How do you portray Strahd?

[Sareau]

Liches sort of walk into it eyes open-I think that gives them a definate edge, and an outlook of "Death is only the beginning" type mentality-if they didn't already possess that sort of mind, I doubt they'd pursue undead status in the first place. Vampires, on the other hand, seem to hit the night with the thought all they're giving up is sunlight, not realizing all the myriad little psychological adjustments necessary to go from being a person to eating them. Vampires have a lot of difficulties, especially if they're the current crop of wannabe human weenies we can thank Barnabus Collins for pioneering.

Most vampires seem to either embrace their advantages and become consummate monsters so long as they can keep up with modern society, or fade into corners where they become whiney goth/emos and await the women to whom that sort of thing appeals to approach them.

[Zettaijin]

And let us not forget that one can become a vampire unwillingly!

Outside of Andres Duval, I don't think I've ever heard of an accidental lich...

Maybe certain vassaliches might be partial to depression or various trauma akin to what a fledgling vampire might feel, but those would be rather rare I assume.

[HuManBing]

Yes! In the words of the not-so-famous commonsense wisdom, vampires are the whiny teenage runway models who angst about immortality. Liches are the scheming masterminds who always thought eating/sleeping/breathing was a waste of good worktime.

[Sathien]

Yes! In the words of the not-so-famous commonsense wisdom, vampires are the whiny teenage runway models who angst about immortality. Liches are the scheming masterminds who always thought eating/sleeping/breathing was a waste of good worktime.

How about ghouls and the ancient dead/mummies?

[Sareau]

Mummies would fit in the lich category-let's face it, these two undead types have it made-no maintenance required and long term schemes. Now, mummies do tend to "hibernate" more, but that may simply be due to them being a part of such a remote past in Europe.

Ghouls run into the same condition as vampires-"I used to be lunch" is a hard thing to work into their minds, unless they became ghouls through cannibalism. Wights would have an outlook similar to mummies and liches, but wights aren't as cerebral, no matter how many brains they choke down.

An interesting thing may be the psychologies of the incorporeal undead-I'd bet a decent spectre could out-whine a wannabe human vampire...

[Lovecraftforever]

If only Ravenloft had therapy groups. Oh well.

[Zettaijin]

I'm partial to the portrayal of the ghoul community in Planescape:Torment. No time for depression when you're constantly scavenging food. Prime candidates for the eating disorder ward.

Wights are an interesting case, before the VRGttWD Wights were merely a middle of the food chain undead creature meant to offer a challenge to players getting too big for ghouls and ghasts but not yet able to tackle vampires.

So we know Wights are angry, VERY angry. So very angry that they rise from the dead, seething with rage. Kinda like Frank Constanza during Festivus, only with more flesh eating during the airing of grievances and no feats of strength.

"I have a lot of issues with you people, and now I'm going to eat you!"

Seriously though, Wights should typically be short term planners and a Wight who isn't angry would probably lose all reason for unlife. I'd assume a Wight might willingly be looking for trouble just to justify its existence.

Wights and ghouls are creatures of habit and obssession, compared to the ancient dead who tend to fall into differing categories depending on the circumstances leading to its current state.

Some ancient undead have become something not unlike the solitary monk who lives alone as a hermit: completely aloof and unconcerned with the world outside their humble abode, living for nothing but an endless cycle in order to achieve some lofty spiritual goal.

Others are upset that they didn't exactly get the spiritual awakening they'd have hoped for and are pretty bummed that the afterlife is nothing like in the brochures... I mean scriptures. They'd be all sorts of angry and mopey, I'd bet, especially since vampires can have something akin to a social life and the liches are unrepentant workaholics. The mummy, except for the previous example, has perhaps no real plans for its afterlife and is a little lost. Sure, they might start a cult or something, proclaiming Godhood or divine agency, but I bet there are lots of mopey ancient dead. I'm thinking first generation goth still writing poetry about suicide and depression at 50 something and complaining about those Emo poseurs, the vampires.

[LadySoth]

If only Ravenloft had therapy groups. Oh well.

"Hi, My Name is Strahd . . . and I'm an addict."

"Hi, Strahd"

"I haven't been able to break my addiction for over 500 years. I'm obsessed with this girl, you see, and just can't shake this. I've also got an issue with drinking. Blood, that is. . ."

(this is just a bit of fun. No offense intended to real groups that do good work helping many people)

[DilisnyaRevenge]

I'm actually reaching a point where I am planning to have Strahd make an appearance in my campaign so I thought I would share my own impressions of how I intend to play him.

Strahd is an absolute despot with complete control over everything and everyone in Barovia. He is also in complete control of himself. When he takes an interest in his realm he knows nearly all and is afraid of little. He has a keen and sharp mind. He is almost always several steps ahead of any enemy, has many contingencies, and can react and change strategy at the drop of a hat. He is also exceptionally patient. He is willing to wait years or even decades to defeat an opponent if necessary. Given all this, it stands to reason that under normal circumstances he is effectively unbeatable for anyone on the power level of typical player characters.

BUT

When Tatyana becomes involved... He changes. He becomes a more reckless creature, prone to taking uncharacteristic risks. He becomes impatient and desperate. He acts with emotion and not intellect. He is prone to outbreaks of rage and fits of depression. He makes mistakes. He becomes so singularly focused on her that he suddenly becomes beatable.

I don't think my impressions are particularly original, but what I am planning to emphasize is the dichotomy between a ruler who governs with brutal intellect and absolute power, but is suddenly willing to throw that all to the wind over a girl.

[Nukdai]

in the Tales of Ravenloft short stories Strahd impreesed upon me to be subtle, strong willed and a sense of responsibility for HIS people...yet straight forward when confronting the antogonists of the story. Perhaps Lord Strahd still has some sense of duty to Barovia and not meerly a posessive nature.

[Nukdai]

as far as other undead
Liches: definate workaholics
mummies: let's face it brain scrambled with a hot poker, locked into coffin and shoved into a dark tomb for along time..kinda out dated yet much like the RPG devistating when used correctly
wights: aww the psycho killers from celtic and gaelic myth returned from the dead to prey on the living
ghouls: hunger incarnate no real skill just an animalistic cunning

[herkles]

in the Tales of Ravenloft short stories Strahd impreesed upon me to be subtle, strong willed and a sense of responsibility for HIS people...yet straight forward when confronting the antogonists of the story. Perhaps Lord Strahd still has some sense of duty to Barovia and not meerly a posessive nature.

That is a good theory IMO, for is not the first words in his book, I am an ancient, I am the land. So there is something to this.

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

His "protectiveness" of his land can also be seen in a bit more sinister light. Remembering that the I Strahd books, including the Caretaker story in Tales of Ravenloft are told from his point of view, seen from the outside, it's not protectiveness, but extreme possessiveness. This ties into his lust for Tatyana. He's all about what's "rightfully" his: his land, his people, his woman.

He's a bit of a spoiled brat, wanting what he wants, and taking it and hoarding it regardless of the consequences, dressing it up in terms of entitlement. He protects his land because it's his to prey on. He has no great love of his people other than as snacks, but anyone else dipping their hand in his cookie jar sets him off.

Ironic, since his fall was based on coveting that which was actually his brother's...

[Lovecraftforever]

in the Tales of Ravenloft short stories Strahd impreesed upon me to be subtle, strong willed and a sense of responsibility for HIS people...yet straight forward when confronting the antogonists of the story. Perhaps Lord Strahd still has some sense of duty to Barovia and not meerly a posessive nature.

Agreed.

I see Strahd as a tragic hero. Not an evil arch villain.

Unlike most of the dark lords Strahd actually acts like a "lord".

I see Strahd as a stern father figure. He treats his peasants as he would children. He makes the rules with no room for discussion. He applies brutal discipline when needed, but not for the sake of being cruel.

He may be brutal on occasion with the people he rules over. But if an outsider messes with his people? Strahd becomes a bear protecting his cubs.

[Don Fernando]

True, I agree with Lovecraftforever.

But I consider Strahd to be evil and malicious, not because he was born that way, but because his life has made him that way. In I, Strahd he starts as a great general, his men have great loyalty for him (well not all.. ). but in becoming a Vampire he turned into a resentful and bitter man..err... vampire. I think this is 'cause he knows deep inside he did terrible things to become what he is.

And as for the land, unlike any other darklords Barovia was not given to him, he won the land in a war. It is, under his consideration, a well earned right.