A DM is telling a story but it’s their job to assist everyone having a good time. And as he’s ran this several times with similar issues I’d assume the problems is with the DM for sure!
The Force Romance is a no no. If the DM wanted to incluyed, he needed to bring to season 0 and the other group do no accepted the force romance nether, why trying to revive it? To me feels that DM was having a crush to the wife and the most probable the other person was a woman too.
I'm DMing the Curse of Strahd campaign right now, and for what it's worth, the charm effect would work exactly as it played out at the table- the charm has a high DC, lasts for 24 hours without any further save unless removed, and is an ability, not a spell, so could reasonably be used without anyone else in the room necessarily knowing (although I would certainly have asked for insight checks to give the other players a chance to clock that something was up). Very close to the default MM vampire charm ability, IIRC. The "lunch" is also part of the campaign as written, although in the book it is more of an optional invitation which could be freely denied (with possible consequences later) rather than something fully "forced". All of that said, it is 100% not OK for the DM to use this ability to force a player to RP a romance against their will. Part of the challenge of running CoS is using Strahd as a persistent, powerful antagonist without crossing any lines or ruining any of the players good time- he should certainly do things to make the party hate him and want to defeat him, but flat out perma-charming a PC to enforce a non-consensual "romance" is way over the line. One thing worth noting, the default module contains a romantic sub-plot between Strahd and an NPC, probably specifically to steer the story away from this sort of interaction with a PC while keeping the classic Dracula "lost-love" theme as a component in the campaign. Having the DM delete the NPC love interest and insert a PC in their place, especially without discussing it and OKing it with the whole table ahead of time, seems strange and even a little sketchy, at least in my opinion. Nothing new is really being added to the story, and springing this plot on a PC and forcing them into the victim role is problematic at best. I don't think any player at the table would be unreasonable in objecting to it, whether or not they are the direct target.
Hey Rob! That’s brilliant. Thank you for giving us all a bit of added context on the campaign, it’s massively appreciated!! Strahd seems an amazing campaign and one our party is looking forward to In The future.
I have NOTHING against romance in DnD - if people like it, feel free (IF ALL PEOPLE INVOLVED LIKE IT), BUT what this DM did wass NOT romance, since using charm-spell is going into ... "Danger zone". Side-note : If you really can't play Strahd to persuade / indimidate/ seduce/ etc without spells (with just his presence and personality) then ... well, that's one weak Lord.
Very well said. There’s a line that shouldn’t be crossed and it should be fun and enjoyable for all party members. Not had the pleasure of playing Strahd myself as of yet but it is on our lost for the future
The boring answer is that the DM should have been more open with the wife about the nature of her central position in the storyline before the story starts. And been willing to work in an NPC to fill the role of ingenue if the wife was uncomfortable. A story only works if your players are willing to invest, and clearly at least one, probably two, of these players weren't. Having said that... The OP sounds like an awful player. From the DM's perspective he told them point blank that he's taking inspiration from a movie that has a romance plot central to its story, using a villain whose entire existence and motivation is centered on his lost love. Then a player waits at least 3 different scenes, most likely over 3+ different game sessions, to tell him he was uncomfortable. OP is not leaving the DM a lot of room to course correct the story and is acting like it's nothing to ask the DM to throw out his entire narrative halfway through to salve the feelings of a single player who was warned and told exactly the direction the story was going. The DM cancels the next game session giving him time to tinker with the story and explore his options. Then comes back and, surprise surprise, tells the single uncomfortable player that he's not going to be willing to rewrite the entire story at this point for a single player. And according to OP's own story, the DM felt the OP's response was condescending and belittling. Which leads us to the wife. Her discomfort matters, ALOT. It's why my solution revolves around open and honest communication between the wife and the DM. However, her involvement wasn't brought to the DM's attention until the middle of an argument where both sides feel they're being talked down. Now given the that the OP shows absolutely no effort in comprehending the DM's point of view, even in the aftermath point of the story, I very much believe he was being every bit as condescending as the DM accused. You don't wait until you're in an argument to present the most important reason and you don't deliver it along with insulting language, to someone you think is insane. Whether the wife was uncomfortable or not barely even matters at that point, since the context makes it very easy to believe OP made that up to win an argument.
Such a fantastic response! Thank you for taking the time to to out together such a thoughtful response and you seemed to have hit the nail on the head with this one. There would appear to be Red Flags with both parties and we can clearly tell we haven’t been given the full story at this point. Thank you again
Sounds like something is being excluded in this story. I doubt that was the ONLY reason why the DM got annoyed at OP. This is exactly the kind of situation where someone would omit any mentions of wrong doing they did to just focus on one thing.
You are correct, we are only getting one side of the story here, though I can definitely see a few red flags of the DM has had this issue multiple times. But any DM using their time time to run multiple campaigns for others can’t be all bad!
I'll be honest, the DM sounded a bit like the classic "muh story" DM - basically, he had a plot in mind and that took priority over player agency. It's kind of a variant on railroading, basically. I should know... I've been a "muh story" myself ONCE. And goodness gracious did I ever get flak over it...
Lol, indeed! I look at stories from several Subreddits so it makes it easy to identify at a glance it’s a story from Reddit lol. This may be adjusted slightly moving forward though.
Sounds to me like a few things are omitted, but I get that overall vibe that the DM was trying to win over his wife through roleplay (or worse, live that dream with the campaign). I'd say it's good they got out of it, but...I'd still want to know the rest of the story if there is any, just so I have better context. And I have to admit. It does put the DM in a bad light when they try and force a romance. It should occur organically in the scene, not through forced charming-I mean. Either they're going to like each other through interaction, or they're going to be at each others' throats if it really doesn't click. Never did get why some folk have to force it...and with the main badguy at that, too.
I fully agree, it has to be natural or it ends up being an awkward situation for all the participants. Though we are only getting one side of this story there are more than a few Red Flags it would seem from the DM, more context in the situation is always a welcome one!
What do you think of this DM? Was he in the right or not? Let us know what you think!
A DM is telling a story but it’s their job to assist everyone having a good time. And as he’s ran this several times with similar issues I’d assume the problems is with the DM for sure!
The Force Romance is a no no. If the DM wanted to incluyed, he needed to bring to season 0 and the other group do no accepted the force romance nether, why trying to revive it? To me feels that DM was having a crush to the wife and the most probable the other person was a woman too.
Well said!
I saw it the exact same way. It felt more apparent when he mentioned about checking his feelings/emotions etc.
You have 2 soundtrack that breaks the inversion
Hey, thank you for the feedback. I will work on it for the next story. It’s really appreciated :)
I liked it and I’m subscribed
Hey man thank you so much for join ins is here! It is massively appreciated!
I'm DMing the Curse of Strahd campaign right now, and for what it's worth, the charm effect would work exactly as it played out at the table- the charm has a high DC, lasts for 24 hours without any further save unless removed, and is an ability, not a spell, so could reasonably be used without anyone else in the room necessarily knowing (although I would certainly have asked for insight checks to give the other players a chance to clock that something was up). Very close to the default MM vampire charm ability, IIRC. The "lunch" is also part of the campaign as written, although in the book it is more of an optional invitation which could be freely denied (with possible consequences later) rather than something fully "forced".
All of that said, it is 100% not OK for the DM to use this ability to force a player to RP a romance against their will. Part of the challenge of running CoS is using Strahd as a persistent, powerful antagonist without crossing any lines or ruining any of the players good time- he should certainly do things to make the party hate him and want to defeat him, but flat out perma-charming a PC to enforce a non-consensual "romance" is way over the line.
One thing worth noting, the default module contains a romantic sub-plot between Strahd and an NPC, probably specifically to steer the story away from this sort of interaction with a PC while keeping the classic Dracula "lost-love" theme as a component in the campaign. Having the DM delete the NPC love interest and insert a PC in their place, especially without discussing it and OKing it with the whole table ahead of time, seems strange and even a little sketchy, at least in my opinion. Nothing new is really being added to the story, and springing this plot on a PC and forcing them into the victim role is problematic at best. I don't think any player at the table would be unreasonable in objecting to it, whether or not they are the direct target.
Hey Rob! That’s brilliant. Thank you for giving us all a bit of added context on the campaign, it’s massively appreciated!! Strahd seems an amazing campaign and one our party is looking forward to In The future.
I really love these long stories
Thank you so much my friend!
I think the DM thought "dungeons and dragons" meant "sex dungeons" if he's convinced you can't have a D&D game without people wanting to bone down XD
That seems like his level of maturity lol
I have NOTHING against romance in DnD - if people like it, feel free (IF ALL PEOPLE INVOLVED LIKE IT), BUT what this DM did wass NOT romance, since using charm-spell is going into ... "Danger zone".
Side-note : If you really can't play Strahd to persuade / indimidate/ seduce/ etc without spells (with just his presence and personality) then ... well, that's one weak Lord.
Very well said.
There’s a line that shouldn’t be crossed and it should be fun and enjoyable for all party members.
Not had the pleasure of playing Strahd myself as of yet but it is on our lost for the future
This was the best story you’ve read so far! Please keep them coming!
So glad you enjoyed it!
The boring answer is that the DM should have been more open with the wife about the nature of her central position in the storyline before the story starts. And been willing to work in an NPC to fill the role of ingenue if the wife was uncomfortable. A story only works if your players are willing to invest, and clearly at least one, probably two, of these players weren't. Having said that...
The OP sounds like an awful player. From the DM's perspective he told them point blank that he's taking inspiration from a movie that has a romance plot central to its story, using a villain whose entire existence and motivation is centered on his lost love. Then a player waits at least 3 different scenes, most likely over 3+ different game sessions, to tell him he was uncomfortable. OP is not leaving the DM a lot of room to course correct the story and is acting like it's nothing to ask the DM to throw out his entire narrative halfway through to salve the feelings of a single player who was warned and told exactly the direction the story was going. The DM cancels the next game session giving him time to tinker with the story and explore his options. Then comes back and, surprise surprise, tells the single uncomfortable player that he's not going to be willing to rewrite the entire story at this point for a single player. And according to OP's own story, the DM felt the OP's response was condescending and belittling.
Which leads us to the wife. Her discomfort matters, ALOT. It's why my solution revolves around open and honest communication between the wife and the DM. However, her involvement wasn't brought to the DM's attention until the middle of an argument where both sides feel they're being talked down. Now given the that the OP shows absolutely no effort in comprehending the DM's point of view, even in the aftermath point of the story, I very much believe he was being every bit as condescending as the DM accused. You don't wait until you're in an argument to present the most important reason and you don't deliver it along with insulting language, to someone you think is insane. Whether the wife was uncomfortable or not barely even matters at that point, since the context makes it very easy to believe OP made that up to win an argument.
Such a fantastic response! Thank you for taking the time to to out together such a thoughtful response and you seemed to have hit the nail on the head with this one.
There would appear to be Red Flags with both parties and we can clearly tell we haven’t been given the full story at this point.
Thank you again
Sounds like something is being excluded in this story. I doubt that was the ONLY reason why the DM got annoyed at OP. This is exactly the kind of situation where someone would omit any mentions of wrong doing they did to just focus on one thing.
You are correct, we are only getting one side of the story here, though I can definitely see a few red flags of the DM has had this issue multiple times.
But any DM using their time time to run multiple campaigns for others can’t be all bad!
I bet OP omit the part where DM explain the forced seduction and they accept it.
The OP is 100% excluding information here, which could be detrimental to the DM. There is definitely Red Flags from both parties for sure.
I'll be honest, the DM sounded a bit like the classic "muh story" DM - basically, he had a plot in mind and that took priority over player agency. It's kind of a variant on railroading, basically.
I should know... I've been a "muh story" myself ONCE. And goodness gracious did I ever get flak over it...
You are very correct my friend. It seems he had a plan and didn’t want to deviate. It seems there’s definite faults on both ends.
Btw thank you for taking the time to comment and such a fantastic comment and breakdown as well.
Ah yes, r/Reddit, my favorite subreddit.
Lol, indeed! I look at stories from several Subreddits so it makes it easy to identify at a glance it’s a story from Reddit lol. This may be adjusted slightly moving forward though.
Sounds to me like a few things are omitted, but I get that overall vibe that the DM was trying to win over his wife through roleplay (or worse, live that dream with the campaign). I'd say it's good they got out of it, but...I'd still want to know the rest of the story if there is any, just so I have better context.
And I have to admit. It does put the DM in a bad light when they try and force a romance. It should occur organically in the scene, not through forced charming-I mean. Either they're going to like each other through interaction, or they're going to be at each others' throats if it really doesn't click.
Never did get why some folk have to force it...and with the main badguy at that, too.
I fully agree, it has to be natural or it ends up being an awkward situation for all the participants.
Though we are only getting one side of this story there are more than a few Red Flags it would seem from the DM, more context in the situation is always a welcome one!