All marriages are consummated by a ritual that causes both spouses to be eternally charmed towards one another...

>OP explicitly says it's a two-way charm, ie a mutual effect
>Poorly because love is about more than just you dominating some tittyfox
>REKT

Come on guys, the OP is literally two lines. How can you run tabletop games predicating on reading and understanding things if you can't even get through two lines without inserting what you THINK the guy said?

Marriage for love is an extremely modern invention. Throughout most of history, it was fully expected you'd be unhappy to begin with cuz you'd be marrying some third cousin for political reasons or have something arranged and it'd then be your DUTY to learn to make the best of it.

People were kind of fucked in the head between the Classical period and the early modern era.

Don't. It's sad but they feel that they've just accomplished something.

It depends on how much the Charm twists their personality or perceptions.

Best case scenario we now have a way of making political marriages more bearable for both members.

Making it mutual makes it even worse, to get lost, waifufaggot

Also, about the whole love aspect - people in relationship, arranged or not, warm to each other. Just because they fucking spend their lives together. It's not a rule, it's not guaranteed to change into love or even friendship, but that doesn't mean a marriage of convenience will mean two enemies hating each other. They've married for a reason, usually meaning having kids in the process. I know it might be hard to imagine, but unless they are both selfish pricks and did it all because their families wanted some stupid union (which is VERY rare, against what you can imagine), then they will get used to each other.

Not to mention another thing - a LOT of marriages in modern world is caused by him impregnating her and the social standard of being married if you are pregnant. That's literally the cause of most marriages in western world

>Waifu faggots defending each other

You'd still die alone and unloved.

You'd see a strong uptake in people who never marry, for one.

I like the idea of a Theocracy doing this for their weddings. It'd be weird if the entire world did it, but you could have some fun campaign hijinx with the concept if you carefully thought through the consequences. Such as:

A. Marriage is intense and for life. It is not entered into lightly and people tend to live with each other for years without getting married (even though this is illegal).

B. Political marriages are rare, because the spouses will likely share everything with each other as soon as they're married.

C. Twisted/unhealthy relationships still happen, and they're even more difficult to exit. A charmed husband can still beat/degrade his wife if he truly believes its for her own good, and a charmed wife will just accept it (or vice-versa). The Theocracy likely has some sort of annulment spell they use in emergencies, because

D. The marriage ritual itself can be horribly abused. Imagine the classic case of the villain kidnapping the princess and forcing her to marry, except now the marriage ensures her total devotion to him. Also, he's wearing an amulet that protects him from charm magic.

It's not about who dominates who, as I'm sure there are plenty of beta waifufags who have no problem with the loli being the dom here.

The real problem here is that waifufags like OP are such unlovable anti-social grognards that they think the idea of someone being magically forced to love them actually sounds "cool" and holds some kind of appeal to other, healthy socially adjusted, people.

Well, that might be the case, if it wasn't supposed to be a mutual agreement to get married.

I think the fact that it's a two-way charm alleviates that a bit? You would only get someone to agree to a marriage if they actually, truly loved you anyway. It actually ups the level of commitment, trust, and mutual affection needed to achieve a relationship. It wouldn't make it easier for neckbeards to get hitched, it makes it harder.

>Seriously still not getting the point
And how the hell anyone is suppose to NOT treat you as socially-inept idiots with imaginary, forced love?
Harem anime was a mistake. Never nuke country twice.

>Never nuke country twice.
You're right. Two Nukes weren't nearly enough.

Don't they already have to love you though? Otherwise why the hell would they go through the ceremony OP described.

This is why I find those stories about how "awful" arranged marriages are absolute bullshit.

Marrying for romantic love was a risky goddamn thing in the Middle Ages, and it's still a risky thing today. The media has sold us on the idea of romantic love being this mighty immutable thing analogous to familial love or platonic love that it's just missing the point entirely, that relationships are forged in irons through mutual trust and intimacy, not love. I mean yeah sure, love is a thing that helps intimacy come about, but it's just one of many factors that doesn't even need to be in the equation.

Like, love can fade. It can grow sour. It can be overcome by someone's even greater love. It's a very fickle thing, but trust and intimacy can only be destroyed through things that would destroy *any* relationship. You have those two things and you could feel nothing towards the other partner, but when push comes to shove you'll be standing right beside them because you know you can count on them, dammit.

Charm spells don't make people love you though?

Why in the everloving fuck do you guys think that having to marry someone for political reasons was common practice for everyone instead of something done by the 1%?

Most people in tabletop games, when presented with a betrothed, will nine times out of ten find out that betrothed is in an arranged marriage and *not* really hot about it.

Basically, Adventurers are the 1% already and they just keep running into the .1% because the DM knows that's the cool stuff.

Because it was, marrying daughters off for dowries is as "political" as cross-nation royal marriages.

Just like most nuns were blue-blooded sluts that either couldn't hide their bow-legged walks of shame or got knocked up.

>Not some tittyfox becoming charmed with you and forced to being your sex doll
Nah. Fox titties tho.

Because in many cultures it was the parents duty to find a spouse for their child?

Welcome to Veeky Forums, where most of population is Amerifat and has no fucking clue about anything happening before 1780s

Cow tits > Wolf tits > Fox tits

No tits > tits

Just because it's arranged doesn't mean there can't be love involved.

I imagine fathers took great strides in securing marriage for their child to their child's beloved.

Read Otoyomegatari. For examples, and the great art, and the cute couples.

But love tho, everyone knows the couple that ran off to get hitched in Las Vegas is a love that's going to last the ages.

At least it explains the idea that the bad guy wants to marry the princess.

Sure there can be, but usually only after the fact and politics being the sole reason those marriages took place.

>but usually only after the fact and politics being the sole reason those marriages took place

Are you telling me a whirlwind romance that turns into broken hearts and a broken home seven years after the marriage is a better alternative?

No I don't have an opinion one way or another, I'm saying that majority of marriages before modern times took place due to "political" reasons, unlike what this nigger implied here.

I hope this is just trolling and not genuine stupidity

Wrong quote, meant this guy

what if it wasn't a tittyfox?

>literate fags defending each other

FTFY

Most of marriages were between peasants, because most of population was peasantry. And that means marriage because they end up with her pregnant.

I know it doesn't really rings a bell in modern society, but THINK just for a while (or pretend you can)
>Small village
>Everyone knows each other
>Bob is with Alice, everyone knows that
>Suddenly Alice is with a belly
>Entire village knows
The "modern" concept of stereotypical shotgun wedding comes right from this.

>Why in the everloving fuck do you guys think that having to marry someone for political reasons was common practice for everyone instead of something done by the 1%?
Because it hasn't. Arranged marriages were very common within the peasantry, and even today about half of the marriages worldwide are arranged, according to some studies.

I'm always sceptical of

>some studies

Not him, but think about this for a while - 1/6 of world population lives in India

Fixes some issues, worsens others. In a modern context, it could make arranged marriages more common, while romantic marriages might become much rarer.

I was being sarcastic because the idea is ridiculous, but it would at least explain why saturday morning cartoon villains seem to expect that everything's going to be hunky-dory after the ceremony.

>Unable to distinguish "political reason" from "managing the homestead"

Very poorly, unless there's a contingency that dispels the charm upon the death of either spouse. It's not exactly uncommon for one spouse to outlive the other, and having the survivor eternally in love with somebody who is dead is a recipe for disaster in a world where magic exists.

That's just shit.

designated

... but they don't?
They are literally pulling the whole marriage thing for purely political reasons, because that would make them the king due to the local laws.
After the marriage the princess can literally go fuck herself and die.

>believing that difference has meaningful impact on the situation.

That would single-handedly solve the current demographic crisis in Europe, which would in turn solve the migrant crisis and save the continent from becoming a brown shithole before the end of this century.

It might not solve SJWism because some people just aren't marriage material though.

>tfw I describe my character as being betrothed to a woman he's never met
>tfw his backstory is adventuring to build up enough renown and wealth to make her happy
>tfw the DM already took issue with my character being fine with an arranged marriage, but now he's trying to find ways to shove obstacles in my way to either hook up with some wild-n-single hottie or imply my betrothed isn't nearly as faithful as I am

Well, that's the actual idea behind the action, but whenever I remember the 'bad guy' trying to marry the princess, it's because he was an lech and expected the princess to become his wife at the end of the matter.
Admittedly, it's been a while- the first thing that really comes to mind on the subject is Aladdin, where Jaffar is interested in actually having Jasmine fall in love with him.

Fun fact: in most Dungeons and Dragons settings, when your soul goes to the afterlife, it eventually loses its individuality and becomes part of that plane.

So what if the BBEG is the subject of one of these charms, and can't stand the thought of being separated from his/her spouse, even rejecting sublimation? And inevitably their machinations fuck with the natural order.

Is it an opt in sort of deal where people can choose whether to have the ritual cast on them or is it basically not a marriage if the ritual isn't done?

How strong is the charming? Would I be unable to see her as anything other than a perfect angel? Would she justify me physically abusing her as an act of love? Would I even be capable of physically abusing her? Does it affect thought processes or just inspire emotions?

Honestly sounds like it would lead to way more tragedy than happiness if its as strong as the thread seems to think it is. What happens when 30% of a kingdom's adult male population is killed in war and the newly minted widows are unable to function as human beings because the charm isn't dispelled by death? What happens to a man whose wife is killed by bandits? What if she's raped by a bored noble.

If people are unable to move on or let go it would seem more a curse than a blessing.

.

>Unable to distinguish "political reason" from "managing the homestead"
Until the rise of the modern national state, the line between the two could and was fairly blurry.

Why couldn't he have just told you he was uncomfortable with arranged marriage?

I'm thinking of adding this to my upcoming game (it takes place in a benevolent theocracy that's fighting off corruption from the inside). Anyone want to add anything else?

...

Man, Heather made me so damn sad. Her whole story worked so well.

>semantics

Back to imgur with you, heathen.

>Marriage for love is an extremely modern invention
It aint, but it's certainly rare and distinct. Westerners, The Egyptians, some Native American peoples, I think the Chinese at some point went through a lovey dovey idealism phase for mariage.