Monday, June 27, 2016

RPGs Don't Require a Morality System

So, as most of my readers know, the major focus of my content on Improved Initiative is Pathfinder. That's partially because it's the game I play the most often, and thus the one I have the most knowledge about. It's also because, as one of the most popular RPGs on the market, it draws a lot more views than when I write about something like World of Darkness, or Call of Cthulhu. However, when I can spare some time (when I'm not running two blogs, writing books, attending conventions, and writing Infobarrel articles) I do like to try and check out new systems. Sometimes it's for work, and sometimes it's for pleasure, but I have noted a repeated problem in several systems that's been giving me barking fits.

If character morality has no mechanical effect in your game, then do not put a spot for it on the character sheet.

We get enough people micromanaging our alignments in real life, thank you very much.

How To Tell When Your Game's Morality System is Useless


Now, before any readers start crowing about how the alignment system (prominently featured in Pathfinder, Dungeons and Dragons, and other games) is a blight on RPGs, I'd like to point out that we're not talking about alignment here. Because, like or or loathe it, alignment has a purpose in games like Pathfinder. Paladins, clerics, inquisitors, and other classes use alignment as a way to gauge how well they're following their teachings and codes, which has a mechanical effect on the game. The same is true of spells, magic items, and traps which react differently to people based on their alignment.

Another candidate for bashing might be the Virtue/Vice system commonly used in White Wolf, but again, that system has a definite purpose in the game. It's meant to refresh your willpower, which can make a huge difference in what your character is capable of achieving. It's an integral part of the game, so it gets a pass as well.

So what are you talking about?
What I'm talking about are games that cling onto vestiges of morality systems, like alignment, but where those systems have no actual impact in a mechanical sense. For example, I recently read through a system that went into 9-point details of personal morality... but then never explained why it was necessary to apply it to your character. Your morality wasn't a test to see whether a god would grant you power, or to figure out whether certain forms of magic would treat you differently. It was a classless system, so your character's morality clearly wasn't to maintain any class features. It served no purpose aside from adding another label to a character during the generation process.

Fewer Labels, More Characterization


If you have a game that doesn't require a morality system (Savage Worlds, Call of Cthulhu, etc.) then a change happens in the character creation process. Rather than picking a morality label, and then asking how this character fits within that label, players instead focus more on the gray areas of who this person they're piloting is. They ask what this character finds morally wrong, and what actions that person thinks are right and proper to take in response. They focus on their history, their knowledge, the places they've been, and the things they've done. Morality emerges as part of the process, but it does so without a label being attached to it that often limits the way a player thinks about right and wrong within the game world.

This can lead to terrible, terrible ideas.
What I am not suggesting is removing parts from your game's engine if those parts have a necessary function. Like them or hate them, many times a morality system is a part of how bigger, more complicated mechanics function. If, however, the parts are purely for looks, or entirely vestigial, then tear them off the same way you would a spoiler on a station wagon. It will smooth out your flow, lead to more thoughtful character creation, and free up a lot of space in the rule book.

Even better, you could fill that vacant space with helpful hints on making better characters. Things like fleshing out your character's family, job experience, their motivations, and all the other things that make them step, fully-formed, into the game world.

As always, thanks for stopping in to check out my Moon Pope Monday update this week. If you'd like to help keep Improved Initiative going, then why not stop by The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a patron today? As little as $1 a month can make a big difference when it comes to getting more content straight to you. Even better, it comes with sweet swag just for being a patron! Lastly, if you haven't followed me on Facebook, Tumblr, and Twitter yet, then what's stopping you?

10 comments:

  1. I'm in complete agreement. Normally, I just slap down an alignment in D&D and I'm done with it. When I started creating characters for my Changeling chronicle, I found the virtue/vice method more interesting, and kinda-sorta similar would be choice of faction, namely the courts in Changeling. Why did Ziggy wind up in the Autumn Court? What does being a member of the Court of Fear mean to a compassionate person like him? For the latter: Used properly, fear can prevent bloodshed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You are basically explaining what we programmers call "the YAGNI principle", which is short for "You Ain't Gonna Need It[, so don't put it in]". All parts of an RPG system should facilitate or reinforce the kind of play its designer wanted to see at the table. If a morality subsystem doesn't do either of those things, it should be cut, just like any other subsystem that doesn't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pretty much the case with designing anything. If it doesn't have a purpose, remove it. What makes design hard is we sometimes have to fight our preconceptions about what's really necessary.

      Delete
  3. So if I have a morality system with no mechanical function, I should add mechanics based off said morality system? okay.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's one way to look at it, yes. On the other hand, if you have a morality system in place that has no mechanical purpose, why waste time with it? Why not just strip it out, and trust the players to create nuanced characters?

      The only reason to create morality rules is to enforce something mechanically. Paladins and clerics lose their powers as a result of immoral actions, which means there has to be rules in place. Vampires slowly begin to turn monstrous the longer they ignore their Humanity. If there's no drawback to being evil, and no benefit to being good, then don't arbitrate it.

      Delete
  4. Actually the "morality system" was a simple way to create a designated opposition. OD&D had law versus chaos, then it was made more complex with the addition of good and evil. If you picture this as a war game it gives you a way of choosing apposition armies.
    But it turns out it can also be used to create internal character tension like good want for the characters in books.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you take a racial alignment and attempt to have the character choose to live counter to it.

      Delete
    2. If you take a racial alignment and attempt to have the character choose to live counter to it.

      Delete
  5. Actually the "morality system" was a simple way to create a designated opposition. OD&D had law versus chaos, then it was made more complex with the addition of good and evil. If you picture this as a war game it gives you a way of choosing apposition armies.
    But it turns out it can also be used to create internal character tension like good want for the characters in books.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is an interesting read.I feel that while some classes can pretty much do away with alignment, it would be important for paladins priests and even the gods for themselves to have a very strong alignment presence. More or less kind of like in real life, alignment should affect those who place a focus on it, and for those who do not...meh no big deal.

    ReplyDelete