Romantic Angst and D&D

[hong]

Sure, they should make the choice to fall -- just as they make the choice to engage in a romantic subplot or to build a stronghold -- but how do you make that a natural part of the game?

Show up to the game wearing an all black outfit, mascara and eyeliner, and an ankh around your neck.

If you have a really motivated player who comes into the game wanting to win the princess's love then see her die, then go into a mad rage and spiral into a destructive depression, he can do that, but how do you make it more likely that your "normal" players will choose dramatic-but-suboptimal strategies?

Drugs. Or alcohol.


Hong "it worked for Kurt Cobain" Ooi

 

[Chrisling]

In a game that has lots of wild emotions in it, one of the important things to remember is . . . .

Have it happen to the NPCs, too. If the PCs see the GM screwing them over and over for role-playing dramatic emotions, but see the NPCs being these emotionless automations, the PCs will probably come to believe the GM is taking advantage of their willingess to RP these things.

Having the villians have these emotions is essential to this sort of game. Additionally, it humanizes the villian, which makes more cool opportunity for RP. I mean, sure the villian's day job is conquering the world -- but what if he believes in true love! Hilarity ensues.

 

[Henry]

To keep things on topic, is there any good way to play out the equivalent of the Anakin-Amidala romance? Or to play out Anakin's fall?

Just as one poster asked how you can lead players to this, and it fits hand in hand with mmadsen's question:

Be sure the players are rewarded with their play of the subject. Many gamers seem to think that challenges are only about combat. In truth, challenges also involve all obstacles from winning the heart of an NPC, to playing out the fall of a PC. In all instances, the players should be rewarded with XP for their characters for their actions.

A player who played out a fall such as Anakin's should get XP for it, same as if he had hewn through dozens of monsters to get there. (No, I'm not referring to the Tusken Raiders! ) No one can deny that Anakin grew in power as the tale progressed - but can you say that all of this growth was the result of training? In fact, from one point of view, obi-wan's and yoda's training actually held him back from being as powerful as he could have been, earlier than he could have been. This can be represented in part by roleplaying awards not just from combat, but from role-play of the romance between him and Amidala, and by the obstacles he faced in finding his mother in the first place.

 

[Jondor_Battlehammer]

I would submit that since most men are heterosexual, they are not used to relating romantically to other men. That means that when the GM is trying to forward a romantic plot line, it can make for a somewhat uncomfortable experience for all involved even though the PC and NPC involved might be a heterosexual male and female.

I'd say it is because societal pressures say that when men relate to other men that it is okay to do it violently but less ok to do it romantically.

I had to read the post a second time to get at what yuo were saying, but my misinterpretation is worth mentioning as well.

The concept of romantic, or more specifically platonic, love between two men is very uncmfortable for most to play out. Midieval history and fantasy literature are full of devoted servants and life long friends who behave in a maner twards the main charachter that would be considered inapropriate or odd by todays standards.

Erk. Posting time cut short, but I think you get the idea.

 

[Deadguy]

Sure, they should make the choice to fall -- just as they make the choice to engage in a romantic subplot or to build a stronghold -- but how do you make that a natural part of the game?

If you have a really motivated player who comes into the game wanting to win the princess's love then see her die, then go into a mad rage and spiral into a destructive depression, he can do that, but how do you make it more likely that your "normal" players will choose dramatic-but-suboptimal strategies?

I've seen two ways that can encourage this sort of behaviour (never actually managed to use it well myself however). Both involve disguising the sub-optimal nature of the choice:

(1) Make the path necessary. Perhaps the PCs need to gain the co-operation of the princess. By getting the player hooked on the necessary affection, it is possible to manipulate the mood of the game for that player. Perhaps the princess bears a terrible curse, or the burden of the crown is heavy, or her family put intolerable pressure on her. In such circs, Good characters can feel compelled to help out, and can be required to do so secretly. When events overwhelm the relationship and the princess, the PC can be overcome with anguish and behave irrationally to preserve the status quo (I know because I'e played that PC! )

(2) More generally, make the choice appear optimal. Think of the seductiveness of the Dark Side. Maybe the PC can benefit from training, or contacts, wealth or secrets. Then slowly add in the downsides - the favours in return, the necessary white llies to disguise the truth, the absences that cause others problems, and so on. If you layer advantage and disadvantage aright, the PC can be persuaded that their future lies with the 'princess', and when she is denied to them simple greed, distorted through the prism of past secrets, can make the PC behave irrationally. (I've been here too - and ended up fighting the party because I believed a lover's lies and desires over the party's goals!)

It takes a good DM to pull this off. I think that the two important factors are:

(i) skill in portraying the central NPC(s), making them sympathetic and believable, even when they are outright lying to the PC!

(ii) knowing the subject player really well, so you know what buttons to push that will make them move in the direction desired (e.g. I am a sucker for melodrama, so my DM played on the love of the emotional rollercoaster and the moments of high drama to manipulate me into a Catch-22 situation).

Neither are simple matters, and it will take a talented DM, but it is possible with some players. I emphasise some, as I do know that certain players will never be drawn into these things because they never get deeply enough into their PC-play to lose sight of metagame consequences.

Still, if you want a supreme challenge in your DMing, this is certainly one of them, and it can be very rewarding to the player (other players might not enjoy it, however, as it will demand a lot of one-on-one gaming to set up the situation).

 

[Cullain]

Romantic angst in a fantasy series? What about the Wheel of Time books? I've given up on them, but from what I remember none of the main male characters(Rand, Perrin, Mat) could figure out girls to save their life, sometimes nearly literally. And Rand's love interests, all(some?) of them are torn between their friendship with each other, and their love of Rand.

I don't use much romantic angst in my campaigns: mostly guys, and one of the girls is the ex of one of the guys. Would all be a little too awkward for my tastes. But it certainly can be done in the fantasy genre.

Cullain

 

[mmadsen]

In my current D&D game (heck, in all my D&D games) I need to add romantic angst at the request of one of my players...my wife. Now, it's not that I've never had angst in my campaigns, it's just that I'm not very good at adding it in on a regular basis.

Looking back at your original post, NewLifeForm, I realize you have one problem solved: you have a player looking for Romantic Angst. If you're wife's looking for it, and she'll bite every hook you throw out there, you're way ahead of the pack.

 

[Umbran]

If you have a really motivated player who comes into the game wanting to win the princess's love then see her die, then go into a mad rage and spiral into a destructive depression, he can do that, but how do you make it more likely that your "normal" players will choose dramatic-but-suboptimal strategies?

That's the thing, you see. Not too many people want to play a character in such a way as that character will be ruined (by death or otherwise). Drama is nice, but if it is sufficiently sub-optimal, it's also selected against, in a sort of Darwinian sense. Destructive depression, for example, is a good way to get your character axed.

Therein lies the problem. Players generally want to tell a story, but they are reluctant to bring the story to a quick resolution. And there's only so much high drama you can do with one character before his story really has to end...

So, there's a couple of things:

First, make it so the highly dramatic is not particularly sub-optimal. I find that making PC death less likely helps. If the player feels he's got a little more leeway, and will take more risks. Personally, rather than make combat less deadly, I try to make combat less likely. This gives more time for dramatic play, for one thing (since the session isn't packed with combat). Plus, if the game's tension isn't coming from physical danger, it's gotta come from somewhere - drama!

Another is to make your campaigns of limited length. Shorter campaigns, IME, tend to have higher drama. If the player knows he's only got six months to tell this character's story, he or she will often work to fit as much story into that time as possible. That leans you to drama.

 

[mmadsen]

And there's only so much high drama you can do with one character before his story really has to end...

That's one reason to consider running a Pendragon-style campaign, where you don't just play a character through a year or two of his life; you play a clan through the decades. Besides, hasn't everyone made a few cosmetic changes to a dead character and said, "Uh, this is his brother, Gandorf..."

 

[philippe tromeur]

Re: Must...stop...surfing...

http://philippe.tromeur.free.fr/whrpg.htm

I'm working on two d20 versions of it.

No joke !

First version :
I'll just write a page where I say "well, create your d20 character as usual, then roll your Wuthering Heights characteristics. You're done.
For action resolution, choose the d20 or the WH one as you see fit."

Second version :
I also had a project where Feats would be replaced by Problems, and where some new Classes (besides the existing ones : Noble, Expert, Soldier ...) would have NEGATIVE hit points. For example the "Drug addict" class would be -d2 Hit point per level, the "Phtisiac" class would be -d3 per level.
Of course, you only die when you reach -10 HP, of course, so you can survive at least one session !