Engraving of St. Valentine, by Cibera, 1853

The history between the OSR and romantic fantasy roleplaying is a tortuous one. From the crusade against the Blue Rose roleplaying game to the censure of the old Dragonlance adventures, the play styles have often been cast in opposition. I think there are lots of reasons for this (perhaps not all of them pleasant), but mainly because romantic fantasy RPGs are heavily associated with railroading and the much maligned trad play style.

Like all good GMs, I've followed the Discourse and kept my games focussed on maintaining player agency. Yet something isn't quite right. When I talk to my players, they aren't particularly concerned about their agency so much as playing out the interpersonal consequences of their choices.

As one of my players noted:

I think the main thing you can do there as a GM is give us those opportunities for our characters to make big choices that they might have different perspectives on, and then give us space to show those interpersonal consequences playing out - which tbh you’re pretty good at imo.

For my players, the game seems to really begin when the characters have a quiet moment between the action to speak with each other, trying to understand how everyone is feeling and playing out the conflicts that their intense emotions create. I believe plots are incidental to their enjoyment, rather than core as others would have it.

I think back to those Dragonlance adventures and wonder if the appeal wasn't the forced encounters so much as those moments between, with everyone sitting around a campfire playing out their emotional responses to the day's events, very much like the characters in the novels. How many players enjoyed the pauses, where they could play out the puzzle of engaging with each other's character's needs, drives and motivations? Maybe our thought leaders are too focussed on materialistic agency (i.e. where players can go, what they can steal) and can't see the emotional agency romantic fantasy and the trad play style offers.