Love and the DnD experience

DonTadow

Visitor
GVDammerung said:
Love. Sex. Romance.

Howard's work had it.

Leiber's work had it.

Moorcock's work had it.

Tolkien's work had it.

Wagner's work had it.

Dumas' work had it.

etc.

If you don't have _any_ love, sex or romance in your game, you are running prepubescent/self-abusing otaku D&D and need to get out of your parents basement more, ya smelly Fat Beard.

Joke? Sure. :lol:
Hey how could you forget about George Lucas? ;)

Seriously, I think maybe I have George Lucas syndrome. I think she was looking for me to play out a real love interest, but I have no idea how a woman expects a woman in love to act (as if I"m observant) , thus I imagined Leia or some other heroine.
 

Ragnar69

Visitor
Love is an illusion. To be more precise, it's like a Phantasmal Killer. First you roll your save if you believe in it, then to see if your heart gets ripped out.

Sometimes we have love (PC/PC or PC/NPC) and sometimes not, it depends if the players are interested in it. One particulary cruel Game Mistress lets us roll Will saves sometimes to see if we fall in love (that got me married one time and willingly permanently polymorphed into a halfling another ;) ). She also owns the Book of Erotic Fantasy, but we don't use it. So no, there are no rules needed for it, handle it like you want.

With another GM I just say that I spend half of the reward on ale&whores and thats it.

I actualy enjoy roleplaying such things, but when your wife is played by a 250 pound guy with a full beard it feels kinda weird :\
 

Nomad4life

Visitor
Oh, man, there’s nothing quite like a slow-to-burn volatile love triangle to add tension to the party, bring out the worst aspects of good characters, and to add pain, betrayal, and unpredictability to an ongoing campaign.

The ranger who finds himself getting too close to the party cleric while adventuring away from his wife?

The paladin who discovers a dark Hellish flame in her heart as she watches the hedonistic bard flirt shamelessly with her ex from across the campfire?

The young wizard who vows in his sleep to be a little less forthcoming with his spellslinging the next time the party rogue who harshly shot him down (and yet seems quite friendly towards the fighter) needs aid?

Love in the campaign? Sign me up. As long as it will lead to conflict, that is. :]
 

Nyaricus

Visitor
fusangite said:
Doug, never before have you and I been so completely on the same page.
Fus, I've never even seen Doug on the boards, and he's reading the same damn book as us! :lol:

Man, you just got .sigged :)
 

Nyaricus

Visitor
Rystil Arden said:
Wow, I made two people's heads explode--admittedly I did summarise a lot of plot that makes more sense in context by placing it out of context in a short summary. I wonder how many more heads would explode if I tried to do a similar summary for my main face to face campaigns--last time I did so, I got this sig quote :D
Okay, I double dog dare you to give us a sum-up of your campaign. So there :p
 
Nyaricus said:
Okay, I double dog dare you to give us a sum-up of your campaign. So there :p
I remember that the time I got the sig, it wasn't even a summary but actually a description in a (now deleted thanks to the crash--Grrr!) thread about 'where is your PCs' home base?'. The answer, in my case, was that they live in the extradimensional mansion of their intelligent tent that was suffused by magical radiation. Instead of Unseen Servants like a normal magnificent mansion, she has visible human avatars of herself, which of course can never leave the tent. After the time that she (the tent) and the Pixie Assassin disguised herself as a red dragon to scare away some enemies and the party Wizard nearly destroyed her with a Cone of Cold, she researched the Wizard's books from the magical library (located inside her extradimensional space, conveniently) and became a 1st-level Wizard, getting her 'revenge' by flitting in with hidden avatars and shooting at the party Wizard with Ray of Frost spells.
 

Nyaricus

Visitor
Ah, I seem to rememer that convo, but I can't remember anyone sayign that about your story. Anyways, that's kinda weird :uhoh:

Magical Tents, eh...
 
I've done romance in my game; one player (who is functionally immortal, but does not remember his past, like The Nameless One from Planescape: Torment) has a past love whose death he is responsible for, and he's just finding all the details out now. Another player has a relationship with an NPC who travels with the party, and that's going well too. I don't make it a main feature of the game, but it's a great little sideplot. Doesn't work for everyone, which is why only two of the four players have any kind of plot going with it.

I too agree it depends on the players, and what they want out of gaming. If they would be uncomfortable with a romantic subplot, then yeah, not worth throwing out there.
 
Yeah, works of fiction had romance.

But D&D is not a story, it's a game. Romance as a plot device is ok, but personally I prefer any romance/sex to be glossed over in the background.
 

Cassandra

Visitor
We've done romance in our games in the past. I admit it made it easy in my D&D games that I was a female GM playing with almost exclusively male players who played almost only male characters. The time the 200 or so-year-old elf was seduced by the 17-year-old princess was classic. She stumbled, and had to hold his arm, and then her ankle was sore... Fade to black shortly after that. (I couldn't believe it worked; I thought both the player and the character would be on to her.) With a little half-elf on the way, the princess' guardian took the chance to marry off the little troublemaker. When the elf's player got married, though, and his new wife didn't want to play the princess, we pretty much retired that campaign.

Our group has done PC-PC romances, as well as PC-NPC, with various GMs in at least five game systems in three genres. They have not always turned out well, but on the average have been good plot devices and provoked good roleplaying. In that spirit, Tabletop Adventures (which involves a lot of the same people) published a romance supplement for fantasy d20 - "Shards of the Heart," which provides statted NPCs, with motivations and details that make them easy to use as romantic elements. It's no BoEF; there are no strange new mechanics, just folks to toss in to a game.
 
Just gotta throw one thing in the mix: Without some romance (and the attendant squishy noises), you can't have the old 1e campaign arc, where you play your characters to 20th level, build strongholds/rule nations/become gods, and then play their kids (rinse and repeat). I always wanted to go that route.
 
GVDammerung said:
Love. Sex. Romance.

Howard's work had it.

Leiber's work had it.

Moorcock's work had it.

Tolkien's work had it.

Wagner's work had it.

Dumas' work had it.
I haven't read all these authors, of course, but it seems to me romance is used in fantasy novels to sell books, not because it's good for the story. Do they get together next book? How about the one after? Nope, maybe next one. Relationships are virtually never resolved, and if any relationship is in "danger" of becoming happy, they have to throw a pretty girl or hunky guy into the mix just to keep the relationship from resolving. Or separate the lovers. Or make them think one has gone traitor. Etc.

It's almost like married characters in novels are doomed either to divorce or to see their spouse get murdered. (The novel "Without Remorse" was particularly bad in that respect; the main character's wife gets killed in a car accident on like page two, and then he rescues a girl in trouble who quickly becomes his girlfriend who then gets murdered, so he's out for revenge.)

Fusangite said:
I don't disallow it. I don't need to. It's been pretty much an unspoken social contract in every game I have run that this is not something explored in games. Frankly, as a GM, I have less than no desire to roleplay NPCs who are in love with my PCs. And as a PC, I can't think of a player with whom I would be happy roleplaying such a thing because every other player is either (a) someone with whom you are in a romantic relationship or (b) someone with whom you are not in a romantic relationship. I cannot see any good coming of roleplaying romance with either category of person.
Same here.

Yes. I'm a big fan of the latter. I think that love is best represented in game as a motive or reason for acting rather than an event that is actually part of the play itself.
And also same here (although I'll avoid killing off lovers).
 

pawsplay

Visitor
lukelightning said:
Yeah, works of fiction had romance.

But D&D is not a story, it's a game. Romance as a plot device is ok, but personally I prefer any romance/sex to be glossed over in the background.
I agree that as an interaction between approximately 2-3 players, it shouldn't dominate the game, but romance can be a very interesting element. Particularly, in some World of Darkness games I've played in, it's been significant. However, in D&D, more time romancing generally means less time getting XP, so romance should be used mainly, I think, to impel characters into adventure.

An earlier post suggested that romantically involved characters stop adventuring or have to have someone die. I can think of a number of counter-examples. Anakin and Padme were married for years. In the EU, Han and Leia adventure together and separately. Aragorn and Arwen are in love, Aragorn rejects Eowyn, and they tie the knot at the end. And so forth.

Not every romance has to be a Mel Gibson/James Bond-esque fling or tragedy.
 
pawsplay said:
Anakin and Padme were married for years.
Secretly married, and their marriage consists of the most gut-wrenchingly terrible dialogue I've ever heard. "I love you." "No. I love you more." They are an example of why romance should be left out!
 
pawsplay said:
An earlier post suggested that romantically involved characters stop adventuring or have to have someone die. I can think of a number of counter-examples. Anakin and Padme were married for years. In the EU, Han and Leia adventure together and separately. Aragorn and Arwen are in love, Aragorn rejects Eowyn, and they tie the knot at the end. And so forth.

Not every romance has to be a Mel Gibson/James Bond-esque fling or tragedy.
Anakin and Padme weren't happily married. Their very romance had to be hidden. Anakin didn't bother to consult Padme on important decisions. He throttled her with the Force, and (oh yeah) she died! He was "adventuring" because he saw she would die in a future vision, and tried to rescue her. I don't think this one really counts.

I don't know about Han and Leia. I have reasons to avoid anything that takes place after Episode VI anyway.

Aragorn had a hard time courting Arwen because she's an elf and he's human - Elrond didn't seem to approve. (This was carried even further in the movie.) Of course, Arwen and Aragorn were actually in love with each other. He was separated from her for a long time. Eowyn practically threw herself at him. Very awkward. Although they did end up happily married, just not during the course of the story.
 

pawsplay

Visitor
I didn't say it had to be peaches. And if parents disapproving of relationships disqualifies someone from happiness, a lot of my friends are in deep.

Anakin and Padme were dysfunctional and ended in tragedy, sure, but in between, a lot of stuff happened.
 
pawsplay said:
I didn't say it had to be peaches.
But they're never peaches.

And if parents disapproving of relationships disqualifies someone from happiness, a lot of my friends are in deep.
They could just elope. Why didn't they? Right, because medieval upper class romances didn't work that way.

Love matches were rare and wonderful among upper classes in a lot of socities.

Furthermore, if they eloped, there'd be no doubt that they're going to stay in love, get married, and be happy ... and we can't have that!

Anakin and Padme were dysfunctional and ended in tragedy, sure, but in between, a lot of stuff happened.
Yeah, annoying to watch stuff. I'm not going to put my dating history in a movie and call it entertainment. We've all (or mostly all) fallen in love and gone on dates. We already know what it's like. Why do so many novels make us read the same thing over and over and over again?
 
Cassandra said:
When the elf's player got married, though, and his new wife didn't want to play the princess, we pretty much retired that campaign.
That's why I tend to avoid it entirely... my group is a mix of 30-40 something couples and teenagers, many of whom are children of those couples. Between the 15-year-old mindset, jealousy between RL player couples, and the parent/child issues... Not going there, nuh-uh.
 
The worst part of Star Wars? The stupid romance. The worst part of Lord of the Rings? The stupid romance (ugh, fast forward!). The worst part of Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon? Yup, the romance.
 

Advertisement

Top