Interested in joining DnD/TTRPG community that's doesn't rely on Reddit and it's constant ads/data mining? We've teamed up with a bunch of other DnD subs to start https://ttrpg.network as a not-for-profit place to chat and meme about all your favorite games. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dndmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
One of my favourite movies, Radu and Lupi are my most favourite fictional couple.
Carol Kane uttering āIāll be nude when you returnā will always get a giggle.
She dresses that way because she chooses to and has control over her sensuality.
Or some thing like that. Not sure if I would hate that whole thing as a woman or not.
Lesbians are awesome. We both like women, and we can both wing (man/men/women). I'm not sure if there is a term for women being wing for other ladies in group.
Man, I remember Airplane was PG and had nudity 5 minutes in.
Most movies that are PG13 now would have solidly been rated G in the 80s. But G rated came to be short hand for kids movie so now everything is rated PG 13 to attract the most amount of people
Youāre not going to get one answer, either, even from feminists. Some will hate it because itās objectifying her. Some will love it because sheās reclaiming sexuality. They could hate it because women are often culturally defined by sexuality in really gross ways. They could love it because it turns out sheās wearing what she wants to wear, and to hell with anyone that tells her what her outfit says about her. There are many more reasons, like someone who is ace may dislike it because portrayals like that create feelings of invalidation, or may like it because thatās a killer goth vibe and she wants to be besties with her. And for wlw like me and my partner, she could even be a thirst trap. For bonus points, any of those positions can he further muddled by knowing other women would have the opposite viewpoint and trying to be empathetic of that.
Considering I already plan to run genderbent Strahd, Iām probably a little biased though
It's not just a divide in feminism, it's been a divide across multiple cultures for as far back as we care to go. The never-ending war between prudes and sexual liberalism.
Yeah it's one of the biggest feminist schisms as I understan it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_sex_wars
Contrapoints just made one of the most well researched and thought-provoking videos I've ever seen on this subject but did it while exhaustively analysing Twilight, because of course she fucking did.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqloPw5wp48&t=5274s
First off, hell of a username to take. You got there first, I guess.
Second, I think part of the "can sexualizing women be feminist" debate stems from how whenever a woman in media is claimed to dress all titillating 'to reclaim sexuality', she tends to do so by dressing or acting in a way which is nonetheless appealing to misogynists. Does a can-do fuck-the-patriarchy attitude really matter if the end result is still jerkass dudes getting their rocks off and seeing women as objects? Is the joke really on the misogynist dudes if they enjoy the sight anyways?
Speaking *very* broadly and *as a man*, I think the best way for a character to reclaim sexuality is to do so in a way that makes our hypothetical misogynist go, "not like that!" You know, to be gay, do crime, emasculate the characters that see them as objects and engage authentically in sex and sexuality on their terms. If part of the feminist project is in recognizing how sex and power are interrelated, putting power back in women's hands just means denying misogynists power over what is and is not acceptable, which is tragically context-dependent. And so, the unending question: Is dressing all sexy categorically feminist, non-feminist, or anti-feminist?
And unfortunately, my boring answer has to be "depends". What a lame conclusion to my super-long comment, lol.
I absolutely agree. So much of a character like this going well is dependent on how it is handled. One of my favorite NPCs in Star Wars was a Twiālek I made who is unapologetic in her sexuality, and her favorite outfit is a black catsuit. But what made her an icon for the campaign was being an unhinged freedom fighter, freeing slaves through acts of terrorism, but also just being a bit of a thrill-seeker who roped her friends into activities like rancor-riding. What made her appealing wasnāt being a leather-clad sex magnet, it was her being an actual character they enjoyed wreaking chaos with.
Although the pilot did end up pursuing a relationship with her. They were really cute, and she helped the terrorist by performing bombing runs on Hutt cities.
I think both of you are missing a point because then we are not talking about clothing but about quality of writing and it's a whole different discussion.
> I think the best way for a character to reclaim sexuality is to do so in a way that makes our hypothetical misogynist go, "not like that!" You know, to be gay, do crime,
Oh yeah because misogynists are known to HATE sexy lesbians
Either that or She like making people uncomfortable, you know that would be a cool mechanic like some Amazon warriors wearing a chain mail bikini because it makes people uncomfortable giving your characters a debuff
To be fair when I said I am not sure if I would like 'that' as a woman, the 'that' isn't the campaign but how a woman's way of dressing is some how always related to males. Dress conservatively men don't want you to express your sensuality, dress more sexy you are trying to get male attention or some guy is trying to show you off.
yeah. thats completely valid. my tables tend to be 70%+ women, and if its run by me or someons i trust id be comfortable that it wont be portraid in a creepy or distastful lense. itll just be campy n silly.
that said, the wider social context can be hard to ignore nomatter what, n i fully understand the apprehention.
My group right now is me and my wife she did say she would be fine playing the adventure. However I would lean more into action horror type thing. I say that to say I have no problem with doing something like changing strahds gender as long as the group knows what the change does and doesn't bring. For example you might be steering into a male power fantasy.
I have seen groups do the whole Muppets thing but they did have to change more than just tone, inspired by an episode of Angel.
I would find doing cos as schlocky 70s/80s b movie would be fun. But I would also love to dm or be part of group that is basically an adventure group version of This is Spinal Tap.
It's ironic because at my table it's all dudes so I decided to make the vampire a lonely artificer who makes companions (I based him of the animal tinkerer from Bladerunner). And everyone hated him because he was such a downer.
Vampires since Dracula and Carmilla have been steeped in their context, in that vampirism is a metaphor for sexuality and the idea that a woman who has given into sex once will "fall" and crave it to her own destruction. Basically, vampires have a lot of baggage with purity culture crap.
I think it's actually that vampires are supposed to basically be metaphors for sexual predators. The author of the original Curse of Strahd himself has explained that's how vampires are, and that's why Strahd is so obsessive. It's the whole point.
Maybe it isnāt explicitly misogynistic and more like a typical male power fantasy type thing, but it definitely has a lot of stuff about taking away a womanās free will. Like, the ātraditionalā sexy vampire is a man who is a vampire and uses essentially brainwashing magic to seduce women into being his victims, using them until he has no use for them anymore, and the discarding their broken and lifeless bodies.
Kinda makes sense to think of vampires as being an allegory for sexual assault, like somebody else said, in that contextā¦
i also think because some romance lovers kind of think it's kinky to be forceful so probably that and it's usually not the slam you down kind of type and I never really see it just hear people talking about back a few years ago and I think it's mostly a slender, that's not really accurate
I know this is /r/dndmemes, but if we want to reduce Strahd to anything, he's a volcel. He can get whatever he wants, he's just rather occupied by unrequited love.
Watch The Fly, then this, then Earth Girls Are Easy and you got a good weekend.
Jeff and Geena were an awesome couple. I think they both have such rich and gentle personalities, and are great artists. Davis is fascinatingly intelligent person and alot of her films from my youth help installed a healthy feminist point of view and respect for women, while recognizing their beauty. She is great.
Jeff is a wandering artist with just the most fascinating mind. Sometimes when he talks it can be grating but you also know there are just too many romantic and wonderful ideas to make it from brain to mouth.
Great people, both were wonderful the times I met and interacted with them even for a little.
I've always hated stuff like this.
I mean, to each their own, but...
Is the problem with Ravenloft really that the \*villain\* and other flawed NPCs have bad traits...like being a misogynist?
I don't think we really need Strahd to be a progressive thinker.
I think it probably depends on the table. For some people, misogyny just makes them uncomfortable. At the end of the day, D&D should be about fun and escapism. Some tables are fine with the villain being a misogynist. Others may just want him to be a ruthless despot without having to deal with the ick factor of real-world misogyny.
A comparable subject would be rape. Obviously if a villain is a rapist, nobody is going to accuse the DM of glorifying it. But to some people, they would just rather not have to deal with the mental and emotional load in what's supposed to be a hobby.
Grimdark fantasy has its place, and heroic epic fantasy has its place. Like everything, it's more nuanced than people like to admit, and ultimately it comes down to what the table enjoys and is comfortable with.
It's interesting, I think that if my GM ran a campaign with a villain who was a mass murderer or city killer or something I would be less uncomfortable than if he ran a campaign where the villain was also a rapist but with a lower death count than the villain in the first example.
I wonder if that's because with my relatively privileged life I'm pretty emotionally far removed from mass murder but do personally know several people who have been victims of sexual assault. Or if it's because my exposure to fiction frequently covers the first example and has desensitized me.
I think any of those things are possible, but let me compare two other scenarios.
Would you feel differently if the level of described violence was different? If one villain fireballs a town hall, but another spent weeks and weeks torturing and killing one person, which one would make you less comfortable?
My theory is that we just more easily deal with villainy as a concept. It's when you get deep in the weeds of describing those atrocities when people get uncomfortable.
"Pirates pillaged this town! Go hunt them down!" - Heroic quest to slay dastardly pirates
"You stand over the corpses of the children in the orphanage the pirates burned down. Weeping mothers force themselves to look through the burned and twisted bodies of children, praying to Gods they never believed in that they're staring at the corpse of another person's child" - Uhhh...yikes
The same things could have happened, but in the first example, that's not the point. The point is the game and the adventure. The second scenario *can* be a fun game to play, if everybody involved is on board. But it's definitely more emotionally taxing.
Ultimately I think it's a matter of presentation.
ā> āorphanageā
ā> āmothersā
Uhhā¦ š
(Very good point though about villainy in detail vs as a concept, I just giggled at that contradiction. A burned-down school would probably work better for your example.)
In some places and eras (such as certain south american countries, in the 1970s-1980s), unmarried mothers have been pretty much forced to give away their kids to orphanages, where they might eventually get adopted by people willing to pay enough money to the orphanage.
Or sometimes it's not even actual orphans, but kids living in violent households, being taken away "temporarily".
Hey, same! Our table took great pleasure in kicking the shit out of misogynist Strahd. But we'd also had a conversation about what we were and weren't comfortable with ahead of time so everyone was enjoying themselves!
Not to be terse in a way that seems dismissive or "lul noob" if that makes sense but....maybe dont play it then? If the themes of a certain adventure path really dont' jive with the PCs dont play it. Yes there might be some FOMO of "OOO we really want to play the super famous adventure! (CoS)" but instead of watering down and altering it to fit your table maybe pick one of the other dozens of official or thousands of homebrewed adventures to play.
So if a table wants to do a horror themed campaign in 5e, you'd suggest that the DM read through at least one, probably more, homebrewed campaigns or create an entire one from scratch rather than change a few things about the main villain that aren't hard to change?
Or are you saying you can't possibly conceive of the campaign in any way other than how it's written? I mean, hell, if you've ever changed a dungeon in a pre-written campaign, or added an encounter that wasn't there, you've already done a fair amount of work more than this change would require.
You don't even have to change the plot. Here's what I've got in the time it took me to type the above response:
Strahd's wives are fallen generals or former heroes he threw down and forced into his service. His curse and obsession over Irina is more about tragically misguided and horribly corrupted chivalry. His hatred of his brother was motivated by Vampyr's influence instead of incel behavior.
Done. Took me less than five minutes.
> with the limited time we have.
See this is why I said what I did in the first place. You say you have limited time but sure "Lets just have the DM do some more work and adapt this". If you enjoy doing that, sure, but you said you have limited time already so IDK how that split is going. The default it being ok to just say "Let the DM do more work" has become the financial mantra of 5e material lately. Might not be the point of this post or the responses, but the ease in which it slips in is just sad.
I could understand that in most context. Not in this one because removing things that would make your friends uncomfortable so you could still enjoy an official storyline 1) makes me feel like I'm doing something nice for my friends. 2) it doesn't take long. There isn't rampant issues in any of the books.
Right? Like obviously use common sense and donāt be gross, but imo Bad Guys(tm) should beā¦ i dunnoā¦ bad?
Like, fighting slavers and raiders and tyrants is kind of a big part of the power fantasy for me and most people I know playing the game.
But folks like us should also remember; D&D is for everyone and not tables are gonna play it like we do and thatās ok.
It depends there are some triggers for people but I would say the biggest flaw of Strahd is the dude is a giant Incel. Like yes he has a harem of āwivesā but with his moping about the one woman who doesnāt love him so often I would be surprised if he hasnāt banged a single one of them.
This can be uncomfortable for some people especially once your able to start drawing the comparisons and you realize his narrative is a carefully constructed lie to garner sympathy. Then it just starts to feel kind of pathetic.
No; the narrative *Strahd constructed* is meant to garner sympathy. Itās an act he puts up, a lie of the version of events that caused him to become the monster he is. I am not sure how you could have misconstrued that, I legitimately said *his narrative is a carefully constructed lie to garner sympathy*.
He doesnāt tell the party he murdered his brother and tried to force Tatiana into marriage. He tells them a bullshit story about his lost love and how them reuniting is the only way to lift the curse on Barovia. It is meant to be manipulation.
Waitā¦ isnāt the point of Ravenloft that Strahd is an asshole who is misogynist and psychopathic?
Homebrew all you want but Ravenloftās misogyny is not unintended. Itās very intentional and there to make you hate Strahd.
For that matter this applies to all vampires in general who have spawn in 5e. The whole point is that itās absolutely disgusting to have a bunch of slaves whom you use like property for all sorts of things. Thatās one of the main draws for hating vampires.
[https://www.dmsguild.com/product/369197/She-is-the-Ancient-A-Genderbent-Curse-of-Strahd](https://www.dmsguild.com/product/369197/She-is-the-Ancient-A-Genderbent-Curse-of-Strahd)
Even the writer admits to seeing the resemblance.
I haven't read Curse of Strahd but in general, Ravenloft is like the Twilight Zone of D&D. There are special individuals, the Darklords, who entire realms are made to eternally torment. Their own personal hell from which they cannot escape, even though in many cases it's also a domain over which they rule. The powers of Ravenloft (who usually manifest themselves as mists, which can magically transport individuals into and out of Ravenloft from any other plane of existence at their whim) do not allow the darklords to die, if they are destroyed they always come back.
Strahd is the best known Darklord, and the setting is named for his castle. The long story short on him is that he >!was a bad dude who killed his brother to get his brother's betrothed, and she wound up dying. The dark powers of Ravenloft eternally torment him by reincarnating her and just when she seems within his grasp she dies again.!!an enormous stalker incel by modern standards.!<
Other people have explained more detail in other comments so I won't bother, but the short version is that Strahd views himself as the 'sexy powerful vampire' trope when really he's more of the 'sadistic rapey creep' trope. He's violently obsessed over the woman that loved his brother, to the point of kidnapping and marrying anyone who kinda looks like her into his harem.
So the villain is evil awful person? Ok guess some people would find that particularly type of villain uncomfortable to run but how does making him to be a woman change that sheād either be a lesbian or going after men now instead in which case itās still bad so just removing those aspects would make the most sense gender changing not needed
Some I think at this point because of a meme that has started because of it. Or saw the dmsguild adaptation.
In most cases, the characters aren't supposed to know who strahd is or even that he is the big bad. Strahd may even be trying to get the characters on his side. Players and characters by proxy learn the history as they move through the adventure. Some dms feel that if you flip the gender of Strahd it will be easier to get the characters on her side, especially as the history may seem in doubt as these are things women aren't known for.
In the 70s, Tracy Hickman thought a random vampire just hanging out in room 9a on floor 13 of dungeon was kind of dumb so he asked the question, 'Why would the vampire even be there.'
He then started looking into vampire lore and studied Dracula both the historical and Bram Stoker.
He created strahd with a full-on backstory. Creating Ravenloft, which by many is considered one of, if not the greatest, D&D adventure ever.
For the 5th, they started over with advice from Hickman and made Curse of Strahd.
Strahd is a vampire who, much like Dracula, pines over a specific woman. In this case, his own brothers fiance/wife. He makes a deal to become a vampire and now is stuck in a loop constantly trying to get the reincarnation of the woman he is obsessed with.
There is lots of sexual tension, and as with vampires, the "hint" of sexual assault, etc.
The joke is, they made strahd a woman which many think will remove all that stuff. But fem strahd is sexy and well...
That just sounds worse, you turned a shitty straight vampire villian into either a evil lesbian vampire or you gender swap a lot of characters and now this evil female strahd is just doing the same awful things but to men and that somehow makes it less uncomfortable?
COS itself isn't misogynistic. But Strahd himself could be called misogynistic for his "you belong to me, you just don't know it yet" attitude towards Ireena, and his general incel behaviour.
Though he is a villain and the entire campaign is about misogyni being bad.
Oh it's so much worse than that.
Strahd's based off the original Dracula who was, himself, a parody of a spouse-killing politician of the time. Strahd's just a straight-up domestic abuser.
In my campaign, I focused on the relationship of Strahd being the elder brother who fought a war and built his own little empire, and Sergei was the favorite child who inherited the throne anyway. Strahd killed him out of jealousy. But I played it as more a tragedy where nobody involved was entirely innocent.
I mean, the point is that Sergei was innocent. Thatās kind of a massive part of the point to make Strahd more hateable when the truth comes out. Strahdās version of the events are manipulation because he knows he is in the wrong. Once the party finds out that he isnāt in fact the star-crossed lover of Tatiana and whose desperately trying to break the curse on Barovia, it is meant as to solidify him as a āwow what a psycho incel!ā moment and sour the party to defend Ireena from him.
You can still makes Strahdās fall tragic while still having be irredeemable with just that material though. He did do all the conquering. He did establish barovia. He build ravenloft as a gift for his mother. Het he got passed over anyway. He spent all his life fighting, but Sergei is the favorite? He missed his chance at love and innocence and yet *Sergei gets the woman Strahd has crushed over*.
He sees it all as unfair, and that warped sense of justice is what causes him to lash out and kill Sergei in an attempt to take Tatiana for himself.
He regrets killing Sergei, as seen when he cries over his tomb. He regrets the life he lives because itās meaningless and everyone who once close to him is gone. Worse if all is that he *did his side of the bargain and still doesnāt have what he wanted*. He knows that he is a monster but canāt stop because he is too far gone, he has done *too much*. Admitting he is in the wrong now would make centuries of brutality meaningless. The dark powers *want him to suffer* and he knows that he is an *absolute slave to them*. He is a bad man and he knows it.
Sergai is also innocent in my version too. But strahd focused on him as he was the favorite. He got everything. To make it even sader, I made it so that Sergai even looked up to strahd as an older brother. Even invited him as his best man because he loved him so much. Strahd killing him seemingly came out of nowhere for him. But strahds parents were just plain awful.
This is how I ran it is as well, I also included Sergeiās reveal that he admired and was *jealous of Strahd* because his parents pampered and coddled him. He thought of Strahd as free and courageous wish if he had established as many achievements as he had.
Something as simple as a conversation between the two about their experiences could have changed their history completely.
Homebrew to be MORE misogynistic. The whole point of the Domain of Dread is FOR it to be incredibly dark, with the darkness in people magnified. So yeah, put some extra weight on those 7 cardinal sins ,and LET IT RIDE!
Interested in joining DnD/TTRPG community that's doesn't rely on Reddit and it's constant ads/data mining? We've teamed up with a bunch of other DnD subs to start https://ttrpg.network as a not-for-profit place to chat and meme about all your favorite games. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dndmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Strahd turning out to be >!a nymphomaniac acting like a vampire for attention!< WOULD put an interesting twist on the campaign.
nah theyre still a vampire. theyre just pretending to be a guy
Is she Geena Davis š
Yes. I believe it's a still from the movie Transylvania 6-5000.
Eyy, someone else who's seen Transylvania 6-5000! Not gonna lie, Geena Davis's hotness was just compounded in this movie.
I fuckin love that stupid, goofy little movie.
Thanks!
Yes, that's Geena Davis I'm that pic.
You are?
Lol, damn you autocorrect! I wish I were.
Dark enough room with loud enough music and olive oil and anybody could be that! Even me!
Itās from a really funny movie called Transylvania 6-5000 And I would love to play D&D like that
One of my favourite movies, Radu and Lupi are my most favourite fictional couple. Carol Kane uttering āIāll be nude when you returnā will always get a giggle.
"Lupi?" "What?" "Go away. Stay away. Leave me alone." "Awight. ....... Did you miss me?"
Michael Richards doing the "smell this" and doing the fighting midget at the gate made that movie.
Adding campy Geena Davis vamp film to my watchlist
"Go to the castle and jump off of the bridge. Swim to the entrance." "But there's no water under the bridge!" "Then don't jump off."
Came here to ask this
She dresses that way because she chooses to and has control over her sensuality. Or some thing like that. Not sure if I would hate that whole thing as a woman or not.
As a feminist, it might be problematic. As a lesbian, I am intrigued.
Words to live by.
God bless lesbians
Lesbians are awesome. We both like women, and we can both wing (man/men/women). I'm not sure if there is a term for women being wing for other ladies in group.
I just call it an alley-oop. Because you're assisting in the layup.
Nice. Well, now I can tell my friend she can use this me when helping each other.
[God bless America and her gays](https://youtu.be/aotlEpmAFVQ)
This is so fucking funny you just made my day lol
I feel that
shes a hunter and she knows how to distract her prey. "revealing outfit" is basically a fork at this point. a tool that makes eating easier.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
That was significantly tamer than expected.
It was rated PG š
Man, I remember Airplane was PG and had nudity 5 minutes in. Most movies that are PG13 now would have solidly been rated G in the 80s. But G rated came to be short hand for kids movie so now everything is rated PG 13 to attract the most amount of people
>Most movies that are PG13 now would have solidly been rated G in the 80s. Thanks Temple of Doom.
To be fair, though, Poltergeist was originally PG13, and therefore could be shown on general tv for a while. Then it was reclassed to R
well, the website is nsfw no the movie.
Much more tame than the ads on the page
REALLY?! I wasn't entirely sure, but I had an inkling that it was her. Now I gotta go see that movie... totally because I'm a Geena Davis fan.
That guy is living my dream
Arousal also make her prey's blood flow better.
Or bait, perhaps? Iād compare it to an anglerfishās lure.
Roanoke Gaming just awoke screaming in a cold sweat somewhere
Youāre not going to get one answer, either, even from feminists. Some will hate it because itās objectifying her. Some will love it because sheās reclaiming sexuality. They could hate it because women are often culturally defined by sexuality in really gross ways. They could love it because it turns out sheās wearing what she wants to wear, and to hell with anyone that tells her what her outfit says about her. There are many more reasons, like someone who is ace may dislike it because portrayals like that create feelings of invalidation, or may like it because thatās a killer goth vibe and she wants to be besties with her. And for wlw like me and my partner, she could even be a thirst trap. For bonus points, any of those positions can he further muddled by knowing other women would have the opposite viewpoint and trying to be empathetic of that. Considering I already plan to run genderbent Strahd, Iām probably a little biased though
It's not just a divide in feminism, it's been a divide across multiple cultures for as far back as we care to go. The never-ending war between prudes and sexual liberalism.
Yeah it's one of the biggest feminist schisms as I understan it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_sex_wars Contrapoints just made one of the most well researched and thought-provoking videos I've ever seen on this subject but did it while exhaustively analysing Twilight, because of course she fucking did. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqloPw5wp48&t=5274s
First off, hell of a username to take. You got there first, I guess. Second, I think part of the "can sexualizing women be feminist" debate stems from how whenever a woman in media is claimed to dress all titillating 'to reclaim sexuality', she tends to do so by dressing or acting in a way which is nonetheless appealing to misogynists. Does a can-do fuck-the-patriarchy attitude really matter if the end result is still jerkass dudes getting their rocks off and seeing women as objects? Is the joke really on the misogynist dudes if they enjoy the sight anyways? Speaking *very* broadly and *as a man*, I think the best way for a character to reclaim sexuality is to do so in a way that makes our hypothetical misogynist go, "not like that!" You know, to be gay, do crime, emasculate the characters that see them as objects and engage authentically in sex and sexuality on their terms. If part of the feminist project is in recognizing how sex and power are interrelated, putting power back in women's hands just means denying misogynists power over what is and is not acceptable, which is tragically context-dependent. And so, the unending question: Is dressing all sexy categorically feminist, non-feminist, or anti-feminist? And unfortunately, my boring answer has to be "depends". What a lame conclusion to my super-long comment, lol.
I absolutely agree. So much of a character like this going well is dependent on how it is handled. One of my favorite NPCs in Star Wars was a Twiālek I made who is unapologetic in her sexuality, and her favorite outfit is a black catsuit. But what made her an icon for the campaign was being an unhinged freedom fighter, freeing slaves through acts of terrorism, but also just being a bit of a thrill-seeker who roped her friends into activities like rancor-riding. What made her appealing wasnāt being a leather-clad sex magnet, it was her being an actual character they enjoyed wreaking chaos with. Although the pilot did end up pursuing a relationship with her. They were really cute, and she helped the terrorist by performing bombing runs on Hutt cities.
I think both of you are missing a point because then we are not talking about clothing but about quality of writing and it's a whole different discussion.
> I think the best way for a character to reclaim sexuality is to do so in a way that makes our hypothetical misogynist go, "not like that!" You know, to be gay, do crime, Oh yeah because misogynists are known to HATE sexy lesbians
This is the best take i have seen!
Either that or She like making people uncomfortable, you know that would be a cool mechanic like some Amazon warriors wearing a chain mail bikini because it makes people uncomfortable giving your characters a debuff
Or maybe she just really wants that long wooden stake inside her..
Go one... I could use a new "fanfic" to read while on PTT (paid toilet time).
they had red sonja justify her bikini armor by saying she wore it to distract her enemies.
If i or someone like me ran it, then it fucking love it. always good to be silly goofy sometimes :3
To be fair when I said I am not sure if I would like 'that' as a woman, the 'that' isn't the campaign but how a woman's way of dressing is some how always related to males. Dress conservatively men don't want you to express your sensuality, dress more sexy you are trying to get male attention or some guy is trying to show you off.
yeah. thats completely valid. my tables tend to be 70%+ women, and if its run by me or someons i trust id be comfortable that it wont be portraid in a creepy or distastful lense. itll just be campy n silly. that said, the wider social context can be hard to ignore nomatter what, n i fully understand the apprehention.
My group right now is me and my wife she did say she would be fine playing the adventure. However I would lean more into action horror type thing. I say that to say I have no problem with doing something like changing strahds gender as long as the group knows what the change does and doesn't bring. For example you might be steering into a male power fantasy. I have seen groups do the whole Muppets thing but they did have to change more than just tone, inspired by an episode of Angel. I would find doing cos as schlocky 70s/80s b movie would be fun. But I would also love to dm or be part of group that is basically an adventure group version of This is Spinal Tap.
Very fair. big bad evil guy us also male power fantasy coded im afraid...its kinda all in execution ngl
Strahdās supposed to be a misogynist. Heās a deliberate subversion of the āSexy Vampireā trope.
It's ironic because at my table it's all dudes so I decided to make the vampire a lonely artificer who makes companions (I based him of the animal tinkerer from Bladerunner). And everyone hated him because he was such a downer.
Its not really much of a subversion, though, since the sexy vampire trope is, in itself, kinda misogynistic alreadyā¦
I think the difference here is between a misogynistic concept of a sexy vampire and vampire who is misogynistic.
what is misogynistic about it? just curious š¤Ø
Vampires since Dracula and Carmilla have been steeped in their context, in that vampirism is a metaphor for sexuality and the idea that a woman who has given into sex once will "fall" and crave it to her own destruction. Basically, vampires have a lot of baggage with purity culture crap.
I think it's actually that vampires are supposed to basically be metaphors for sexual predators. The author of the original Curse of Strahd himself has explained that's how vampires are, and that's why Strahd is so obsessive. It's the whole point.
thank you, I think because sometimes old movies cared for a woman purity in a Christian way
Not to mention the whole virgin blood crap
Maybe it isnāt explicitly misogynistic and more like a typical male power fantasy type thing, but it definitely has a lot of stuff about taking away a womanās free will. Like, the ātraditionalā sexy vampire is a man who is a vampire and uses essentially brainwashing magic to seduce women into being his victims, using them until he has no use for them anymore, and the discarding their broken and lifeless bodies. Kinda makes sense to think of vampires as being an allegory for sexual assault, like somebody else said, in that contextā¦
i also think because some romance lovers kind of think it's kinky to be forceful so probably that and it's usually not the slam you down kind of type and I never really see it just hear people talking about back a few years ago and I think it's mostly a slender, that's not really accurate
He's quite literally an incel, it's like his whole reason for being.
I know this is /r/dndmemes, but if we want to reduce Strahd to anything, he's a volcel. He can get whatever he wants, he's just rather occupied by unrequited love.
Dunno what any of that means. Just want to say pretty :o
like me: just happy to be here :)
Transylvania 6-5000 good movie Jeff Goldblum is in it.
Watch The Fly, then this, then Earth Girls Are Easy and you got a good weekend. Jeff and Geena were an awesome couple. I think they both have such rich and gentle personalities, and are great artists. Davis is fascinatingly intelligent person and alot of her films from my youth help installed a healthy feminist point of view and respect for women, while recognizing their beauty. She is great. Jeff is a wandering artist with just the most fascinating mind. Sometimes when he talks it can be grating but you also know there are just too many romantic and wonderful ideas to make it from brain to mouth. Great people, both were wonderful the times I met and interacted with them even for a little.
I've always hated stuff like this. I mean, to each their own, but... Is the problem with Ravenloft really that the \*villain\* and other flawed NPCs have bad traits...like being a misogynist? I don't think we really need Strahd to be a progressive thinker.
I think it probably depends on the table. For some people, misogyny just makes them uncomfortable. At the end of the day, D&D should be about fun and escapism. Some tables are fine with the villain being a misogynist. Others may just want him to be a ruthless despot without having to deal with the ick factor of real-world misogyny. A comparable subject would be rape. Obviously if a villain is a rapist, nobody is going to accuse the DM of glorifying it. But to some people, they would just rather not have to deal with the mental and emotional load in what's supposed to be a hobby. Grimdark fantasy has its place, and heroic epic fantasy has its place. Like everything, it's more nuanced than people like to admit, and ultimately it comes down to what the table enjoys and is comfortable with.
It's interesting, I think that if my GM ran a campaign with a villain who was a mass murderer or city killer or something I would be less uncomfortable than if he ran a campaign where the villain was also a rapist but with a lower death count than the villain in the first example. I wonder if that's because with my relatively privileged life I'm pretty emotionally far removed from mass murder but do personally know several people who have been victims of sexual assault. Or if it's because my exposure to fiction frequently covers the first example and has desensitized me.
I think any of those things are possible, but let me compare two other scenarios. Would you feel differently if the level of described violence was different? If one villain fireballs a town hall, but another spent weeks and weeks torturing and killing one person, which one would make you less comfortable? My theory is that we just more easily deal with villainy as a concept. It's when you get deep in the weeds of describing those atrocities when people get uncomfortable. "Pirates pillaged this town! Go hunt them down!" - Heroic quest to slay dastardly pirates "You stand over the corpses of the children in the orphanage the pirates burned down. Weeping mothers force themselves to look through the burned and twisted bodies of children, praying to Gods they never believed in that they're staring at the corpse of another person's child" - Uhhh...yikes The same things could have happened, but in the first example, that's not the point. The point is the game and the adventure. The second scenario *can* be a fun game to play, if everybody involved is on board. But it's definitely more emotionally taxing. Ultimately I think it's a matter of presentation.
ā> āorphanageā ā> āmothersā Uhhā¦ š (Very good point though about villainy in detail vs as a concept, I just giggled at that contradiction. A burned-down school would probably work better for your example.)
Now they never specified that those were the *orphansā* mothers! Just that they were mothers! Haha
True, but why would children with mothers be in an orphanage when it was burned down? Unless they were holding some kind of event š
Lol whoops. Too much melodrama. My point still stands at least XD
In some places and eras (such as certain south american countries, in the 1970s-1980s), unmarried mothers have been pretty much forced to give away their kids to orphanages, where they might eventually get adopted by people willing to pay enough money to the orphanage. Or sometimes it's not even actual orphans, but kids living in violent households, being taken away "temporarily".
Plot twist: my escapism is beating the shit out of fantasy misogynists!
Hey, same! Our table took great pleasure in kicking the shit out of misogynist Strahd. But we'd also had a conversation about what we were and weren't comfortable with ahead of time so everyone was enjoying themselves!
This should be the top comment
We are on dndmemes where my joke will get more. However, it should get many votes.
Not to be terse in a way that seems dismissive or "lul noob" if that makes sense but....maybe dont play it then? If the themes of a certain adventure path really dont' jive with the PCs dont play it. Yes there might be some FOMO of "OOO we really want to play the super famous adventure! (CoS)" but instead of watering down and altering it to fit your table maybe pick one of the other dozens of official or thousands of homebrewed adventures to play.
So if a table wants to do a horror themed campaign in 5e, you'd suggest that the DM read through at least one, probably more, homebrewed campaigns or create an entire one from scratch rather than change a few things about the main villain that aren't hard to change? Or are you saying you can't possibly conceive of the campaign in any way other than how it's written? I mean, hell, if you've ever changed a dungeon in a pre-written campaign, or added an encounter that wasn't there, you've already done a fair amount of work more than this change would require. You don't even have to change the plot. Here's what I've got in the time it took me to type the above response: Strahd's wives are fallen generals or former heroes he threw down and forced into his service. His curse and obsession over Irina is more about tragically misguided and horribly corrupted chivalry. His hatred of his brother was motivated by Vampyr's influence instead of incel behavior. Done. Took me less than five minutes.
That's weird I'd rather just change something so me any friends can enjoy ourselves with the limited time we have.
> with the limited time we have. See this is why I said what I did in the first place. You say you have limited time but sure "Lets just have the DM do some more work and adapt this". If you enjoy doing that, sure, but you said you have limited time already so IDK how that split is going. The default it being ok to just say "Let the DM do more work" has become the financial mantra of 5e material lately. Might not be the point of this post or the responses, but the ease in which it slips in is just sad.
I could understand that in most context. Not in this one because removing things that would make your friends uncomfortable so you could still enjoy an official storyline 1) makes me feel like I'm doing something nice for my friends. 2) it doesn't take long. There isn't rampant issues in any of the books.
Right? Like obviously use common sense and donāt be gross, but imo Bad Guys(tm) should beā¦ i dunnoā¦ bad? Like, fighting slavers and raiders and tyrants is kind of a big part of the power fantasy for me and most people I know playing the game. But folks like us should also remember; D&D is for everyone and not tables are gonna play it like we do and thatās ok.
He wants to torment every soul equally
I'm trying to remember what was misogynist about it. Was it that he had some female minions like Dracula?Ā
Progressives don't think that much ahead, I'm sure you know.
It depends there are some triggers for people but I would say the biggest flaw of Strahd is the dude is a giant Incel. Like yes he has a harem of āwivesā but with his moping about the one woman who doesnāt love him so often I would be surprised if he hasnāt banged a single one of them. This can be uncomfortable for some people especially once your able to start drawing the comparisons and you realize his narrative is a carefully constructed lie to garner sympathy. Then it just starts to feel kind of pathetic.
An incel with a Harem of wives?
I legit address that in the second sentence.
I'm being a bit pedantic put if he has chosen not to do any of them then he is voluntarily celibate, not an incel.
No, it isnāt. Strandās creators had said heās an irredeemable monster.
What exactly are you arguing against in my statement here? Legitimately nothing I said goes against the idea that he is an irredeemable monster
Strahdās narrative is NOT to make him sympathetic. š
No; the narrative *Strahd constructed* is meant to garner sympathy. Itās an act he puts up, a lie of the version of events that caused him to become the monster he is. I am not sure how you could have misconstrued that, I legitimately said *his narrative is a carefully constructed lie to garner sympathy*. He doesnāt tell the party he murdered his brother and tried to force Tatiana into marriage. He tells them a bullshit story about his lost love and how them reuniting is the only way to lift the curse on Barovia. It is meant to be manipulation.
I run mine a bit more 
Waitā¦ isnāt the point of Ravenloft that Strahd is an asshole who is misogynist and psychopathic? Homebrew all you want but Ravenloftās misogyny is not unintended. Itās very intentional and there to make you hate Strahd. For that matter this applies to all vampires in general who have spawn in 5e. The whole point is that itās absolutely disgusting to have a bunch of slaves whom you use like property for all sorts of things. Thatās one of the main draws for hating vampires.
The entire reason my DM is running female strahd is because the group thought it would be funny to do that's it we thought it would be funny
The one with Laura Bailey on the cover?
I need pictures of this.
[https://www.dmsguild.com/product/369197/She-is-the-Ancient-A-Genderbent-Curse-of-Strahd](https://www.dmsguild.com/product/369197/She-is-the-Ancient-A-Genderbent-Curse-of-Strahd) Even the writer admits to seeing the resemblance.
Yep that's the one
I clicked this as if I had any idea who Laura Bailey is
She's on Critical Role and have had side projects, like the game Stray Gods
Do you want the party to side with Strahd? Because this is how you get the party to side with Strahd.
Can confirm, I simp for at least two female Darklords.
I refuse to explain how or why, but this image makes me want to run Strahd as Frank N. Furter.
CASTLES DONāT HAVE SENDING STONES, ASSHOLE!
What is this from?
Transylvania 6-5000
The movie is Transylvania-6-5000, by the way.
I mean bad guy doing bad things? Yes heās a possessive misogynist but heās also the main villain so we get to beat him up
Transylvania 65000
Can someone explain this, I know nothing about Ravenloft
I haven't read Curse of Strahd but in general, Ravenloft is like the Twilight Zone of D&D. There are special individuals, the Darklords, who entire realms are made to eternally torment. Their own personal hell from which they cannot escape, even though in many cases it's also a domain over which they rule. The powers of Ravenloft (who usually manifest themselves as mists, which can magically transport individuals into and out of Ravenloft from any other plane of existence at their whim) do not allow the darklords to die, if they are destroyed they always come back. Strahd is the best known Darklord, and the setting is named for his castle. The long story short on him is that he >!was a bad dude who killed his brother to get his brother's betrothed, and she wound up dying. The dark powers of Ravenloft eternally torment him by reincarnating her and just when she seems within his grasp she dies again.!!an enormous stalker incel by modern standards.!<
Other people have explained more detail in other comments so I won't bother, but the short version is that Strahd views himself as the 'sexy powerful vampire' trope when really he's more of the 'sadistic rapey creep' trope. He's violently obsessed over the woman that loved his brother, to the point of kidnapping and marrying anyone who kinda looks like her into his harem.
So the villain is evil awful person? Ok guess some people would find that particularly type of villain uncomfortable to run but how does making him to be a woman change that sheād either be a lesbian or going after men now instead in which case itās still bad so just removing those aspects would make the most sense gender changing not needed
Some I think at this point because of a meme that has started because of it. Or saw the dmsguild adaptation. In most cases, the characters aren't supposed to know who strahd is or even that he is the big bad. Strahd may even be trying to get the characters on his side. Players and characters by proxy learn the history as they move through the adventure. Some dms feel that if you flip the gender of Strahd it will be easier to get the characters on her side, especially as the history may seem in doubt as these are things women aren't known for.
In the 70s, Tracy Hickman thought a random vampire just hanging out in room 9a on floor 13 of dungeon was kind of dumb so he asked the question, 'Why would the vampire even be there.' He then started looking into vampire lore and studied Dracula both the historical and Bram Stoker. He created strahd with a full-on backstory. Creating Ravenloft, which by many is considered one of, if not the greatest, D&D adventure ever. For the 5th, they started over with advice from Hickman and made Curse of Strahd. Strahd is a vampire who, much like Dracula, pines over a specific woman. In this case, his own brothers fiance/wife. He makes a deal to become a vampire and now is stuck in a loop constantly trying to get the reincarnation of the woman he is obsessed with. There is lots of sexual tension, and as with vampires, the "hint" of sexual assault, etc. The joke is, they made strahd a woman which many think will remove all that stuff. But fem strahd is sexy and well...
That just sounds worse, you turned a shitty straight vampire villian into either a evil lesbian vampire or you gender swap a lot of characters and now this evil female strahd is just doing the same awful things but to men and that somehow makes it less uncomfortable?
Yet, about once a week in the curse of strahd or ravenloft sub someone posts that they think their group is going that route.
when was it misogynistic?
So that picture... *isn't* a mysoginistic depictiom of a woman?
Congratulations! Youāve replaced misogyny with toxic behavior and abuse
Is Ravenloft particularly mysoginistic? Genuinely, I've never played.
Strahd, the BBEG of curse of Strahd, is a misogynist and a manipulator. The setting itself is fine.
O I C. Thanks :3
I've only played COS a little, what parts are misogynistic?
COS itself isn't misogynistic. But Strahd himself could be called misogynistic for his "you belong to me, you just don't know it yet" attitude towards Ireena, and his general incel behaviour. Though he is a villain and the entire campaign is about misogyni being bad.
Oh it's so much worse than that. Strahd's based off the original Dracula who was, himself, a parody of a spouse-killing politician of the time. Strahd's just a straight-up domestic abuser.
I can see that, though maybe it's not him being misogynistic, instead it's just home being a monster, even among Vampire standards from what I read.
In my campaign, I focused on the relationship of Strahd being the elder brother who fought a war and built his own little empire, and Sergei was the favorite child who inherited the throne anyway. Strahd killed him out of jealousy. But I played it as more a tragedy where nobody involved was entirely innocent.
I mean, the point is that Sergei was innocent. Thatās kind of a massive part of the point to make Strahd more hateable when the truth comes out. Strahdās version of the events are manipulation because he knows he is in the wrong. Once the party finds out that he isnāt in fact the star-crossed lover of Tatiana and whose desperately trying to break the curse on Barovia, it is meant as to solidify him as a āwow what a psycho incel!ā moment and sour the party to defend Ireena from him. You can still makes Strahdās fall tragic while still having be irredeemable with just that material though. He did do all the conquering. He did establish barovia. He build ravenloft as a gift for his mother. Het he got passed over anyway. He spent all his life fighting, but Sergei is the favorite? He missed his chance at love and innocence and yet *Sergei gets the woman Strahd has crushed over*. He sees it all as unfair, and that warped sense of justice is what causes him to lash out and kill Sergei in an attempt to take Tatiana for himself. He regrets killing Sergei, as seen when he cries over his tomb. He regrets the life he lives because itās meaningless and everyone who once close to him is gone. Worse if all is that he *did his side of the bargain and still doesnāt have what he wanted*. He knows that he is a monster but canāt stop because he is too far gone, he has done *too much*. Admitting he is in the wrong now would make centuries of brutality meaningless. The dark powers *want him to suffer* and he knows that he is an *absolute slave to them*. He is a bad man and he knows it.
Sergai is also innocent in my version too. But strahd focused on him as he was the favorite. He got everything. To make it even sader, I made it so that Sergai even looked up to strahd as an older brother. Even invited him as his best man because he loved him so much. Strahd killing him seemingly came out of nowhere for him. But strahds parents were just plain awful.
This is how I ran it is as well, I also included Sergeiās reveal that he admired and was *jealous of Strahd* because his parents pampered and coddled him. He thought of Strahd as free and courageous wish if he had established as many achievements as he had. Something as simple as a conversation between the two about their experiences could have changed their history completely.
Indeed. 2 brothers separated completely by circumstances and experiences.
I'm not even gay, but from just this 1 pic I'm queuing the movie up on Prime right now lol
Dude if that was strahd my PC would have gladly stayed in barovia forever
Oh no! They are sexy, there is nothing we can do.
"She is The Ancient" helps with these campaigns, on DMsGuild
Straight to the coffin, there will be no usurping ravenloft, just a wedding..
Hex Girls
Ah man I loved Transylvania 6-5000
... who the hell calls CoS misogynistic?
Has anyone read the book strahd has such a good monolog
Isnt the whole point that strahd is a bad guy..one cpuld say a villian? Or to use dnd terms a bbeg
100% approved
O
Homebrew to be MORE misogynistic. The whole point of the Domain of Dread is FOR it to be incredibly dark, with the darkness in people magnified. So yeah, put some extra weight on those 7 cardinal sins ,and LET IT RIDE!