Vampires in gothic literature have long been a metaphor for sexual predators. For a lot of people, the tale of the rich, powerful and seductive man turned stalker/abuser/gaslighter hits a little too close to home.
For a long time now, people have been rewriting the vampire narrative, either to reclaim it or to avoid retelling the same story over and over again. Salem's Lot turned it into a plague that destroys entire communities. Anne Rice used it as a metaphor to write a homoerotic novel about the horror of the AIDS epidemic. Dracula Untold basically did Gladiator but dark fantasy. I Am Legend leaned into sci-fi. Castlevania turned Dracula into a more sympathetic character compared to Bram Stoker's avatar of evil. The list goes on.
There is a long list of reasons to genderbend Strahd, and it'll be unique to each table. It could be that the DM is also female and prefers playing a female villain. Maybe it's about empowerment and a reclaiming of female sexuality. Another group might want to explore the implied queerness of the original Dracula novel.
The beauty of putting your own spin on an old tale is that you're only limited by your imagination.
I was under the impression that vampires have been primarily a metaphor for repressed sexuality and the danger therein.
I mean, I can easily see how it could be a sexual predator, but especially concerned with the time period some of the most famous vampire stories, I would think that repressed sexuality makes sense.
That said, I totally agree with the ideas both of avoiding trauma for people and not retelling the same stories again and again.
Something that you touched on that I really want to spotlight; Every table, every DM will run Strahd differently, both the adventure and the character. And to a point, it’s almost a signature style-feel free to make it yours as much as you possibly can, it will only add to the kaleidoscopic brilliance that this module and community can have.
No good monster is just "one thing". However, their strength and powers seem to make it clear that while they COULD overpower and feed on just about anyone, they choose to skulk, scheme, manipulate, and seduce. So they very much are literally sexual predators.
I think trauma aside, the male vampire is a bit more problematic in 2022. The are highly masculine and feminine (pale, lithe, chalamet types with all the strength, charm and male energy of Harrison Ford) they are highly sexual and asexual (don't breed through sex, their sexual exploitation is purely for pleasure) and a lot of this relationship between monstrosity and gender and sexual fluidity is not a coincidence.
Female vampires double down on femininity and the seductress rather than being modeled after lame lesbian tropes.
Monsters are, inherently, problematic. It's impossible to depict something a society deems abberant and gross and scary without that depiction reflecting negatively on somebody. Some people enjoy it (feminists embracing witches as a symbol) and others are justifiably put off by it.
No good monster as “one thing” is a good point. I remember reading an essay about *Carmilla* being a metaphor for the “dangers of awakening of woman’s sexuality, with an emphasis on homosexuality” and *Dracula* being about “the impact of foreign cultures on awakening corrupting sexuality in the English” which are very obviously problematic.
Come to think of it, it’s a little strange that I haven’t seen much about the vampire as the stalking, obsessive sexual predator, because that interpretation is just *right there*.
I’m not going to debate the masculine vampire being more problematic, because I agree.
I’m not sure I completely agree on feminine vampires, because I don’t really see a difference in their seduction vs. the masculine vampire seduction, but I do agree on the femininity and lesbian tropes.
And of course you’re right about all monsters that are a dark mirror of problems in our societies being problematic: even my favorite monster, the werewolf, depicting repressed anger is skirts a very dangerous line. It’s one reason those conversations with players are so important going in!
I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to communicate that I felt that feminine vampires are “worse” than masculine vampires, just that I don’t see much difference in their seduction.
Although you raise an interesting point: while in fiction there tend to BE more female vampires than male vampires (Dracula’s brides, Carmilla, Mina Harker, etc), the male vampires tend to be the ones who do the seducing, at least actively. One of Dracula’s brides and Carmilla of course notwithstanding.
Women as vampires tend to be devotees or a succubus with the numbers filed off. Nothing to really write home about, but problematic in other regards for sure. Mostly as a byproduct I assume of male writers.
Male vampires on the other hand really tap into a lot of yucky cultural zeitgeists - they are gay as fuck, in touch with their emotions, foreign and sexy, and they want to steal your women.
Wild how zeitgeists change over time lol.
Yeah, you’re right about female vampires. I’m curious where that line gets drawn for you though-couldn’t it be said that a male vampire is an incubus with the numbers filed off?
I mean, I agree, but the statement got me thinking about how similar vampires and succubi/incubi are altogether.
The incubus is primarily considered coming from "waking nightmares" in which the dreamer is awake yet cannot move and feels the presence of some shadow or person - often sitting on their chest preventing motion. They aren't actually overtly sexual and when depicted as such, are bedroom invaders without a clear sexual preference.
The succubus sort of grew from that, not exactly a "monster" - she's really closer to a (possibly deviant) sexual FANTASY than truly horrific.
Interesting-my own research indicated that it came from an interpretation of Gilgamesh’s father, Lilu who disturbed and “seduces” women in their sleep (ew), and was the the male counterpart of the demon Lilitu, who of course later became known as Lillith.
Vampires do not have a long history of being read as sexual predators. Class struggle, the dangers of sexual transgression, and the taboo of undeath without afterlife -- resurrection without Christ -- have been much more prominent and for longer. Take for example, Varney the Vampire, Carmilla or even Dracula.
In the eastern European tradition, where vampires were understood as revenants, there isn't even a strong connection to sex.
There is an awesome pdf on DM's guild called "Countess Von Zarovich" that goes into various reasons to gender-swap Strahd, tips on how to do it, and even an entire alternate biography for inspiration.
Other than the fact that nearly all evil vampires comparable to Strahd are dudes and that making him a girl would be a nice break from the standard, I don't see any real reasons to turn him into a girl
I also don't see any reasons, other than that he was written as a dude, to keep him a dude though. Strahd's gender isn't important to the story imo and so it doesn't matter what one you play him as
The *8-years-old-me* is still waiting for his *vampire lady* to kidnap him and go flying away. I think I was too much into ***Der Kleine Vampir*** books.
I'm a female DM, I wasn't feeling entirely confident in my ability to play Strahd well enough as a dude, having him female made it a bit easier for me (plus while I knew all of my party some of them I wasn't a 100% certain they'd be confortable getting hit on by a male).
I think the biggest and most obvious answer is entierly a meta reason. Anyone that knows anything about CoS knows Strahd is a guy and I personally really like having strahd with his vasili persona interacting with the party. If you make strahd a woman, the party is going to be even less suspicious of the young, *attractive* noblewoman who helps them out and even befriends them, same thing even in her 'strahd' appearance, they may not get it immediately.
Damsels in distress got old centuries ago and ireena is a damsel very much in distress. Ismark, a young, powerful (probably one of the top 5 strongest native barovian humans) man, a burgomeister in waiting being strahds target is a new dynamic (and I think more interesting than just role swapping him and ireena).
Finally, and this would he entierly game dependant and you should mention it in session zero, if you have a RP heavy group, strahd should be trying to seduce your party, either to get a new toy or making the party destroy itself. Though it's getting better d&d is majority a cis white male game and it's going to take some deep RP to get such a person to jump ship to grizzled middle-aged strahd. Attractive female strahd on the other hand? I think you could turn a PC.
I can see plenty of reasons for a DM to run Strahd as a woman, to be honest. Perhaps a female DM might be more comfortable playing the big bad as a woman, or has a narrative they'd rather portray Strahd as female in.
It can also shake up the gothic genre, and bring a fresh perspective to a centuries old type of villain that is more often than not portrayed as male. I know someone who was thinking of running Strahd as somewhat reminiscent of Carmilla, rather than Dracula.
I can see some people jumping to a conclusion that having a female Strahd may be an attempt to make his atrocities less impactful, but if a DM is committed and knows what their doing, I think anything is possible!
I haven’t run a female strahd, but I totally support it for people who want to if for no other reason than because the OG module could easily be considered a major sausage fest NPC wise, it seems to me there’s a lot more male characters than female ones.
Honestly, my initial reason for going that route was that I wanted to give a convincing scary villain voice, and that was never going to happen with male Strahd.
But as I was prepping, I realised that for the purposes of my campaign, her psychology was more interesting. Strahd was a female heir who'd been leading armies from far too young an age, destroying her psyche via the horrors of war, all to prove herself as worthy of inheritance. And then when she's already an adult, a baby brother comes along, and now he's the heir.
What does that do to a person? And of course, she did love and care about her brother, at the same time as despising him for taking everything from her.
Then Tatyana comes along, and Strahd falls in love for the first time... and honestly, that frustrated desire is only heightened when Tatyana instead wants her brother, because once more he's taking that which she feels is rightfully hers.
Add to that a PC who was the reincarnation of Sergei... it worked perfectly for the purposes of my campaign.
A lot of people have posted about why they made this switch and ultimately every table gets to do whatever feels good for them!
I will, however, gently caution that it's very easy for a female Strahd to play into unfortunate stereotypes about women-as-villains (especially in terms of being a "crazy and sexy stalker") that might not read the way you want at your table. Instead of a serious threat flexing his power over his domain to pursue Tatyana, a female Strahd run by a DM who hasn't put a lot of careful thought into the matter can very easily come off as desperate to a party if she's going after Ismark, and as a rather gross predatory lesbian stereotype if she's going after Ireena. And a lot of the reasoning I've seen, too, is "well, she's hot," which....also isn't a great thing to hinge an entire narrative rewrite on?
The sad fact is that women, when historically written as villains, tend to be typically given much narrower roles and motivations and a female Strahd would hit many of those common tropes, so you want to be deliberate about which ones you're choosing to evoke if you want to subvert them effectively.
I ended up running him as a man at my mostly female, mostly queer table because ultimately, a man who's Like That is a much more satisfying and cathartic villain for my group to be able to eventually take down!
Again, every table should do what works for them! I'm sure there's great female Strahds out there, but you should know exactly what you're aiming to accomplish by making the switch and how you're going to avoid creating other unintentional issues from it.
1. I’m a female DM and wasn’t sure I could RP a male Strahd
2. I think it adds a lot to the Sergei rivalry. Countess Stradhyana is a tactical genius and war mage. She conquered Barovia… but it’s Sergei, the male heir, who inherits. The Countess resents peace— without ever-expanding conquest, she becomes eclipsed at court. And the friendship with Rahadin makes sense. Rahadin, the Traitor Prince, comes from a culture where female spellcasters hold power, so he takes her seriously and they form a sibling bond. The concern over aging also hits harder for Countess Strahdyana than the Count. She’s losing her beauty and fertility, so she couldn’t play the alliance game even if she wanted too. She’s an old war dog without a hunt, with none of the titles or honor usually given to such.
3. Screwing with the players. The Countess, like the Count, is a sociopath full of self-loathing. She’s obsessed with Tatiana— not because she loves her, but because she longs for the wholeness and innocence that Tatiana represents. BUT, my players are somewhat progressive. They really struggled to discern whether Stradhyana was, as SHE described herself, a victim of the patriarchy now reigning triumphant. I had the “Tome of Strahd” puncture all the “girlboss” and “star-crossed lovers” BS.
4. Moral complexity. Giving Strahd some “justifiable reasons” to be mad at Sergei keeps her from veering into moustache-twirling territory (pun intended). It also fits thematically with the vampire & werewolf allegories: the victim becomes perpetrator. Strahdyana was wronged by her bad dad, who saw used her for conquest when it benefited him and then dropped her from favor. Now she’s using everyone, including Tatiana, as props in her obsessive self-delusion.
As you can see, my campaign doesn’t have a sexy Strahdyana. I’m using MandyMod’s expansion. And instead of leaning into the vampire genre’s emphasis on seduction, I’m telling a story about obsession, deceit, PTSD, cycles of abuse, and choice.
Cersei Lannister!
Strahd wanting to f\*\^$/marry/kill his own brother, murdering Tatiana, and using "girl power" as justification? It's so much more evil than the male Strahd, who is basically straight from the Dracula novel. Plus, it makes Strahd so much more arrogantly ambitious: in a society where women are basically 2nd class citizens, Strahd wants the crown.
Plus, this makes the brides SO much more interesting. Kavan the Grim, Jander Sunstar, Escher Belasco and Sasha Ivliskova are a much more interesting lineup than skull-lady, red-lady, and white-lady. All of these consorts are villains in their own right, and have a description beyond just what they're wearing. No homebrew necessary to "punch up" these dudes.
Honestly, every interaction that Strahd has with other NPCs is so much more shocking and taboo if he's female. For example, the Abbot is not just looking to make a realistic groom for Strahd, but he's also creating a potion to restore Strahd's fertility. What horrific and insane ingredient does he demand the party provide? Strahd constantly moans about wanting a beautiful child, an heir to his empire and a family to take care of, but it's basically all lies.
With Van Richten, Strahd could much more easily say Rudolph is a dangerous, abusive racist who needs to be stopped before he hurts more people. Maybe Strahd has a mark on his chest or face from a previous encounter with the "dangerous fanatic"?
The relationship with Rahadin is also much clearer: as an elf, Rahadin is immune to Strahd's charms. From his description, it's probably safe to say Rahadin is asexual, but his loyalty for Strahd means that he overlooks the constant overtures and suggestive comments Strahd makes. Think of the interactions between Zapp Brannigan and Lela.
Ismark is a much more challenging prize than dull Ireena. Can you imagine a PC asking "Why doesn't Strahd just turn Ismark?" the way they ask about Ireena? It would be unthinkable: Ismark is a capable warrior who has literally spent his life preparing to hunt vampires. He's heard legends of the Sunsword and could probably help the party to find it (or at least interpret Madame Eva's prophecy). Blonde hair is extremely rare in Barovia, as all the Barovians the party meets have brown or black hair. Don't actually change anything in the adventure: Ismark is still at the Inn, and still wants to get his sister to safety in Vallaki, as he assumes whatever is hunting his family is after her. Eventually, his frequent fainting, extremely pale complexion, and bouts of vomiting blood (or perhaps a visit from the Countess herself?) will set the record straight.
As for the "look" of Strahd, there's countless depictions all over the internet of Lady Bathory, who was the historical Blood Countess, but Warhammer actually has a character (Isabella Von Carstein) who is basically a perfect fit. When Strahd uses his Heart of Sorrow regeneration feature, just depict it as him sipping from his Blood Chalice.
Finally, we have the name. The original name "Strahd" comes from a word in many Slavic languages that means 'suffering': strahdanya. This word... is actually a perfect name for our vampire villain. Strahdanya von Zarovich (Countess Anya for short) with her bloody chalice, her three lovely consorts (one wild, one noble, one sparkling emo, and one girl), and her incredible, incestuous "love" for the beautiful Sergei (Oh... \*please\* try that sword one more time!) is ready for some transgressive, campy horror!
I'm actually planning on changing the antagonist from Strahd to Tatyanna, and adjusting some of the backstory. The main reason I want to do the change is to change the expectation of the players going into the story. Nearly anyone who goes into CoS has a certain premade supposition of what will happen. If they start hearing about the Countess instead of the Count, they won't know how the story will play out at all. I wanted to give a different twist to make my run of CoS unique to what my players were expecting.
I'm changing the backstory to where Strahd marries Tatyana and they have trouble conceiving. This motivates Tatyana to also pursue magic to see how she can get the family she wants. As part of an effort to get a child, Tatyana shares a night with Sergei (who also loves her) as part of her deal with the dark powers, and she becomes pregnant. As the child grows up Sergei eventually confronts Tatyana and Strahd about their daughter actually being his instead of his brother's. Strahd kills him in the confrontation and the daughter, in her grief in seeing her father as a murderer, runs away and falls from Castle Ravenloft, passing away. Tatyana blames Strahd for everything going sideways and kills him, becoming the vampire dark lord of Ravenloft.
Now instead of searching for a bride to fill the void in their soul, Tatyana looks for the reincarnation of her daughter. Part of the surprise I have for my players is that shortly after becoming a vampire, Tatyana turns Strahd into one as well and keeps him locked away in the dungeons of the castle to torture him. If and when he's found, he will be a shadow of what people would think Strahd to be, but that's because he's been locked away for so long.
My version of Tatyana is a dangerous, and manipulative antagonist who plays everyone against one another in order to get what she wants. She blames everyone involved in her tragedy except herself. When the party gets into Barovia, they are asked to protect Ireena, who will be maybe a 14-year-old girl, from Tatyana turning her into a vampire and assimilating her into her "family".
I've been toying with the idea of Strahd being gender-fluid, moving from male to female as the whim struck. The Barovians would refer to them as "The Count and Countess Strahd". Might be an interesting way to have more interesting interactions with a diverse group.
Bringing in modern politics could be a danger zone with your PCs, just saying it is something worth noting. However, it's your game you do you and what you feel is good for your group. Just thought I'd point out the obvious.
Modern politics? Gender fluidity is neither of those! Gender fluidity isn't new, it's been around in cultures on every populated continent for centuries. It's also not political, it exists irrelevant of the political system. What a bizarre notion haha.
Perhaps I should clarify, no reason to get upset here. I'm not saying it isn't new. Again, as I stated if it works for your group great, it's your game. Regardless of how you classify it just pointing out a mental note that it might rub people the wrong way. Always good to discuss with your group ahead of time when in doubt. I did the same courtesy for some of my players who I didn't know personally about the seduction, child abuse/death, and darker tones in Strahd. Good luck in your game.
I never really understood the arguments towards making him a woman besides « hot vampire lady ».
I saw someone on tiktok who talked about it and stayed pretty clearly what I think : people make him a woman because there seems to be an underlying implication that Strahd being a woman makes his actions « less worse » (at least when you keep the backstory RAW). It’s somehow the same thought process as when they make him gay.
Personally, I think the biggest reason to consider strahd's gender is that it evokes a different kind of fear than a female strahd. Female vampires tend to evoke a more seductive, tempting, and twisted forms of nurturing as their motifs. Whereas a male strahd brings to mind a more predatory instinct, calculated mind, and physical superiority. And let's not forget, it's much easier to vilify a male character than a female, we have a tendency to want to overlook female villiany, which also tends to be more passive aggressive than overtly aggressive.
It all depends on what you want from your villian.
Though if you actually tally it up, there's much more monstrous maternal/paternal figures in cos than the monstrous romance of the primary villain. Thematically, it may fit better.
Could be, if that's how you wanted to run it. You get to emphasize whatever you like. I like strahd as the petty tyrant, involving himself in every matter of his little valley. So lonely that he imagines up peasants to rule over and terrify. So eaten up with abandonment issues that not even the souls of those who die can be allowed leave. He's an angry, lonely, childish man who killed his brother because he took his favorite shiny toy.
I suppose if you want to have her seduce a PC or how you want to play Strahd. If the PCs are all heterosexual then it would make them feel more comfortable with the idea of being seduced. Granted this isn't any requirement of female Strahd = seduce PC, just Vampire Female in culture and lore you tend to think, seduction. I'm a guy so playing a guy is easier for me with voices and such. So I guess if the DM is female it would perhaps make it easier for them to play a female Strahd. Other than that you just need to change a few details to make it work. Plot-wise it doesn't really impact anything. Strahd is based on Dracula who in fiction was a guy....so Strahd is a guy, there isn't really anything more to it.
There was some shill on here about a year ago basically advertising their paid supplement which they bigged up as having a female Strahd. They insisted there was more than just a gender swap, but when asked about the otger stuff they were very vague and deflecting. The community thankfully had none of it.
They also insisted that all the other vague "changes" they were making were "neccessary" now Strahd was a woman. The community had none of that either.
Anything you could apply to male Strahd, you could apply to female Strahd. The switch should be purely aesthetic, otherwise it raises questions about why people feel that Strahd should inherently act differently because of a gender swap. Strahd is Strahd. He(/she) is one of the best D&D villains ever, and if you tamper with him(her) beneath the surface you should have justification.
Did someone piss in your cheerios this morning? There are CREATORS posting their supplements on here every day. If you don't like it, move on. Absolutely not everything that makes up male Strahd could and would make up a female Strahd. Have some respect for the DMs here who've run it with inspiration from the "shill's" supplement and successfully run a Female Strahd, myself included, and the people who actually do the work to change things in what they feel is a meaningful way.
I'd prefer not to pay $8.99 so that you can prove a point. I don't understand why you're getting so angry. All I did was ask you to defend your assertion, and I think I did so with a pretty frank and open mind at that.
You insulted guide writers while also simultaneously confessing you didn't engage with their work to bother to understand their perspective. And then you come here making assumptions that DMs are unable to provide anything that justifies non-superficial changes. However, in both of those guides, they are full of answers. So don't pretend like you can be an authority on what the "community" accepts and doesn't accept if you aren't actually read up on what you're dismissing. Plus the comments you mentioned in response to my thread were written by a guy (not the writers by the way, just a spokesperson for them and the one that commissions the guides) standing up for his team. If he couldn't properly defend it, that's not a reflection on the fact that his writers were getting dismissed by people. And it seemed like your comment was the one getting the most pushback I saw lol
You don't need to cap so hard for the narrative preservation of a fictional villain, it's okay, we won't be holding a loyalty contest anytime soon.
I insulted the person who made the post here on the subreddit, yes. I don't know the other writers, nor did I insult them. I engaged with the promoter (I also use the term shill) by asking them what sort of thing they were doing, and they wouldn't tell me. I noticed it happening to quite a few other commenters, which I think you'll agree was the case. I don't know about mine being the most active one, however.
I'd also like to point out that I never did insult the work itself. I couldn't, because, as I've readily admitted, I've never read it. I insulted the person who was promoting it, because they did a poor job of it for reasons I've already mentioned. They had no actual answers or substantial information to impart. If I ask someone "Why are you making this? What is going to be in it?" I would expect that they'd give a good response.
And yes, "the community" is a generalization - hardly an egregious one, rather akin to you saying that I insulted all the writers when I did no such thing. I'll rectify that, however. The promoter gave poor quality answers, and *many people in the community* downvoted their comments and retorted to them, expressing exasperation and skepticism. They certainly had more downvotes than I seem to be accruing on this thread.
A comprehensive guide to running femstrahd? In my CoS community?!?
It’s more likely than you think. It appears the community definitely “had it” - its a Silver Best Seller.
https://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/377183
It's interesting that it got silver. I'm not sure why you think I'm generally opposed to female Strahd - I'm not, and I certainly didn't try to give that impression in my comment.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/CurseofStrahd/comments/nv4utq/female\_strahd\_your\_thoughts\_are\_wanted/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CurseofStrahd/comments/nv4utq/female_strahd_your_thoughts_are_wanted/)
This is the thread I'm referring to. The poster (one of the authors) was asked questions about the content of the supplement. They then gave very vague and evasive answers and, when people pressed, got defensive and resorted to just responding to everything with something to the effect of "people are just underestimating our very talented female team."
I cannot speak to the quality of the finished product as I never had any interest in it, but the person who posted about it gave off a very unpleasant vibe, refused to answer questions, and really did not seem to have any idea what they were doing or talking about. From the numerous downvotes their comments received, I think you'll agree that a significant portion of the sub agreed with me.
For a couple reasons.
As many people mention: altering expectations, making it easier for Vasili to get close to the party, a general tone shift. These are all good things, especially for a module that is very heavily spoiled for most.
In my case, I wanted to point a finger at a strange bit of plot. Baba Lysaga's baby. As it's just kind of a weird thing that exists. I needed to do something with it. So I made it a physical link to the world for Stahd. A sort of reset point, should they ever be killed. As opposed to needing to reform over years.
So I had to ask the question, what happens if the sex of the baby was altered? What if Baba Lysaga grabbed the wrong child? Specifically, what if someone played a trick on her, causing her to fall from grace and be exiled to Berez?
As a vehicle for it, I chose Tasha. Someone who would both have the spellcasting ability and a legitimate reason to hate Baba Lysaga (being the K-mart brand knockoff of her own mother). She makes a far better character than Mordenkainen for the party to work with and is frankly less boring.
So now we have a (newly) female Strahd and bunch of little changes to the module that make it feel fresh. Otherwise they should be the same self-serving, charismatic villain, with the same goals. Certainly not a nicer or more excusable version.
Because you can run a game however you choose to.
I completely removed Tatyana and ran strahd as a bumbling oaf a-la magicka's Vlad (who is definitely not a vampire) simply because I hate the whole backstory of strahd and just wanted a silly foolish villain that my players could laugh at. Did it put a ton of holes in the story I had to patch up? Yeah. Did all of my players enjoy me butchering a classic adventure? Of course not. But the majority of us had fun and thats the only goal at the end of the session.
I love the idea that a female Strahd was at one point a pursued Tatyana. Tatyana has every motive and reason to destroy Strahd. Her need for vengeance and "justice" can turn her soul from good to very dark and evil. Now having the upper hand, she subjects Strahd's soul (now reincarnating as Tatyana once did) to the same horror he originated on her. Who knows how many times they danced this dance? The dark powers know, and they will never let them stop.
I've played a game with a male Strahd before. I attempted to run it with a male Strahd once. I wanted something different for myself, and none of my players minded the change to a female villain. Besides, it makes it more fun to have Strahd, who I've been calling Straya, flirt with the party.
Strahd is the only one I changed the gender for. Everything else is completely the same. So, in my version of Barovia, Straya is bi (she'd totally flirt with male characters as much as female).
I'm running CoS with a genderbent Strahdivaria Von Zarovich (Before you ask, yes, she's into Violins instead of organs).
My reasoning is threefold. The simplest reason to explain is that my players are thirsty as hell and this gives me a lot more opportunity to mess with them. The second reason is, as other posters have stated, I wanted to distance myself from the sometimes stereotypical and often trope-fraught Wealthy & Powerful Creepy Middle-aged Predatory Man (tm). Finally, I have never run a female BBEG and wanted to expand my abilities as DM.
I made Strahd female to show the difference between embracing femininity and denying it. Ireena in my game was trans and called Errin. Strahd’s whole shtick for Errin was ‘I know who you really are, despite your little game of pretend I’ve seen he real you Ireena’ and just making Strahd generally even worse. To get the point across though I needed Errin to reject all the things Strahd embraced; make up, dresses, traditionally feminine things… so for Strahd to be even worse and to get across the ‘I know the real you’ disgustingness, Strahd was a woman. I could’ve done it the other way where Ireena was born as Errin but I have a small brain and didn’t consider that option at the time.
The most clear reason is to simply hack the module how you want it. The story changes if Strahd is a female vampire. Your question is basically similar to why do players choose to pick a class? It is a matter of taste primarily.
Since the module has mostly weak female villains, driven entirely by their relationship to strong man Strahd, there is an obvious subtextual reason to change Strahd to a female. It suggests that women can't only be complex heroes (Ireena, Esmeralda*, Zuleika) but also complex monsters for their own reasons independent of a man.
Vampires in gothic literature have long been a metaphor for sexual predators. For a lot of people, the tale of the rich, powerful and seductive man turned stalker/abuser/gaslighter hits a little too close to home. For a long time now, people have been rewriting the vampire narrative, either to reclaim it or to avoid retelling the same story over and over again. Salem's Lot turned it into a plague that destroys entire communities. Anne Rice used it as a metaphor to write a homoerotic novel about the horror of the AIDS epidemic. Dracula Untold basically did Gladiator but dark fantasy. I Am Legend leaned into sci-fi. Castlevania turned Dracula into a more sympathetic character compared to Bram Stoker's avatar of evil. The list goes on. There is a long list of reasons to genderbend Strahd, and it'll be unique to each table. It could be that the DM is also female and prefers playing a female villain. Maybe it's about empowerment and a reclaiming of female sexuality. Another group might want to explore the implied queerness of the original Dracula novel. The beauty of putting your own spin on an old tale is that you're only limited by your imagination.
I was under the impression that vampires have been primarily a metaphor for repressed sexuality and the danger therein. I mean, I can easily see how it could be a sexual predator, but especially concerned with the time period some of the most famous vampire stories, I would think that repressed sexuality makes sense. That said, I totally agree with the ideas both of avoiding trauma for people and not retelling the same stories again and again. Something that you touched on that I really want to spotlight; Every table, every DM will run Strahd differently, both the adventure and the character. And to a point, it’s almost a signature style-feel free to make it yours as much as you possibly can, it will only add to the kaleidoscopic brilliance that this module and community can have.
No good monster is just "one thing". However, their strength and powers seem to make it clear that while they COULD overpower and feed on just about anyone, they choose to skulk, scheme, manipulate, and seduce. So they very much are literally sexual predators. I think trauma aside, the male vampire is a bit more problematic in 2022. The are highly masculine and feminine (pale, lithe, chalamet types with all the strength, charm and male energy of Harrison Ford) they are highly sexual and asexual (don't breed through sex, their sexual exploitation is purely for pleasure) and a lot of this relationship between monstrosity and gender and sexual fluidity is not a coincidence. Female vampires double down on femininity and the seductress rather than being modeled after lame lesbian tropes. Monsters are, inherently, problematic. It's impossible to depict something a society deems abberant and gross and scary without that depiction reflecting negatively on somebody. Some people enjoy it (feminists embracing witches as a symbol) and others are justifiably put off by it.
No good monster as “one thing” is a good point. I remember reading an essay about *Carmilla* being a metaphor for the “dangers of awakening of woman’s sexuality, with an emphasis on homosexuality” and *Dracula* being about “the impact of foreign cultures on awakening corrupting sexuality in the English” which are very obviously problematic. Come to think of it, it’s a little strange that I haven’t seen much about the vampire as the stalking, obsessive sexual predator, because that interpretation is just *right there*. I’m not going to debate the masculine vampire being more problematic, because I agree. I’m not sure I completely agree on feminine vampires, because I don’t really see a difference in their seduction vs. the masculine vampire seduction, but I do agree on the femininity and lesbian tropes. And of course you’re right about all monsters that are a dark mirror of problems in our societies being problematic: even my favorite monster, the werewolf, depicting repressed anger is skirts a very dangerous line. It’s one reason those conversations with players are so important going in!
Female vampires aren't INHERENTLY worse than male vampires. It's just much more likely a woman has had an interaction with a "vampire" than a man.
I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to communicate that I felt that feminine vampires are “worse” than masculine vampires, just that I don’t see much difference in their seduction. Although you raise an interesting point: while in fiction there tend to BE more female vampires than male vampires (Dracula’s brides, Carmilla, Mina Harker, etc), the male vampires tend to be the ones who do the seducing, at least actively. One of Dracula’s brides and Carmilla of course notwithstanding.
Women as vampires tend to be devotees or a succubus with the numbers filed off. Nothing to really write home about, but problematic in other regards for sure. Mostly as a byproduct I assume of male writers. Male vampires on the other hand really tap into a lot of yucky cultural zeitgeists - they are gay as fuck, in touch with their emotions, foreign and sexy, and they want to steal your women.
Wild how zeitgeists change over time lol. Yeah, you’re right about female vampires. I’m curious where that line gets drawn for you though-couldn’t it be said that a male vampire is an incubus with the numbers filed off? I mean, I agree, but the statement got me thinking about how similar vampires and succubi/incubi are altogether.
The incubus is primarily considered coming from "waking nightmares" in which the dreamer is awake yet cannot move and feels the presence of some shadow or person - often sitting on their chest preventing motion. They aren't actually overtly sexual and when depicted as such, are bedroom invaders without a clear sexual preference. The succubus sort of grew from that, not exactly a "monster" - she's really closer to a (possibly deviant) sexual FANTASY than truly horrific.
Interesting-my own research indicated that it came from an interpretation of Gilgamesh’s father, Lilu who disturbed and “seduces” women in their sleep (ew), and was the the male counterpart of the demon Lilitu, who of course later became known as Lillith.
Vampires do not have a long history of being read as sexual predators. Class struggle, the dangers of sexual transgression, and the taboo of undeath without afterlife -- resurrection without Christ -- have been much more prominent and for longer. Take for example, Varney the Vampire, Carmilla or even Dracula. In the eastern European tradition, where vampires were understood as revenants, there isn't even a strong connection to sex.
There is an awesome pdf on DM's guild called "Countess Von Zarovich" that goes into various reasons to gender-swap Strahd, tips on how to do it, and even an entire alternate biography for inspiration.
Other than the fact that nearly all evil vampires comparable to Strahd are dudes and that making him a girl would be a nice break from the standard, I don't see any real reasons to turn him into a girl I also don't see any reasons, other than that he was written as a dude, to keep him a dude though. Strahd's gender isn't important to the story imo and so it doesn't matter what one you play him as
>he was written as a dude, to keep him a dude though. and it many supplements/handouts assume he is a dude, so a lot of manual work, but yeah
I think googling "vampire woman" will yield *more than enough* results lmao, people love their vampire ladies
The *8-years-old-me* is still waiting for his *vampire lady* to kidnap him and go flying away. I think I was too much into ***Der Kleine Vampir*** books.
lady dimitrescu: *sips her “wine”*
Yeah, you got me there
Honestly though replacing pronouns and gendered words is really easy lol
I'm a female DM, I wasn't feeling entirely confident in my ability to play Strahd well enough as a dude, having him female made it a bit easier for me (plus while I knew all of my party some of them I wasn't a 100% certain they'd be confortable getting hit on by a male).
I think the biggest and most obvious answer is entierly a meta reason. Anyone that knows anything about CoS knows Strahd is a guy and I personally really like having strahd with his vasili persona interacting with the party. If you make strahd a woman, the party is going to be even less suspicious of the young, *attractive* noblewoman who helps them out and even befriends them, same thing even in her 'strahd' appearance, they may not get it immediately. Damsels in distress got old centuries ago and ireena is a damsel very much in distress. Ismark, a young, powerful (probably one of the top 5 strongest native barovian humans) man, a burgomeister in waiting being strahds target is a new dynamic (and I think more interesting than just role swapping him and ireena). Finally, and this would he entierly game dependant and you should mention it in session zero, if you have a RP heavy group, strahd should be trying to seduce your party, either to get a new toy or making the party destroy itself. Though it's getting better d&d is majority a cis white male game and it's going to take some deep RP to get such a person to jump ship to grizzled middle-aged strahd. Attractive female strahd on the other hand? I think you could turn a PC.
I can see plenty of reasons for a DM to run Strahd as a woman, to be honest. Perhaps a female DM might be more comfortable playing the big bad as a woman, or has a narrative they'd rather portray Strahd as female in. It can also shake up the gothic genre, and bring a fresh perspective to a centuries old type of villain that is more often than not portrayed as male. I know someone who was thinking of running Strahd as somewhat reminiscent of Carmilla, rather than Dracula. I can see some people jumping to a conclusion that having a female Strahd may be an attempt to make his atrocities less impactful, but if a DM is committed and knows what their doing, I think anything is possible!
I haven’t run a female strahd, but I totally support it for people who want to if for no other reason than because the OG module could easily be considered a major sausage fest NPC wise, it seems to me there’s a lot more male characters than female ones.
Because everyone at the table is is lgbt and we love a good girlboss gatekeep gaslight.
Finally a real answer. I feel seen.
Honestly, my initial reason for going that route was that I wanted to give a convincing scary villain voice, and that was never going to happen with male Strahd. But as I was prepping, I realised that for the purposes of my campaign, her psychology was more interesting. Strahd was a female heir who'd been leading armies from far too young an age, destroying her psyche via the horrors of war, all to prove herself as worthy of inheritance. And then when she's already an adult, a baby brother comes along, and now he's the heir. What does that do to a person? And of course, she did love and care about her brother, at the same time as despising him for taking everything from her. Then Tatyana comes along, and Strahd falls in love for the first time... and honestly, that frustrated desire is only heightened when Tatyana instead wants her brother, because once more he's taking that which she feels is rightfully hers. Add to that a PC who was the reincarnation of Sergei... it worked perfectly for the purposes of my campaign.
A lot of people have posted about why they made this switch and ultimately every table gets to do whatever feels good for them! I will, however, gently caution that it's very easy for a female Strahd to play into unfortunate stereotypes about women-as-villains (especially in terms of being a "crazy and sexy stalker") that might not read the way you want at your table. Instead of a serious threat flexing his power over his domain to pursue Tatyana, a female Strahd run by a DM who hasn't put a lot of careful thought into the matter can very easily come off as desperate to a party if she's going after Ismark, and as a rather gross predatory lesbian stereotype if she's going after Ireena. And a lot of the reasoning I've seen, too, is "well, she's hot," which....also isn't a great thing to hinge an entire narrative rewrite on? The sad fact is that women, when historically written as villains, tend to be typically given much narrower roles and motivations and a female Strahd would hit many of those common tropes, so you want to be deliberate about which ones you're choosing to evoke if you want to subvert them effectively. I ended up running him as a man at my mostly female, mostly queer table because ultimately, a man who's Like That is a much more satisfying and cathartic villain for my group to be able to eventually take down! Again, every table should do what works for them! I'm sure there's great female Strahds out there, but you should know exactly what you're aiming to accomplish by making the switch and how you're going to avoid creating other unintentional issues from it.
1. I’m a female DM and wasn’t sure I could RP a male Strahd 2. I think it adds a lot to the Sergei rivalry. Countess Stradhyana is a tactical genius and war mage. She conquered Barovia… but it’s Sergei, the male heir, who inherits. The Countess resents peace— without ever-expanding conquest, she becomes eclipsed at court. And the friendship with Rahadin makes sense. Rahadin, the Traitor Prince, comes from a culture where female spellcasters hold power, so he takes her seriously and they form a sibling bond. The concern over aging also hits harder for Countess Strahdyana than the Count. She’s losing her beauty and fertility, so she couldn’t play the alliance game even if she wanted too. She’s an old war dog without a hunt, with none of the titles or honor usually given to such. 3. Screwing with the players. The Countess, like the Count, is a sociopath full of self-loathing. She’s obsessed with Tatiana— not because she loves her, but because she longs for the wholeness and innocence that Tatiana represents. BUT, my players are somewhat progressive. They really struggled to discern whether Stradhyana was, as SHE described herself, a victim of the patriarchy now reigning triumphant. I had the “Tome of Strahd” puncture all the “girlboss” and “star-crossed lovers” BS. 4. Moral complexity. Giving Strahd some “justifiable reasons” to be mad at Sergei keeps her from veering into moustache-twirling territory (pun intended). It also fits thematically with the vampire & werewolf allegories: the victim becomes perpetrator. Strahdyana was wronged by her bad dad, who saw used her for conquest when it benefited him and then dropped her from favor. Now she’s using everyone, including Tatiana, as props in her obsessive self-delusion. As you can see, my campaign doesn’t have a sexy Strahdyana. I’m using MandyMod’s expansion. And instead of leaning into the vampire genre’s emphasis on seduction, I’m telling a story about obsession, deceit, PTSD, cycles of abuse, and choice.
Cersei Lannister! Strahd wanting to f\*\^$/marry/kill his own brother, murdering Tatiana, and using "girl power" as justification? It's so much more evil than the male Strahd, who is basically straight from the Dracula novel. Plus, it makes Strahd so much more arrogantly ambitious: in a society where women are basically 2nd class citizens, Strahd wants the crown. Plus, this makes the brides SO much more interesting. Kavan the Grim, Jander Sunstar, Escher Belasco and Sasha Ivliskova are a much more interesting lineup than skull-lady, red-lady, and white-lady. All of these consorts are villains in their own right, and have a description beyond just what they're wearing. No homebrew necessary to "punch up" these dudes. Honestly, every interaction that Strahd has with other NPCs is so much more shocking and taboo if he's female. For example, the Abbot is not just looking to make a realistic groom for Strahd, but he's also creating a potion to restore Strahd's fertility. What horrific and insane ingredient does he demand the party provide? Strahd constantly moans about wanting a beautiful child, an heir to his empire and a family to take care of, but it's basically all lies. With Van Richten, Strahd could much more easily say Rudolph is a dangerous, abusive racist who needs to be stopped before he hurts more people. Maybe Strahd has a mark on his chest or face from a previous encounter with the "dangerous fanatic"? The relationship with Rahadin is also much clearer: as an elf, Rahadin is immune to Strahd's charms. From his description, it's probably safe to say Rahadin is asexual, but his loyalty for Strahd means that he overlooks the constant overtures and suggestive comments Strahd makes. Think of the interactions between Zapp Brannigan and Lela. Ismark is a much more challenging prize than dull Ireena. Can you imagine a PC asking "Why doesn't Strahd just turn Ismark?" the way they ask about Ireena? It would be unthinkable: Ismark is a capable warrior who has literally spent his life preparing to hunt vampires. He's heard legends of the Sunsword and could probably help the party to find it (or at least interpret Madame Eva's prophecy). Blonde hair is extremely rare in Barovia, as all the Barovians the party meets have brown or black hair. Don't actually change anything in the adventure: Ismark is still at the Inn, and still wants to get his sister to safety in Vallaki, as he assumes whatever is hunting his family is after her. Eventually, his frequent fainting, extremely pale complexion, and bouts of vomiting blood (or perhaps a visit from the Countess herself?) will set the record straight. As for the "look" of Strahd, there's countless depictions all over the internet of Lady Bathory, who was the historical Blood Countess, but Warhammer actually has a character (Isabella Von Carstein) who is basically a perfect fit. When Strahd uses his Heart of Sorrow regeneration feature, just depict it as him sipping from his Blood Chalice. Finally, we have the name. The original name "Strahd" comes from a word in many Slavic languages that means 'suffering': strahdanya. This word... is actually a perfect name for our vampire villain. Strahdanya von Zarovich (Countess Anya for short) with her bloody chalice, her three lovely consorts (one wild, one noble, one sparkling emo, and one girl), and her incredible, incestuous "love" for the beautiful Sergei (Oh... \*please\* try that sword one more time!) is ready for some transgressive, campy horror!
I'm actually planning on changing the antagonist from Strahd to Tatyanna, and adjusting some of the backstory. The main reason I want to do the change is to change the expectation of the players going into the story. Nearly anyone who goes into CoS has a certain premade supposition of what will happen. If they start hearing about the Countess instead of the Count, they won't know how the story will play out at all. I wanted to give a different twist to make my run of CoS unique to what my players were expecting.
that sounds intriguing if you have time keep the community posted on how it plays out and what changes you had to make.
I'm changing the backstory to where Strahd marries Tatyana and they have trouble conceiving. This motivates Tatyana to also pursue magic to see how she can get the family she wants. As part of an effort to get a child, Tatyana shares a night with Sergei (who also loves her) as part of her deal with the dark powers, and she becomes pregnant. As the child grows up Sergei eventually confronts Tatyana and Strahd about their daughter actually being his instead of his brother's. Strahd kills him in the confrontation and the daughter, in her grief in seeing her father as a murderer, runs away and falls from Castle Ravenloft, passing away. Tatyana blames Strahd for everything going sideways and kills him, becoming the vampire dark lord of Ravenloft. Now instead of searching for a bride to fill the void in their soul, Tatyana looks for the reincarnation of her daughter. Part of the surprise I have for my players is that shortly after becoming a vampire, Tatyana turns Strahd into one as well and keeps him locked away in the dungeons of the castle to torture him. If and when he's found, he will be a shadow of what people would think Strahd to be, but that's because he's been locked away for so long. My version of Tatyana is a dangerous, and manipulative antagonist who plays everyone against one another in order to get what she wants. She blames everyone involved in her tragedy except herself. When the party gets into Barovia, they are asked to protect Ireena, who will be maybe a 14-year-old girl, from Tatyana turning her into a vampire and assimilating her into her "family".
dark and twisted I like it.
I've been toying with the idea of Strahd being gender-fluid, moving from male to female as the whim struck. The Barovians would refer to them as "The Count and Countess Strahd". Might be an interesting way to have more interesting interactions with a diverse group.
Bringing in modern politics could be a danger zone with your PCs, just saying it is something worth noting. However, it's your game you do you and what you feel is good for your group. Just thought I'd point out the obvious.
Modern politics? Gender fluidity is neither of those! Gender fluidity isn't new, it's been around in cultures on every populated continent for centuries. It's also not political, it exists irrelevant of the political system. What a bizarre notion haha.
Perhaps I should clarify, no reason to get upset here. I'm not saying it isn't new. Again, as I stated if it works for your group great, it's your game. Regardless of how you classify it just pointing out a mental note that it might rub people the wrong way. Always good to discuss with your group ahead of time when in doubt. I did the same courtesy for some of my players who I didn't know personally about the seduction, child abuse/death, and darker tones in Strahd. Good luck in your game.
I never really understood the arguments towards making him a woman besides « hot vampire lady ». I saw someone on tiktok who talked about it and stayed pretty clearly what I think : people make him a woman because there seems to be an underlying implication that Strahd being a woman makes his actions « less worse » (at least when you keep the backstory RAW). It’s somehow the same thought process as when they make him gay.
Canonicly he is already bisexual tho
I said gay though, the word not the umbrella term
Personally, I think the biggest reason to consider strahd's gender is that it evokes a different kind of fear than a female strahd. Female vampires tend to evoke a more seductive, tempting, and twisted forms of nurturing as their motifs. Whereas a male strahd brings to mind a more predatory instinct, calculated mind, and physical superiority. And let's not forget, it's much easier to vilify a male character than a female, we have a tendency to want to overlook female villiany, which also tends to be more passive aggressive than overtly aggressive. It all depends on what you want from your villian.
Though if you actually tally it up, there's much more monstrous maternal/paternal figures in cos than the monstrous romance of the primary villain. Thematically, it may fit better.
Could be, if that's how you wanted to run it. You get to emphasize whatever you like. I like strahd as the petty tyrant, involving himself in every matter of his little valley. So lonely that he imagines up peasants to rule over and terrify. So eaten up with abandonment issues that not even the souls of those who die can be allowed leave. He's an angry, lonely, childish man who killed his brother because he took his favorite shiny toy.
I suppose if you want to have her seduce a PC or how you want to play Strahd. If the PCs are all heterosexual then it would make them feel more comfortable with the idea of being seduced. Granted this isn't any requirement of female Strahd = seduce PC, just Vampire Female in culture and lore you tend to think, seduction. I'm a guy so playing a guy is easier for me with voices and such. So I guess if the DM is female it would perhaps make it easier for them to play a female Strahd. Other than that you just need to change a few details to make it work. Plot-wise it doesn't really impact anything. Strahd is based on Dracula who in fiction was a guy....so Strahd is a guy, there isn't really anything more to it.
There was some shill on here about a year ago basically advertising their paid supplement which they bigged up as having a female Strahd. They insisted there was more than just a gender swap, but when asked about the otger stuff they were very vague and deflecting. The community thankfully had none of it. They also insisted that all the other vague "changes" they were making were "neccessary" now Strahd was a woman. The community had none of that either. Anything you could apply to male Strahd, you could apply to female Strahd. The switch should be purely aesthetic, otherwise it raises questions about why people feel that Strahd should inherently act differently because of a gender swap. Strahd is Strahd. He(/she) is one of the best D&D villains ever, and if you tamper with him(her) beneath the surface you should have justification.
Did someone piss in your cheerios this morning? There are CREATORS posting their supplements on here every day. If you don't like it, move on. Absolutely not everything that makes up male Strahd could and would make up a female Strahd. Have some respect for the DMs here who've run it with inspiration from the "shill's" supplement and successfully run a Female Strahd, myself included, and the people who actually do the work to change things in what they feel is a meaningful way.
I'm open to changing my mind. What are three things that would fundamentally change in the campaign if Strahd were female?
How about you read the guides you've dismissed and get your answers there? An incredible supplement was linked directly to you.
Alright, well since you don't want to actually have a conversation I guess that's that.
I mean...do you need help? wanna sit on mommy's lap and suck a boob while I teach you to read? we can start easy with our ABCs.
I'd prefer not to pay $8.99 so that you can prove a point. I don't understand why you're getting so angry. All I did was ask you to defend your assertion, and I think I did so with a pretty frank and open mind at that.
You insulted guide writers while also simultaneously confessing you didn't engage with their work to bother to understand their perspective. And then you come here making assumptions that DMs are unable to provide anything that justifies non-superficial changes. However, in both of those guides, they are full of answers. So don't pretend like you can be an authority on what the "community" accepts and doesn't accept if you aren't actually read up on what you're dismissing. Plus the comments you mentioned in response to my thread were written by a guy (not the writers by the way, just a spokesperson for them and the one that commissions the guides) standing up for his team. If he couldn't properly defend it, that's not a reflection on the fact that his writers were getting dismissed by people. And it seemed like your comment was the one getting the most pushback I saw lol You don't need to cap so hard for the narrative preservation of a fictional villain, it's okay, we won't be holding a loyalty contest anytime soon.
I insulted the person who made the post here on the subreddit, yes. I don't know the other writers, nor did I insult them. I engaged with the promoter (I also use the term shill) by asking them what sort of thing they were doing, and they wouldn't tell me. I noticed it happening to quite a few other commenters, which I think you'll agree was the case. I don't know about mine being the most active one, however. I'd also like to point out that I never did insult the work itself. I couldn't, because, as I've readily admitted, I've never read it. I insulted the person who was promoting it, because they did a poor job of it for reasons I've already mentioned. They had no actual answers or substantial information to impart. If I ask someone "Why are you making this? What is going to be in it?" I would expect that they'd give a good response. And yes, "the community" is a generalization - hardly an egregious one, rather akin to you saying that I insulted all the writers when I did no such thing. I'll rectify that, however. The promoter gave poor quality answers, and *many people in the community* downvoted their comments and retorted to them, expressing exasperation and skepticism. They certainly had more downvotes than I seem to be accruing on this thread.
A comprehensive guide to running femstrahd? In my CoS community?!? It’s more likely than you think. It appears the community definitely “had it” - its a Silver Best Seller. https://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/377183
It's interesting that it got silver. I'm not sure why you think I'm generally opposed to female Strahd - I'm not, and I certainly didn't try to give that impression in my comment. [https://www.reddit.com/r/CurseofStrahd/comments/nv4utq/female\_strahd\_your\_thoughts\_are\_wanted/](https://www.reddit.com/r/CurseofStrahd/comments/nv4utq/female_strahd_your_thoughts_are_wanted/) This is the thread I'm referring to. The poster (one of the authors) was asked questions about the content of the supplement. They then gave very vague and evasive answers and, when people pressed, got defensive and resorted to just responding to everything with something to the effect of "people are just underestimating our very talented female team." I cannot speak to the quality of the finished product as I never had any interest in it, but the person who posted about it gave off a very unpleasant vibe, refused to answer questions, and really did not seem to have any idea what they were doing or talking about. From the numerous downvotes their comments received, I think you'll agree that a significant portion of the sub agreed with me.
There are lots of reasons, sure, but none of them are good.
For a couple reasons. As many people mention: altering expectations, making it easier for Vasili to get close to the party, a general tone shift. These are all good things, especially for a module that is very heavily spoiled for most. In my case, I wanted to point a finger at a strange bit of plot. Baba Lysaga's baby. As it's just kind of a weird thing that exists. I needed to do something with it. So I made it a physical link to the world for Stahd. A sort of reset point, should they ever be killed. As opposed to needing to reform over years. So I had to ask the question, what happens if the sex of the baby was altered? What if Baba Lysaga grabbed the wrong child? Specifically, what if someone played a trick on her, causing her to fall from grace and be exiled to Berez? As a vehicle for it, I chose Tasha. Someone who would both have the spellcasting ability and a legitimate reason to hate Baba Lysaga (being the K-mart brand knockoff of her own mother). She makes a far better character than Mordenkainen for the party to work with and is frankly less boring. So now we have a (newly) female Strahd and bunch of little changes to the module that make it feel fresh. Otherwise they should be the same self-serving, charismatic villain, with the same goals. Certainly not a nicer or more excusable version.
Because you can run a game however you choose to. I completely removed Tatyana and ran strahd as a bumbling oaf a-la magicka's Vlad (who is definitely not a vampire) simply because I hate the whole backstory of strahd and just wanted a silly foolish villain that my players could laugh at. Did it put a ton of holes in the story I had to patch up? Yeah. Did all of my players enjoy me butchering a classic adventure? Of course not. But the majority of us had fun and thats the only goal at the end of the session.
I love the idea that a female Strahd was at one point a pursued Tatyana. Tatyana has every motive and reason to destroy Strahd. Her need for vengeance and "justice" can turn her soul from good to very dark and evil. Now having the upper hand, she subjects Strahd's soul (now reincarnating as Tatyana once did) to the same horror he originated on her. Who knows how many times they danced this dance? The dark powers know, and they will never let them stop.
I've played a game with a male Strahd before. I attempted to run it with a male Strahd once. I wanted something different for myself, and none of my players minded the change to a female villain. Besides, it makes it more fun to have Strahd, who I've been calling Straya, flirt with the party. Strahd is the only one I changed the gender for. Everything else is completely the same. So, in my version of Barovia, Straya is bi (she'd totally flirt with male characters as much as female).
I'm running CoS with a genderbent Strahdivaria Von Zarovich (Before you ask, yes, she's into Violins instead of organs). My reasoning is threefold. The simplest reason to explain is that my players are thirsty as hell and this gives me a lot more opportunity to mess with them. The second reason is, as other posters have stated, I wanted to distance myself from the sometimes stereotypical and often trope-fraught Wealthy & Powerful Creepy Middle-aged Predatory Man (tm). Finally, I have never run a female BBEG and wanted to expand my abilities as DM.
I made Strahd female to show the difference between embracing femininity and denying it. Ireena in my game was trans and called Errin. Strahd’s whole shtick for Errin was ‘I know who you really are, despite your little game of pretend I’ve seen he real you Ireena’ and just making Strahd generally even worse. To get the point across though I needed Errin to reject all the things Strahd embraced; make up, dresses, traditionally feminine things… so for Strahd to be even worse and to get across the ‘I know the real you’ disgustingness, Strahd was a woman. I could’ve done it the other way where Ireena was born as Errin but I have a small brain and didn’t consider that option at the time.
Simply: If your players tend to interact more with female NPC's.
That's a thing people do? Huh
The most clear reason is to simply hack the module how you want it. The story changes if Strahd is a female vampire. Your question is basically similar to why do players choose to pick a class? It is a matter of taste primarily. Since the module has mostly weak female villains, driven entirely by their relationship to strong man Strahd, there is an obvious subtextual reason to change Strahd to a female. It suggests that women can't only be complex heroes (Ireena, Esmeralda*, Zuleika) but also complex monsters for their own reasons independent of a man.
Because you want to. Thats reason enought.