>>98197953

Yes. But not in DND (or at least not with these rules).

i don't think nudging it to happen deliberately is a good idea

occasionally a nice one will happen, but even the best ones that i had happen to my characters were like 33% romcom memes played for laughs, 33% theoretically spicy scenes faded to black, and 33% just being married and having kids as a background fact of life while continuing the adventures afterwards, it never ended up central to the plot itself

it did not happen in dnd, for what it's worth to the other anon

>>98197953
If you mean relationships as in dating, then no.
If you mean how the characters interact with each other, then it'll require your players to be either "storyshitters" or "theatre kids" (you know, the things /tg/ seems to hate) and then putting them in situations that may cause them to be at odds based on their backstories which you'll have to go through.

>>98197961
What rules would work better?

>>98197953
Theoretically sure, but its more of a "we all know we want to do it this way" situation. If everyone wants to play a drama game then it can work. If they dont... it wont.

vtm does that touchstones thing for NPCs so it can work really well, you just have to get everyone on board

>>98197961
Well I'm not running my game in DnD.
I am not running an Evangelion-inspired campaign in DnD, heaven goodness

>>98198042
>>98198048
That guy is just a weird autistic troll. He spams a D&D hate shitpost in just about every thread, even if it's an extreme stretch to try and spam it.

>>98198042
>>98198048

>What rules would work better?

For NGE and big mechas with pubescent pilots with big issues ? Definitely Bliss Stage.

Be warned tough, is even edgier than last episodes NGE.

>>98197953
For starters not watching your slop. Its premise is wrong. I outgrew anime way faster than cartoons. There aren't really any media worse than anime made after the aughts. Not even disney slop. Not even DC comics after 2015.
Beyond that relationships(assuming social and romantic here) between PCs in my experience become a central feature of the campaign organically or not at all.
e.g. In my current campaign one of the players unleashed, due to carelessness, a curse that resulted in the deaths of several npcs and a near TPK. Everyone was mad at him. There was drama both IC and OC. Fast forward a couple of sessions and the same player sacrifices his IC goals to save a NPC the party had befriended (although most of the time I forgot he even existed). Instant redemption moment. You can't nudge this things because that makes them insincere. You would be just masturbating with fake drama instead of playing a game with frens.

If you are still looking for the secret sauce for player drama it's for the players to have conflicting goals. None of that NPC love triangle bullshit

File: Pormeus Cain and Penny.jpg (458 KB, 2083x3000)

458 KB JPG

>>98197953
>For example, I vaguely remember something like: >each player invents one NPC then comes up with two relationships their PC has with NPCs invented by the other players.
We're doing it in our current campaign. We're playing a small noble house in some sort of Game of Thrones style highly political campaign and DM told us to come up with one NPC who would act like a most trusted person to our PCs. They would serve various functions like messengers, squires, biographers, personal librarians or just simple errand boys. I'm still not sure why they are needed exactly since we are only a couple of sessions in, but they may be some kind of safety net in case we as players don't have info on something that our characters should know (since it's GM's original setting).