This episode is about the end of our Curse of Strahd campaign, and more specifically, about how I ended it.

Not Sean Scanlon, our excellent Dungeon Master. Not Strahd. Not just the dice. Me.

In what I can only describe as a perfect storm of stupid, I managed to take a campaign that probably still had another 18 to 24 months of life in it and drive it straight into a wall in about sixty seconds. That sounds melodramatic until you hear the story. Then it starts sounding annoyingly accurate.

We were deep inside Castle Ravenloft, already battered, exhausted, and inside that special kind of late-session Barovian dread where every room feels like it was built by a sadist with a theology degree. Perlan Goodshadow was dead. Urihorn Tenpenny was down. Radley Fullthorn, my character, was somehow still alive, mostly because the dice briefly took pity on me and handed me a natural 20 on a death save. I came back with one hit point. One. Not “wounded.” Not “in rough shape.” One hit point, which in D&D is the difference between “technically alive” and oblivion.

That should have been the moment I got wise. That should have been the moment I took the hint, used one of the teleport stones in the brazier room to get out, preserved the campaign, saved what I could, and lived to make more mistakes another day.

Instead, I got seduced by the shape of a dramatic ending.

That’s really what this episode is about. Not just a tactical blunder in a tabletop game, but the much more embarrassing and human tendency to mistake a cinematic gesture for a wise decision. I had one hit point, no stake, no real anti-vampire kill condition, no party at my back, and no business going after Strahd in his coffin. I also had just enough adrenaline, exhaustion, self-insertion, and table-energy to convince myself that maybe this was the moment. Maybe this was the shot. Maybe this was the story.

So I took the yellow stone.
I went to the master’s tomb.
I opened the coffin.
And I destroyed our campaign.

What makes this sting, and what makes it worth talking about, is that this was not pure ignorance. I knew enough to know better. I also know enough about myself to recognize exactly why I did it. I am, apparently, the kind of person who can be lured into exchanging a survivable future for one vivid, incandescent, catastrophically bad scene. That’s funny in a game, until it isn’t. Or rather, until it is funny and awful at the same time.

This episode is part campaign postmortem, part confession, part character autopsy, and part meditation on why some of us are so vulnerable to heroic stupidity, especially when someone says exactly the wrong magical words at exactly the wrong moment and suddenly the dumbest move in the room starts glowing with moral significance.

I talk about Radley Fullthorn, Sean Scanlon’s handling of Curse of Strahd, the table dynamics in those final moments, the role of suggestion and agency, why I can’t honestly blame anyone else even though I was definitely “made wiggly,” and why this has stayed lodged in my head more deeply than a simple “well, the character died” story should.

Because Radley didn’t just die.
He died at the exact moment when his death meant the end of the road.

And that’s the part I can’t quite shake.

If you’ve ever played tabletop RPGs, especially long campaigns where the party becomes a little family and the story starts to feel like a second life, you’ll understand this immediately. If you’ve never played, I still think the story lands, because underneath the dice, vampires, and cursed castle architecture, this is about something familiar: the temptation to do the dramatic thing instead of the wise thing, the lure of the last stand, and the cost of letting one stupid idea override common sense.

This is the story of how I confused courage with vanity, story with strategy, and one glowing chance with destiny.

And yes, if D&D had Heroic Inspiration powerful enough to let me mulligan one minute of bad judgment, I would spend it here.

In this episode of The Chris Abraham Show, Chris revisits an argument he first made more than two decades ago—an argument about American foreign policy, intervention, and the strange persistence of what John Quincy Adams once warned against: going abroad in search of monsters to destroy.

The conversation begins with the latest escalation in the Middle East. Following a massive U.S. and Israeli strike campaign against Iran that targeted military infrastructure and senior leadership, the region once again finds itself at the edge of a wider war. Markets convulse, shipping lanes tighten, and the familiar arguments begin circulating: nuclear threats, rogue regimes, regional stability, and the hope that removing a dangerous government might somehow produce a safer political order.

Chris has heard this argument before.

In February of 2005, in the shadow of the Iraq invasion and the still-unfolding war in Afghanistan, he wrote a piece responding to a major debate inside American foreign policy circles. On one side were thinkers arguing that spreading democracy abroad would ultimately make the world safer. On the other were critics warning that intervention itself often creates the enemies it claims to fight.

That debate never really ended. It simply moved from one country to another.

In this episode Chris revisits that earlier essay and asks a simple but uncomfortable question: why do so many efforts to reshape other societies collapse once the outside power leaves?

To explain the pattern, he introduces a metaphor that runs through the entire discussion: the pot on the stove.

As long as heat is applied—troops, money, advisors, sanctions, intelligence networks, and political pressure—political systems can appear stable. But the moment the flame is reduced, societies tend to revert to their own deeper structures. The boiling stops. The underlying equilibrium returns.

Afghanistan becomes the clearest example. Over two centuries three powerful empires—the British Empire, the Soviet Union, and the United States—entered Afghanistan believing they could impose order or reshape the country’s political system. Each eventually left, and each time the country returned to the same underlying networks of tribal, regional, and factional power.

The labels changed—from mujahideen to Taliban—but the structure remained.

The episode also explores what Chris calls the “strongman paradox.” In several Middle Eastern and North African states, authoritarian rulers like Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, and Bashar al-Assad held together fragile political systems through centralized control. When those regimes collapsed or were removed, the countries did not automatically transform into liberal democracies. In many cases they fractured into militias, rival governments, and competing factions.

This leads to a deeper philosophical question about sovereignty and political development. Can democracy be exported the way a country exports technology or institutions? Or do stable political systems emerge slowly from a society’s own culture, history, and internal balance of power?

Chris argues that modern American foreign policy often treats political systems as if they were installable software—something that can be dropped into a society once the “wrong” leadership has been removed. History repeatedly suggests that the reality is more complicated.

The episode also includes a personal confession. Chris explains why he voted for Donald Trump three times—not because of personality or party loyalty, but because of one specific promise: no new foreign wars. That promise, he argues, represented a rare break from the bipartisan consensus that has dominated American foreign policy since the end of the Cold War.

Whether that promise still holds is part of the broader question.

In Season 10, Episode 5 of The Chris Abraham Show, I lay out a theory for why Donald Trump pivots to Iran. This isn’t an episode about Iran’s internal politics so much as it’s an episode about incentives, momentum, and what happens when a leader needs an economic and narrative engine and the preferred domestic plan hits a wall.

About a year ago, I wrote a Substack post arguing that Trump’s big idea wasn’t necessarily invading countries abroad. It was building a domestic “make work” machine: a deportation industrial complex that functions like a WPA-style spending and jobs program aimed squarely at his base. The concept is simple. You hire huge numbers of border and enforcement personnel. You expand detention capacity. You contract transportation at scale. You staff security, logistics, medical care, legal processing, and due process. You build an entire support economy around that infrastructure, the way towns and services cluster around major prison facilities. It becomes a trillion-dollar domestic momentum project, and the people most willing to take those jobs are the people who already support the project politically.

In my view, that domestic plan ran into heavy friction: legal constraints, moral outrage, intense media framing, and constant resistance that made it hard to run at full scale. But the need for momentum doesn’t disappear. The spending machine still wants to move, midterms still loom, and a president who thinks like a businessman and a showman still wants a lever to pull.

So the pivot becomes familiar Plan B: international escalation. Bombing campaigns, expensive munitions, replacement orders, contractor logistics, reserve activation, and the revived atmosphere of terrorism fears and proxy-war paranoia. Whatever you think of the policy merits, this kind of activity reliably drives procurement cycles and absorbs attention. It can also seize the news cycle and reset the political conversation when other stories are dominating.

I also talk about spite as a governing emotion: the “you made me do it” logic that abusers use, repurposed into politics. The subtext becomes, if you had let me run my domestic war economy, I wouldn’t be doing this overseas. Now watch what you forced.

This is a short episode, but it’s the analysis I needed to say out loud after listening to reporting that treated the outcome as shocking. I don’t think it’s shocking. Incentives plus ego plus a hunger for momentum can point in a very predictable direction.

Deportation Industrial Complex Goes Full DWOT

The Deportation Gold Rush

The Deportation Industrial Complex: America’s New WPA

The Deportation New Deal: Escalation's Inevitable Path

Start With the Criminals, End With Everyone

Trump's Spite War

• The Ellisons Prepare to Expand Their Media Empire
• The Century-Long Capture of U.S. Media

In Season 10 Episode 4, Chris Abraham swerves away from the day’s obvious headlines and instead reacts to an On the Media segment on WAMU about “media capture” and the role of public broadcasting in a healthy democracy. He frames himself as an NPR/WAMU lifer with a complicated relationship to the institution: nostalgic for the old public-radio mix, aware of how it shaped him, and also increasingly allergic to how it can feel like a status-enforcing machine rather than a shared civic utility.

Chris challenges a core assumption embedded in a lot of “flawed democracy vs. healthy democracy” talk. When institutions praise certain countries as “strong democracies,” he argues they often mean something closer to “compliant,” “high-trust,” and “aligned with approved messaging.” In his view, populist dissent, cultural resistance, and “opting out” are treated less like legitimate democratic feedback and more like a pathology to be managed, which makes the word “democracy” feel like branding instead of description.

He contrasts the U.S. with European public-media models, not to romanticize them, but to point out why they sometimes enjoy broader buy-in: they deliver visible, practical value, including educational programming that feels like a public good. Chris argues that if public media in the U.S. reliably felt like Mr. Rogers energy, it would be harder to politically defund. When it feels like it exists to scold, dunk, or run a permanent moral emergency about half the country, it triggers backlash in a society already wired to distrust “the man” at every level.

Using a driving metaphor, he describes American politics as a fight over the steering wheel. When institutions respond to populism by steering harder into elite signaling and cultural escalation, the reaction on the right becomes more forceful and more desperate, because people feel they’re holding a fake wheel while someone else drives. That trust breakdown, he argues, is the real accelerant. He also warns that open institutional defiance of elected power can invite a predictable counter-response: aggressive executive action, tightened compliance expectations, and a “find the receipts” mentality that punishes slow-walking and internal resistance.

Chris ends with a mix of dark humor and personal texture. He calls the last decade a mutual “FAFO era,” where both sides have learned hard lessons about power, incentives, and overreach. Then he closes the episode in classic Chris fashion: weather report, coffee, library plans, ongoing Meshtastic tinkering, a quick health update, and a reminder that the next mission is getting back to fighting shape.

Welcome back to The Chris Abraham Show. This episode collects Sessions 27 28 and 29 of our Dungeons and Dragons campaign The Curse of Strahd and turns them into one continuous descent into Castle Ravenloft.

If you are not a D and D person, here is the simple setup. Our small band of adventurers is trapped in Barovia, a mist locked valley ruled by Strahd von Zarovich, an ancient vampire lord with the patience of a spider and the manners of a king. We have been trying to protect Ireena Kolyana from him, recover the Amulet of Ravenkind, and stay alive long enough to do something that matters. Recently we failed to retrieve that amulet in Vallaki, lied to Ireena’s brother Ismark to keep him from charging into a suicide mission, and then finally had to admit the truth. Ireena was taken by Strahd.

So when the invitation arrives, we accept it. Dinner at Ravenloft. Polite. Civilized. Completely insane.

On the road, Barovia reminds us that travel is never just travel. Revenants on a skeletal horse ambush the party and an ogre zombie joins the slaughter. Ismark is dropped in the chaos and only survives because Urihorn rides in on his mountain lion and drags him back from the edge. The undead die laughing with a promise that they will meet us again.

Then the castle welcomes us. An unmanned coach. A swaying drawbridge over a gorge. Doors opening by themselves. Rahadin, Strahd’s chamberlain, arriving with a choir of invisible screams. A banquet hall glittering with chandeliers and a feast laid out like a joke.

Strahd plays the gracious host and then reveals the knife. Ireena enters. So does Yeska, a young altar boy we once tried to keep safe. Both are vampires now. And Ireena is wearing the Amulet of Ravenkind, the holy artifact we lost and desperately needed. The room goes cold in the way only a story can go cold when you realize the villain has been moving pieces you did not even know were on the board.

From there, we start exploring Ravenloft and the castle starts teaching us its rules. Vampire spawn watch from the walls. A ruined chapel dares us to touch what should not be touched. Secret passages lead to trapped rooms. A captive accountant named Lief sits chained to a desk keeping Strahd’s books like bureaucracy is also immortal. A maid begs to be rescued. A centuries old portrait shows Ireena as if she has always been here.

And then the traps get personal. A coffer releases a green gas that drops party members without a fair fight. An animated suit of red armor hunts like a machine and kills Ismark. When we wake later, the castle has rearranged the scene. Bodies are missing. The fire relights itself. Evidence disappears. A bell summons spiders. Burning webs threatens to burn the whole structure down. A tub of blood erupts with a screaming figure and then the blood is gone like it never existed.

Finally, a dusty dining room offers one last bait. A wedding cake explodes. And Strahd arrives not as a man in a cape, but as a pressure in the air, an invisible silhouette reaching for us.

This is the Ravenloft arc where hospitality becomes horror, where grief becomes motion, and where the castle itself feels like the weapon.

Cast and characters
Chris as Radley human Eldritch Knight
Sean D as Urihorn Tenpenny halfling Beastmaster with a mountain lion
Cary as Perlan Goodshadow halfling Monk
Trip as Daermon Cobain elf Arcane Trickster
DM Sean S

If you enjoy gothic horror fantasy, actual play storytelling, and campaigns that refuse to let anyone feel comfortable, you are in the right place.

Session Twenty-Six picks up at a moment where survival has stopped feeling temporary. By now, the party understands that Barovia doesn’t reset between victories. Vallaki, once a place to rest and resupply, has become hostile ground. We’re no longer visitors. We’re trespassers.

The objective is narrow and urgent: recover the Amulet of Ravenkind. Losing a relic capable of harming vampires in Strahd’s domain isn’t a setback. It’s a liability. Lady Fiona Wachter, newly installed as Vallaki’s burgomaster, is the most likely person holding it. Her family predates Strahd’s rule, and in Barovia, old families tend to survive by making old bargains.

We enter her house through the basement. That alone says something about how this campaign has shifted.

The cellar looks ordinary until it isn’t. Eight skeletons tear themselves out of the dirt floor, remnants of people who likely believed Vallaki was safer than the road. The fight is quick and decisive. What would have been a near-death struggle earlier in the campaign is handled with efficiency. Not confidence. Experience.

Radley, the human fighter, has fully settled into his role as an Eldritch Knight. Early in the campaign he relied on armor and luck. Now he holds ground deliberately, mixing blade work with defensive magic. Urihorn, the halfling ranger who no longer casts a shadow, controls distance and terrain, his connection to his animal companion reinforcing a steadiness Barovia hasn’t yet taken from him. Daermon, the arcane trickster, turns positioning and timing into damage. Perlan, the monk newly arrived to the valley, already fights like someone who understands that hesitation gets you killed here.

After the skeletons fall, we notice something worse than the combat itself: signs of frequent foot traffic worn into the dirt. A wall rotates, revealing a hidden chamber. Five chairs sit around a pentagram. No bodies. No ritual in progress. Just evidence that this house hosts meetings, not accidents.

That’s Lady Wachter’s real danger. Not sudden violence, but organization.

Outside the house, the tension shifts from combat to consequence. Ismark, burgomaster of Barovia Village and brother to Ireena, presses us for answers we’ve been avoiding. Until now, we’ve lied to him about his sister’s fate. Not out of cruelty, but because the truth in Barovia doesn’t bring closure. It brings reckless action.

The lie collapses anyway.

Radley carries that moment harder than most. He’s now the only survivor of his original party. Everyone else from those early days is dead. Burned. Taken. Left behind. He isn’t still alive because he’s exceptional. He’s alive because he adapted.

At the end of the session, the party reaches Level 7.

Mechanically, this is a meaningful step. Fighters gain stronger combat options. Rogues and monks become harder to pin down. Spellcasters unlock deeper resources. Everyone gains resilience and flexibility.

Narratively, the level-up marks something quieter: we’re no longer reacting. We’re preparing.

Session Twenty-Six doesn’t end with a win. It ends with clarity. Vallaki is compromised. Lady Wachter is entrenched. Strahd is still ahead of us.

And whatever comes next won’t be handled politely.

In Barovia, that’s progress.

Barovia does not kill you all at once.
It lets the mountain do the arguing.

Sessions Twenty Four and Twenty Five began with the kind of fragile optimism that only survives when everyone is too tired to argue with it. We had stew at the Wizards of Wine. We had candles. We had a plan. Urihorn had no shadow, having traded it for a mist-token in one of Barovia’s quiet, transactional horrors. Nobody liked that, but nobody said no. That is how corruption enters a party. It doesn’t knock. It waits for exhaustion.

Urihorn returned from the woods riding a mountain lion. Not summoned. Bonded. As if nature itself had decided he was still worth something. We left the winery and headed for Mount Ghakis, following a Tarokka prophecy that had been gnawing at us for weeks. The Amber Temple waited above the clouds. So did whatever it takes from you.

At Tsolenka Pass, we found green fire burning in a gatehouse, an unnatural barrier that incinerated anything that touched it. Beyond it stood a lonely tower and a narrow bridge swallowed by fog. It looked like a checkpoint designed by something that hates hope.

Two vrocks descended from the sky. Vulture demons with wings like funeral banners. Their screams stole our breath. Their spores stole our bodies. The fight was brutal and fast and unfair.

Traxidor, our cleric, fell.

No speech. No miracle. Just a body on cold stone while the wind kept moving.

We cremated him in the green flame because there was nowhere else to put the dead on a mountain that eats people.

We turned back.

On the road to Barovia Village, we tried to save a young woman being taken to Castle Ravenloft. We attacked the guards. We cut her loose. And then the cart ran downhill. Too fast. Too heavy. It went off the road and took her with it. Good intentions do not stop physics in Barovia.

In the village, we found water instead of wine and a new companion, Perlan Goodshadow, a monk with sense enough to listen when the world tells you it is dangerous. We lied to Ismark about his sister Ireena because telling him the truth would have killed him faster than Strahd ever could.

He insisted we return to Vallaki.

The guards wouldn’t let us in, so we climbed the walls like criminals, because that is what heroes become here. We slipped into Lady Wachter’s estate through the basement and were met by rising skeletons. We destroyed them quickly. Not because we were strong. Because we were changed.

Behind a rotating wall, we found a hidden chamber. Five chairs. A pentagram. A room waiting for a meeting we were not meant to attend.

Barovia keeps receipts.
And we are starting to owe it things.

That is where these sessions ended. Not with victory. With a door opening into something patient and hungry.

And the worst part is that none of us is surprised anymore.

I didn’t come to Meshtastic with a plan.

I bought a cheap purple device off Etsy for about fifty-five dollars because I’d heard the word a few times and vaguely understood it meant LoRa mesh messaging. I wasn’t a prepper. I’m not a ham. I didn’t have a scenario in mind. The buy-in was low enough that curiosity won.

I live on the 8th floor in Arlington Heights, with windows facing southeast. From that height, there’s a clear line of sight over a golf course and across low-rise terrain toward the Gaylord MGM. That’s not a metaphor or a thought experiment. It’s just geography. If you’re going to put a radio somewhere, elevation and openness matter.

So I plugged it in and turned it on.

At first, it behaved like a gadget. I paired it with my phone. Sent a few test messages. Watched nodes appear and disappear. It worked, which was reassuring, but nothing about it felt consequential. Traffic was sparse. Most activity looked like people checking in, not routing through.

I left it on.

That turned out to matter more than anything I did deliberately.

Over time, it became clear that Meshtastic doesn’t reward interaction. It rewards presence. Nodes that come and go don’t contribute much beyond their own visibility. Nodes that stay up quietly start to matter in ways that aren’t obvious from the app.

Eventually, I changed the device role from node to router. Not out of altruism, but because the device was stationary, wall-powered, and well-placed. Letting it sleep made no sense. A sleeping radio with good placement is just wasted capacity.

That’s where the friction started.

Router mode changes how the device behaves. Power management becomes aggressive. Bluetooth access becomes opportunistic instead of persistent. From the phone’s perspective, it feels unreliable. From the network’s perspective, it’s doing exactly what it should.

There was a stretch where Bluetooth access felt broken. It wasn’t. The control plane was sleeping while the radio stayed active. Once I connected over USB and adjusted the settings with that in mind, the behavior made sense. Deep sleep off. Bluetooth given more patience. The display left on, because power wasn’t scarce.

Once that was done, the device became boring.

And boring is the goal.

Around the same time, the local Arlington / MeshDC area started showing more consistent LongFast traffic. More ACKs. More multi-hop messages. Nodes sticking around instead of flickering in and out. Not because of anything I personally changed, but because more devices were staying online, placed well, and allowed to just exist.

I chose the handle ABRA. Originally short for Abraham. That felt too personal. Now it’s Abracadabra, which fits better. I connected the node to MQTT so it appears on the global map, which is still quietly astonishing. A little purple radio in a window, visible via the modern web, routing messages it doesn’t need to read.

Most of the coordination, discussion, and culture happens elsewhere anyway. Discord. Reddit. The meta layer. The mesh itself just moves packets.

What I learned wasn’t radio theory or emergency planning. It was simpler.

Meshtastic works best when you stop treating nodes like personal devices and start treating them like infrastructure. Infrastructure doesn’t demand attention. It needs uptime, placement, and restraint.

I didn’t set out to build anything. I just left something on in a good place.

Everything else followed.