That is a good point. Romance between 2 PCs leaves the other players sitting there watching a RomCom or something possibly more extreme. Romance between NPC and PC leaves all but one player out as spectators.
That is true of all sorts of things though. It is relatively rare that literally every character's skill set is relevant at the same time. It not really any different than a problem involving religion and not all the characters being into that, or arcane theory, or thieving skills, or diplomacy, etc, etc, etc....
I see what you're saying and agree that the game is a mix of ensemble action and spotlight moments; but there's something so culturally privileged about romance and dating, that beyond my own concerns about the hazards of romantic intimacy in play I've laid out earlier, I think on a further pragmatic level giving significant game space over to a PC's romantic life "third wheels" the rest of the table. Third Wheeling is just uncool.
I would say, if a table wanted to entertain romance it's probably most fun for a table to do so as an all involved romp. Why back in Zero Edition D&D, this guy Shakespeare wrote some modules to that end. They're a little rail-roady in plot and presentation, but a DM can work it to give the players more agency. One, Midsummer Night's Dream, really stands out as an ensemble piece with romance plots (plus the Feywild). If you want to do it a little heavier, you got the Tempest. Much Ado About Nothing on the light intrigue front. I guess if you wanted to do an emo angst oriented session with lots of room for combat, there's Romeo and Juliet.
At my own table, I've inserted this theme of "heroes with weakness" into my Descent into Avernus sandbox rework. One possible trajectory, that would take them out of Hell and into other lower planes adapts the musical Hadestown, itself a reworking of the Orpheus myth where (if you follow then Platonic criticism) an epic level Bard's heroic crusade against death for love collapses due to his insecurity (tangential DM tips: I adapted/cribbed lines from the introduction of "How to Get to Hadestown" and its more interior-oriented reprise into a "things you should know/what you're in for" discussion with sages at Candlekeep before the party embarked to Avernus, it helped set the tone for the characters' conduct: The meanest dog you'll ever meet / He aint' the hound dog in the street / He bares some teeth and tears some skin / But brother, that's the worst of him / The dog you really go to dread / is Is the one that howls inside your head / It's him whose howling drives men mad / And a mind to it's undoing" always thought those lines are relevant to lots of heroic action, including romance plots).
That is a good point. Romance between 2 PCs leaves the other players sitting there watching a RomCom or something possibly more extreme. Romance between NPC and PC leaves all but one player out as spectators.
That is true of all sorts of things though. It is relatively rare that literally every character's skill set is relevant at the same time. It not really any different than a problem involving religion and not all the characters being into that, or arcane theory, or thieving skills, or diplomacy, etc, etc, etc....
I see what you're saying and agree that the game is a mix of ensemble action and spotlight moments; but there's something so culturally privileged about romance and dating, that beyond my own concerns about the hazards of romantic intimacy in play I've laid out earlier, I think on a further pragmatic level giving significant game space over to a PC's romantic life "third wheels" the rest of the table. Third Wheeling is just uncool.
I would say, if a table wanted to entertain romance it's probably most fun for a table to do so as an all involved romp. Why back in Zero Edition D&D, this guy Shakespeare wrote some modules to that end. They're a little rail-roady in plot and presentation, but a DM can work it to give the players more agency. One, Midsummer Night's Dream, really stands out as an ensemble piece with romance plots (plus the Feywild). If you want to do it a little heavier, you got the Tempest. Much Ado About Nothing on the light intrigue front. I guess if you wanted to do an emo angst oriented session with lots of room for combat, there's Romeo and Juliet.
At my own table, I've inserted this theme of "heroes with weakness" into my Descent into Avernus sandbox rework. One possible trajectory, that would take them out of Hell and into other lower planes adapts the musical Hadestown, itself a reworking of the Orpheus myth where (if you follow then Platonic criticism) an epic level Bard's heroic crusade against death for love collapses due to his insecurity (tangential DM tips: I adapted/cribbed lines from the introduction of "How to Get to Hadestown" and its more interior-oriented reprise into a "things you should know/what you're in for" discussion with sages at Candlekeep before the party embarked to Avernus, it helped set the tone for the characters' conduct: The meanest dog you'll ever meet / He aint' the hound dog in the street / He bares some teeth and tears some skin / But brother, that's the worst of him / The dog you really go to dread / is Is the one that howls inside your head / It's him whose howling drives men mad / And a mind to it's undoing" always thought those lines are relevant to lots of heroic action, including romance plots).
I agree that third wheeling is uncool but the same can happen to social players if there is too much melee emphasis, melee players if there is too much social or too much arcane, secular characters if there is too much religion (and vis versa), etc.
When a campaign is at someone's house, these days it is not at all unlikely that the host is married and their spouse is around, possibly even in the campaign as a player. Couples socializing with single friends is something that happens in real life. There is always that need to balance things and try not to make the singles feel like third wheels (or fourth, fifth, or so when there are multiple couples and a few single friends). It is a challenge people overcome all the time.
Couples (in or out of character) should keep it toned down, just as diplomats should understand players who play for the combats, those into playing priests or other religious representatives need to understand and respect those not into that aspect of play, casters should be respected, rogues should be respected, etc....
I suspect we mostly agree and that it is just a question of degree....
The other thing about romance is it only works where it happens naturally. Tryna force it where one or both of the players involved or the DM doesn’t want it just leads to disaster. And yeah, like @Kotath said, you have to be mindful of the feelings of players who aren’t involved. If they like watching the sparks or even interacting with the couple, that’s awesome. If they’re not into it, keep it to the same level you would keep any other subplot that only really involves one or two party members.
The other thing about romance is it only works where it happens naturally. Tryna force it where one or both of the players involved or the DM doesn’t want it just leads to disaster. And yeah, like @Kotath said, you have to be mindful of the feelings of players who aren’t involved. If they like watching the sparks or even interacting with the couple, that’s awesome. If they’re not into it, keep it to the same level you would keep any other subplot that only really involves one or two party members.
Penelope on romance 😊
I agree with this completely. Forced romance is not mere disaster, it is downright creepy.
...which refers to the second example (which was the first campaign) in contrast to the first example (which was the second campaign).
The first campaign - player-initiated with blunt refusal - creepy - threatened with the guards to stop.
The second campaign - both are in on it and the whole party is involved - nobody sidelined.
Same player, same DM, same PC.
Should mention: The first campaign - no such story plots were planned (and it got cringe-y and uncomfortable) The second campaign - DM worked with player to generate a story plot and didn't isolate the plot from the rest of the group (and accidentally invited more involvement than intended, but fun was had all the same).
It seems that it always comes back to communication.
Romance is a touchy subject. (Ha! No pun intended.) Romance ideas should be investigated before attempting with a group.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
The other thing about romance is it only works where it happens naturally. Tryna force it where one or both of the players involved or the DM doesn’t want it just leads to disaster. And yeah, like @Kotath said, you have to be mindful of the feelings of players who aren’t involved. If they like watching the sparks or even interacting with the couple, that’s awesome. If they’re not into it, keep it to the same level you would keep any other subplot that only really involves one or two party members.
Penelope on romance 😊
I agree with this completely. Forced romance is not mere disaster, it is downright creepy.
Extremely creepy
I agree, but in fairness similar caveats can be applied to a lot of emotionally charged stuff that can come up in the game. A lot of character backgrounds are heavy on drama, sometimes downright trauma, and that isn't necessarily something every player wants to deal with at the game table. Broken homes, substance abuse, racism, misogyny, slavery, indoctrination, bullying, crime - it's rare for me to not have one or several of these in any of the backgrounds of the PCs in my groups. Backgrounds I want to incorporate into the story too, but those are delicate subjects. And even if they're not pertinent to the characters personally, plots might revolve around them anyway. A lot of things that can make a campaign or just a single session amazing and memorable if you hit the right tone and everybody at the table is receptive to them can just as easily kill the enjoyment. I don't think romance is necessarily different from that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Alternative hook, I think in the backgrounds to Rime of the Frostmaiden, one possibility is the character is escape an arranged marriage. There's some cultural sensitivity boundaries to negatiate regarding power of family relationships etc, but there's lots of farce and comedy made out of that situation in all sorts of media.
I'm also thinking a "Meet the Parents" (like the movies of the same name) plot where the betrothed family are necromancers or warlocks could be done for laughs.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Alternative hook, I think in the backgrounds to Rime of the Frostmaiden, one possibility is the character is escape an arranged marriage. There's some cultural sensitivity boundaries to negatiate regarding power of family relationships etc, but there's lots of farce and comedy made out of that situation in all sorts of media.
I'm also thinking a "Meet the Parents" (like the movies of the same name) plot where the betrothed family are necromancers or warlocks could be done for laughs.
See my You Tube reference on the previous page. For those that know the movie in my link, the entire segment is hysterical.
Way back in the mists of time (early 2000s) the D&D 3.5 "Living" Blackmoor run by Zeitgeist games had a module called Just Business. In it, you could potentially find a marriageable age lass named Margaret (the upstairs maid) who flirts with you. Depending upon what you do, you got a Certificate that indicated the outcome of your choices. My main character (a Noble/Fighter) decided to marry her, since i was a "hidden noble" and could afford the hit to my noble status (since she was of lesser station than me) due to my noble house being dispersed/disbanded. The upside was I got a bonus on Gather Information and Knowledge: Blackmoor since my paramour (as it indicates on the cert) KNOWS EVERYTHING!
So, there are ways to handle romance between PCs and NPCs....assuming everyone at the table is mature enough to handle it (and doesn't act like a complete choad). I would say that unless you're playing with characters being Nobility, it really shouldn't have that much of an effect on things.....
Those are some really good ideas. Thank you.
Thanks guys. This is a great discussion.
Exactly! I agree with this analysis.
The other thing about romance is it only works where it happens naturally. Tryna force it where one or both of the players involved or the DM doesn’t want it just leads to disaster. And yeah, like @Kotath said, you have to be mindful of the feelings of players who aren’t involved. If they like watching the sparks or even interacting with the couple, that’s awesome. If they’re not into it, keep it to the same level you would keep any other subplot that only really involves one or two party members.
Penelope on romance 😊
Extremely creepy
...which refers to the second example (which was the first campaign) in contrast to the first example (which was the second campaign).
The first campaign - player-initiated with blunt refusal - creepy - threatened with the guards to stop.
The second campaign - both are in on it and the whole party is involved - nobody sidelined.
Same player, same DM, same PC.
Should mention:
The first campaign - no such story plots were planned (and it got cringe-y and uncomfortable)
The second campaign - DM worked with player to generate a story plot and didn't isolate the plot from the rest of the group (and accidentally invited more involvement than intended, but fun was had all the same).
It seems that it always comes back to communication.
Romance is a touchy subject. (Ha! No pun intended.) Romance ideas should be investigated before attempting with a group.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
I agree, but in fairness similar caveats can be applied to a lot of emotionally charged stuff that can come up in the game. A lot of character backgrounds are heavy on drama, sometimes downright trauma, and that isn't necessarily something every player wants to deal with at the game table. Broken homes, substance abuse, racism, misogyny, slavery, indoctrination, bullying, crime - it's rare for me to not have one or several of these in any of the backgrounds of the PCs in my groups. Backgrounds I want to incorporate into the story too, but those are delicate subjects. And even if they're not pertinent to the characters personally, plots might revolve around them anyway. A lot of things that can make a campaign or just a single session amazing and memorable if you hit the right tone and everybody at the table is receptive to them can just as easily kill the enjoyment. I don't think romance is necessarily different from that.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Alternative hook, I think in the backgrounds to Rime of the Frostmaiden, one possibility is the character is escape an arranged marriage. There's some cultural sensitivity boundaries to negatiate regarding power of family relationships etc, but there's lots of farce and comedy made out of that situation in all sorts of media.
I'm also thinking a "Meet the Parents" (like the movies of the same name) plot where the betrothed family are necromancers or warlocks could be done for laughs.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
See my You Tube reference on the previous page. For those that know the movie in my link, the entire segment is hysterical.
Way back in the mists of time (early 2000s) the D&D 3.5 "Living" Blackmoor run by Zeitgeist games had a module called Just Business. In it, you could potentially find a marriageable age lass named Margaret (the upstairs maid) who flirts with you. Depending upon what you do, you got a Certificate that indicated the outcome of your choices. My main character (a Noble/Fighter) decided to marry her, since i was a "hidden noble" and could afford the hit to my noble status (since she was of lesser station than me) due to my noble house being dispersed/disbanded. The upside was I got a bonus on Gather Information and Knowledge: Blackmoor since my paramour (as it indicates on the cert) KNOWS EVERYTHING!
So, there are ways to handle romance between PCs and NPCs....assuming everyone at the table is mature enough to handle it (and doesn't act like a complete choad). I would say that unless you're playing with characters being Nobility, it really shouldn't have that much of an effect on things.....