Shakespeare in the Playground

[Brookshw]

So I had reason today to think about Shakespeare in the Bush (http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/picks-from-the-past/12476/shakespeare-in-the-bush) and it got me thinking, how would the various alignments interpret the story of Hamlet? What do the LG think of it vs the LE? CG vs. CE? Assuming the story more or less moves forward as is with no speak with dead, resurrect or other magic interference because of [reasons], and a bunch of exemplars were sitting around hearing about it, how would they react or interpret it?

So points awarded for entertaining/fun/absurd ways our exemplar friends would understand the story, bonus points if you provide their dialogue.

[EisenKreutzer]

I don't think alignment is the correct lense for this. The elders in Shakespeare in the Bush have such a vastly different cultural background that the story is impossible to translate. At every step of the way, their worldview clashes with the worldview of Shakespear, and when they interpret the story through their cultural lense they arrive at different conclusions.

Alignment isn't as powerful a lense as culture, and I think that six people from the same general cultural background who only differ in alignment would arrive at the same themes and meanings in Hamlet. They just wouldn't care about certain aspects of the morality.
Alignment is all about morality,.

[OldTrees1]

Well we might be able to say some things about how the alignments(or specific instances of the alignments) would judge the characters.

For instance,
Hamlet is fulfilling a perceived duty to save his father's soul by unlawfully slaying his murderer.
Instances of Lawful and Chaotic would have various opinions about whether this is a foolish or wise intention/method and for different reasons.

[Brookshw]

Personally I think that's what makes this an interesting exercise. Not only do we have the absolutism(ish) of D&D mortality to contrast to what we may consider in the real world, but also if you're able to consider exemplar races points of view, in which certain elements may be completely foreign, there's a lot of interesting depth to explore. Modron's for example, would probably take this in a very different way from both you and I, and a very different way from the denizens of the 9 Hells or the Slaad. I do understand your point though.

[Phelix-Mu]

Slaad would probably have been under the impression that it's a Monty Python production, and start making references to "launch the cow!" and how Hamlet's father was a hamster and his mother smelled of elderberry. Certainly, by the time Hamlet starts talking to himself for the second or third time, they'd likely rush onstage, fire the actors, rehire the actors and turn the whole thing into a Noh reinterpretation of Westside Story (Hamlet is Kruptkey, Ophelia is a very confused Maria who can't sing on-key).

This would be even more true if they were actually in the story interacting with real characters instead of actors, lol.

[Coidzor]

I don't think alignment is the correct lense for this. The elders in Shakespeare in the Bush have such a vastly different cultural background that the story is impossible to translate. At every step of the way, their worldview clashes with the worldview of Shakespear, and when they interpret the story through their cultural lense they arrive at different conclusions.

Alignment isn't as powerful a lense as culture, and I think that six people from the same general cultural background who only differ in alignment would arrive at the same themes and meanings in Hamlet. They just wouldn't care about certain aspects of the morality.
Alignment is all about morality,.

Just alignment, no, but the various exemplar and iconic outsiders of various alignments would also have different cultural mores from one another while also having some awareness of the cultural mores of clueless primes.

[Honest Tiefling]

Might be easier to interpret it via the Monster Manual. After all, being a ghost gives you +2 CR and are hard to defeat with a magical weapon. So Kingy-Pants should not be so lazy and get his own dang revenge. And nothing says he can't appear to other people and get his story out, sheesh.

[OldTrees1]

Might be easier to interpret it via the Monster Manual. After all, being a ghost gives you +2 CR and are hard to defeat with a magical weapon. So Kingy-Pants should not be so lazy and get his own dang revenge. And nothing says he can't appear to other people and get his story out, sheesh.

The idea is to interpret from their points of view (just like Hamlet was interpreted by the Bushmen Elders' point of view).

A Ghost would probably be confused at Hamlet's skepticism, hesitance and confusion. This is finishing business after all, everything else pales in importance to the troubles of a ghost.

[Venger]

Might be easier to interpret it via the Monster Manual. After all, being a ghost gives you +2 CR and are hard to defeat with a magical weapon. So Kingy-Pants should not be so lazy and get his own dang revenge. And nothing says he can't appear to other people and get his story out, sheesh.

since that's true, they'd conclude that king hamlet wasn't a ghost and thus didn't exist, actually being a side effect of a nightmare spell fortinbras cast on hamlet continually throughout the play, rendering him unable to sleep, or possibly x image line, so that once hamlet went nuts and killed everyone including himself, fortinbras would be poised to take over. it's at once a nonsensical, overly complicated, and completely implausible plan, even for deeandee

so what I'm saying is the drow would love it.

[Honest Tiefling]

They believed that certain creatures existed, and followed certain. particular, rules. Hence why the suggestion to swap Alignment for the Monster Manual. After all, they're arguing over what a ghost does as opposed to a zombie. That sounds like many arguments I've had in game!

[Coidzor]

since that's true, they'd conclude that king hamlet wasn't a ghost and thus didn't exist, actually being a side effect of a nightmare spell fortinbras cast on hamlet continually throughout the play, rendering him unable to sleep, or possibly x image line, so that once hamlet went nuts and killed everyone including himself, fortinbras would be poised to take over. it's at once a nonsensical, overly complicated, and completely implausible plan, even for deeandee

so what I'm saying is the drow would love it.

I dunno, the whole male humanoid killing another male humanoid for the male humanoid's female humanoid mate might just scandalize them at the very idea of a female humanoid being a prize rather than manipulating them all to eliminate all of her potential rivals.

[Venger]

I dunno, the whole male humanoid killing another male humanoid for the male humanoid's female humanoid mate might just scandalize them at the very idea of a female humanoid being a prize rather than manipulating them all to eliminate all of her potential rivals.

but a sizable portion of the audience would say gertrude was complicit in claudius's plan to kill king hamlet the whole time, which is why she went along with it and tried to dissuade hamlet from his vendetta.

also, you're assuming they'd put it on as-is. hamlet's changed a lot since day 1. why would a drow version be exactly the same as a human version? at the very least, as you've mentioned, a rule 63 on the cast is likely. it's not like "hamlet" and such are gendered names on oerth, so they'd be down with the role being played by a lady.

actually, all drow performers are probably women, and they dress as men to do male roles, similar to how players in shakespeare's time did the opposite.

[Coidzor]

also, you're assuming they'd put it on as-is.

Yes, I was, because that is the premise of the OP and the thread so far, and you hadn't said anything about adapting it for Drow use until this post.

[Brookshw]

The idea is to interpret from their points of view (just like Hamlet was interpreted by the Bushmen Elders' point of view).

A Ghost would probably be confused at Hamlet's skepticism, hesitance and confusion. This is finishing business after all, everything else pales in importance to the troubles of a ghost.

I was certainly hoping for interpretive views though "why didn't the ghost just take revenge" is a good point of view I think.


Yes, I was, because that is the premise of the OP and the thread so far, and you hadn't said anything about adapting it for Drow use until this post.

I did want to maintain the premise of the story not changing but as several posters have expressed an interest in alternative versions, sure, that could be fun as well. Retold or interpretted by D&D races, such as ophelia's role in the eyes of the drow, especially if a female stow were to tell the story, would probably change it quite a bit.

So how to phrase the question then, how would hamlet, or any Shakespeare play be told, progressed, or been understood through the lens of D&D.

[Telonius]

A CE exemplar would consider it one of his finest comedies.

[Honest Tiefling]

By Monster Manual, I didn't mean the races within (Through the drow one would be interesting, maybe an explanation as to why men are incapable of leading), but rather the rules regarding the monsters (Say, a ghost) showing up in the story.

[weckar]

Reading this topic, I'm imagining a 'DM of the Rings'-esque reinterpretation of Shakespeare's best...

[Venger]

Reading this topic, I'm imagining a 'DM of the Rings'-esque reinterpretation of Shakespeare's best...

I'd read that.

DM imposes all-bard party. party gets him back by rolling all drow. hilarity ensues.

[Coidzor]

I'd read that.

DM imposes all-bard party. party gets him back by rolling all drow. hilarity ensues.

Second.

There needs to be something in here about forbidding Dragonforce, the all-kobold bard band, too.