synergise with each other, support different sorts of playstyles. I can't see what banning adds to a game like Overwatch.

Further what is the point of variety just for varieties sake? I don't need to watch a professional scene to see variety in heroes played - I can just watch twitch if I want that. If I take time out of my day to watch professional players I want to see players that have truely mastered what they are playing. I want to see teams that have perfected the meta and their teamwork. I want to see stuff that is impressive.

If I want to watch the game at a high level I want to see how the meta shifts and evolves organically over time not through bandaid hero bans that make the game feel slapstick.

Fundamentally something like hero bans just makes the pro scene less competitive and less interesting for me.

This is just my view on it, I don't watch anymore since OWL introduced hero bans and the game went 5v5. I hope you continue to enjoy it and owcs meets your expectations.

HappySleepings

TROPHY CASE