D&D 5E CoS: Full of child peril and death, but lacking...

Didn't think I could make my players hate Strahd more, but I think having him always appear naked with an erection might just do it....

If we want a source of potential sex-appeal and Strahd-apologists, I'd say Lady Wachtenburg (sp?)'s book club would have the most potential with a little rewrite.

I'm not squeamish about having romance and sexuality in RPGs. However, I have had some bad experiences with it because of the people involved. For example, in my experience there will, invariably, be at least one person who thinks that any female character (PC or NPC) who shows an interest in sexuality is actually a harlot willing to sleep with anyone who crosses her path.

I would say the most important things to consider when adding romance or sexuality to the game are these:

1) Make sure everyone involved knows what content you're planning to include, and that they know the level of detail that can be expected (fade-to-black, etc). Romance and sexuality can be very uncomfortable topics, and you don't want to drive anyone off or make anyone uncomfortable. Making sure that everyone is on the same page with regard to the content and tone of the game is vital when potentially uncomfortable topics are going to become part of the allowed game content.

2) Make sure you know the group can handle it. Because romance and sexuality are topics that can be very uncomfortable, people tend to joke about these things to relieve their discomfort. If you want to run a more serious game, you should be aware that including romance and sexuality can increase the amount of joking around the table simply to release pent-up discomfort.

3) Ease into it (In Dr. Krieger's Voice: like a latex gimp suit). In one of the campaigns I ran where I was comfortable enough with the group to include romance and sexuality, I started off small. I did little things like having the various pieces of art found in treasure hoards and the homes of wealthy patrons depict scenes of romance (the first one was a tapestry of an apprentice mage conjuring flowers to impress a girl), or the naked form (I recall one wealthy merchant NPC having a painting in his study called "Nymph in Repose." The young lady in the painting was naked, but she was posed so as not to be too revealing.), or lovers kissing or embracing.

@OP: I would also add that the sensuality of gothic horror is frequently a matter of environment and description. If you don't get a little active with environmental descriptions, then you're not emphasizing the atmospheric sensuality so common in the gothic horror genre. This is something that you can really play up with adventurers, because they often have to get very involved with the environment when searching for traps or secret doors. Describe the smooth coolness of the stone wall as they look for a secret door. And don't forget the verbiage. Don't simply describe it as the PC running his/her hand along the wall, describe it as caressing or brushing the stones.

And there's a lot of good stuff you can do with decoration and furnishings as well. Play with the ambiance. Softness, warmth, and the right level of lighting can all make a scene more sensual.

Zaran said:

This is the edition where they removed sexuality though. I guess they assume that GMs that want that can add it into their game. I've always found that that sort of thing doesn't work in my group anyway. If it happens its done off camera.

Click to expand...

I'd have to go back to 3e for that. The sheer overreaction to the BoEF was indicative to me that WotC didn't want sexuality anywhere near the game. It also reminded me of the following Neil Gaimain quote:

[sblock]
"I wanted to put a reference to masturbation in one of the scripts for the Sandman. It was immediately cut by the editor (Karen Berger). She told me, "There's no masturbation in the DC Universe." To which my reaction was, "Well, that explains a lot about the DC Universe."
[/sblock]

[MENTION=82779]MechaPilot[/MENTION] found the words that I could not when I attempted to write a post. This is very much an American thing though, violence is very acceptable, but sexuality is not and you really never know what is going to set someone off when sexual subjects come up. You need a very closer group in order to make sensuality work, especially if you want to push it into that uncomfortable zone that both makes people want to stop and keep going at the same time. The fact that WotC has attempted to make the "most generally acceptable" edition of D&D means that sexuality is going to get cut across the board. Especially if their games are expected to be played in public settings with potentially very young people.

So yeah, it's missing, I'm right down with you on that but for the given set of outcomes WotC wants to achieve, it's the most obvious hindrance.

Also as has been pointed out, a lot of Dracula and by extension Strahd (and Vampire mythology in general) sexuality is code for rape, not romance. That's probably thematically appropriate for Victorian Gothic Vampire Horror, but it's clearly inappropriate for a large number of gaming tables and probably for modern gaming in general. You want to put that in a book, that's read privately, not aimed at younger folk? Go for it.

I disagree with the notion that "vampire romance" must involve rape overtures, and the implication "if your vampire game is about consensual romance, you're doing it wrong"

In short, the shudders is on you, Mouseferatu. Have you considered the simpler explanation; that neck-biting depictions is a way around censorship against depictions of sexual intercourse?

Let's just say that in my campaign vampires can feed off any vital fluids. It leads to some very creepy interactions once PCs work out what is going on.

Ever woke up in the morning and considered coyote-gnawing your arm off to avoid waking somebody? Times that by 100

In my last Ravenloft campaign the PCs were in Nova Vaasa in the city of Egretas. While there they heard about strange happenings at one of the college frat houses.

Upon attending one of the frat's parties to investigate they learned the following:

Current members of the frat were all legacies. The same Nova Vassan noble families hade been members of that frat for generations.

Ghosts of former frat members haunted the frat house as party ghosts.

Frat members would get women into their room by asking if they wanted to see a ghost. If she said yes, they would go to the frat member's room and he would perform a fake summoning ritual. One of the house ghosts would then appear in the room in front of the bedroom door.

At that point consensual sex would often occur. Some women, however, either would get scared or simply would not be interested in sex and ask to leave.

The frat member would tell the woman that she was free to leave, however, the ghost would still be in front of the door. When asked to dismiss the ghost, the frat member would refuse to do so.

At no point would a frat member ever say that the woman had to have sex to leave, and he would not lay a hand on her. However, the "implication" was that the ghost would not go away (or might even hurt her) unless the woman agreed to sex. As such, the women would "agree" to have sex. Legally ambiguous sex.

When the PCs discovered all this they stopped the party, burned down the frat house, and lectured the frat members on the proper way to seduce a woman, with respect and alcohol.

Also yes, I did take the plot of this adventure from an episode of "It's always Sunny"

CapnZapp said:

I disagree with the notion that "vampire romance" must involve rape overtures, and the implication "if your vampire game is about consensual romance, you're doing it wrong"

Click to expand...

Has anyone actually said either of those things?

Going back to Mouseferatu's post, he(?) is specifically talking about Dracula, and more specifically his relationship with Mina. He doesn't state that all vampire seductions are rapes, or that if you include a consensual vampire seduction you're doing it wrong.

Zaran said:

This is the edition where they removed sexuality though.

Click to expand...

There was some vestigial cleavage in 3e & 4e art, but WotC have always been very anti-sex,
much moreso than Lorraine Williams era TSR (who apparently thought Clyde Caldwell was an
appropriate artist). 5e just takes it to apotheosis.