Morality and Power, how it shapes my system

[Ayyavazi]

So far, I've been trying to make a fantasy RPG along standard lines. I've read some posts, had some similar design goals to Egon, and given some pretty good ideas to him in his Not enough fantasy thread (If I do say so myself). So here's my stab at the beginnings of a system that uses dice as stats like in dogs, morality, and some blood-and guts, power and corruption role-playing.

Characters have three sets of attributes. First they have their actual attributes, which will be Body and Spirit. Application here is pretty simple: if it is a physical activity, roll your body dice. If its spiritual, roll spiritual dice.

Second, Characters choose Virtues. They can make up their own or use a pre-generated list I'll supply eventually. They assign dice to these virtues like their attirbutes. Whenever they try to do something related to a virtue, they roll that virtue's dice. If they act against a virtue, their opponents roll that virtue's dice against them.

Third, predictably, are Vices. Chosen and assigned like virtues, they work in the opposite way. Opponents automatically get a characters vices if applicable, but the character can use them instead if they are succumbing to the vice or indulging it. Maybe succumbing and indulging can be terms themselves. When indulging the player gets the dice, but may Succumb later, that is, increase their vices.

So how do you think a system like this might work? How would it fare in a fantasy setting? Does it even need to be setting specific? What improvements and suggestions do you have, either related or not to my questions?

Thanks for any input you might have, and feel free to ask questions of your own.

--Norm

[Spooky Fanboy]

I also think an opponent should get a player's virtue dice against him/her if the opponent is trying to manipulate the character into doing something by invoking those virtues. "Come, sir. Use that logic that you're so proud of. If you were being as rational as you claim to be, you'd see that I am a much more suitable match for that lady than yourself." Or, "You call yourself brave, but you dare not stand up to your lord, even though we both know his rules are far harsher on those poor peasants than they should be, especially in this drought."

[Luke]

So how do you think a system like this might work? How would it fare in a fantasy setting? Does it even need to be setting specific? What improvements and suggestions do you have, either related or not to my questions?

Norm,

What kind of behavior are you trying to encourage in your game? What type of behavior would you like to discourage?

-L

[Ayyavazi]

Thanks for the input, Spooky and Luke.
First, I have thought about opponents using player stats and decided to get rid of the idea. I think it would be unwise to expect all players to be familiar with everyone else's stats in addition to the GM needing to be aware of them all as well. In order for someone to use your dice, they have to know they are there. So, I could standardize the virtues and vices, so that everyone has the same ones but different values. Then an opponent could say, "I'm using your envy against you, give me the dice." It bears more thinking but I'm not sure if I should standardize the lists so opponents can use player dice, or if I should leave it free-form and just have players use only their own dice. It could also get difficult if an opponent and the player both want to use the same virtue or vice of a given participant. But ultimately, I like what your idea would allow Spooky.

As for your question Luke, I'm trying to encourage the player's to role-play their characters and develop their personalities over time. I want this to be a constant struggle between choosing the easy road (Vices are easier to invoke and lend aid to magic) or the harder moral road. They way this would be handled statistically is to make the die type for virtues and vices different. For example, all virtues would be measured in d6s while all vices are measured in d8s. I could also tie magic (which is ultimately a force of chaos in the world setting) to spring from vice, which is the effect of chaos on the world. Thus characters that invoke their vices and become more evil get a tangible benefit beyond the higher numbers. This is all still very up in the air though.

I want to discourage people from assuming that all of their action are justified.  For example, when I see people play D&D, its very rare for me to hear a character say, "No, I'm not going to kill him and rob him. No, I won't rob this ancient grave," and so on. To me, when I see these fantasy games I want to encourage players making characters that think about what they do and why they do it.

Does that answer your question?

Thanks again,
--Norm

[Luke]

Norm,
That's perfect. You're on a noble path, one tread by many a RPG designer before you.

Okay, so you have a spectrum of actions. You have a minor (very minor) mechanical weight to encourage players to do the bad thing.

Two more questions: How do you make the players care? What makes a player invested in the choice between vice and virtue? And, to wit, why choose virtue at all?

The easy answer is: They'll care about the game fiction situation. That's fine and good, and possible, but not probable. Let me out myself in case it's not obvious: I'm a systematist. I believe that if you're going to have a mechanical incentive at all, you should have a full blown set of rewards and inducements.

-L

[Ayyavazi]

Thanks again Luke,

As I'm beginning to notice, you have a talent for getting to the quick of things. My answer would be, an interest in the fictional situation. But, you have struck a chord in me. I too believe a system should support the play style desired. In this case, the setting I have in mind has a pretty basic framework. If you remain pure, you may dwell in the cities, places of wonder and majesty. If you sin, you are marked and cast out of the cities. The cities themselves have "rings" and the closer a ring is to the center, the more pure its citizens. When you commit grievous sins, such as murder, you are cast out of the city entirely, to make your way in the wastes. In this case, the player would be interested in virtue to the degree they care about their character's social standing. However, the whole point of the player character is to be one that has been kicked out of the cities already, whether because they deserved it or not. Repentance might allow entry once more, but it hasn't happened before.

So, I do need a mechanical incentive for virtue. The way I think to handle that is to go back to a system where stats can be used for or against a character, even if it is their stats. Since it is harder to invoke a virtue against a character than a vice, culturing virtue become an easy way to control the resources used by and against you. But, since vices are more powerful, they allow a brute force approach to the conflicts. Also, virtue gives rise to the rune-magic, which is extremely safe and covert in its influence, but slow to work. Vice gives rise to the more overt, immediately powerful magics, at the cost of the degenerate's soul, over time. Rune magic is stems from the force of law, while the other stems from chaos.

But does this give players adequate reasons to care about virtue and vice? What other games have handled this situation satisfactorily to you, and how did they handle it?

Thanks again,
--Norm

[Luke]

Hi Norm,
I kinda sorta do this a lot, almost kinda for a living, so I hope I'm able to occasionally convey an idea or two! It's freaking hard! So I hope this helps.

Fictional situation is not entirely devoid of importance here! What you want to do is reinforce your fiction with mechanical incentive. You want something palpable enough for the players to grok it and want it, but loose enough where each person can put his or her own stamp on the ethical situation.

Being cast out of Eden and questing to return to the state of Grace sounds very compelling to me -- so long as you leave all possibilities open: The player can choose to return to Grace, can choose to remain in purgatory or can choose to join the rebel faction and attempt to bring the system down. (That is what we're talking about, here, right?)

Access to different types of magic is a common path for this stuff in RPGS, but look at Star Wars for inspiration. Everyone wants to play a fallen jedi. Evil magic is always cooler than good magic. So I don't think it's a very good incentive.

Personally, I like systems that present the moral question and then reward you for making a decision -- regardless of the ethics of the decision. Dogs in the Vineyard does this very well. However, My Life With Master is also a game to look at. While it seems like one should walk the path of the pure-hearted, becoming the Master is a visceral reward for all your dastardly deeds. Sorcerer also has a moral barometer, Humanity. It's a simple mechanism that doesn't quite grip a player until he's got a Humanity of 2 or 1 and he realizes that he better quit being an asshole or he's out of the game -- or that he might as well burn his bridges because he's going to hell.

Like I said, I feel the role of the system is to get us to the place of decision. I don't believe in right or wrong answers in roleplaying games. I think that's to be decided in play. I think all paths should be rewarded, but each path should have its own reward. Is that too "The Sphinx"?

Hope that helps,
-Luke

[Ayyavazi]

Hey Luke,

Thanks again. You are really helping me to understand the goals and interactions here. You hit the nail on the head with the state of grace comment. And yes, the idea is that the characters can do whichever they want. At character creation the players agree on a generalized goal like the ones you listed. This insures they are all working together. If they want things to be a bit trickier, they can have secret goals, or contrary goals as well. This is just to ensure the group doesn't slaughter itself right away just because the characters have no reason to travel together. Of course, in the harsh wasteland outside of the cities, enemies can be your best friend if they can help you survive.

As for rewarding all decisions, I was planning on that. I just want to try and maintain a good balance. I don't want evil to be the "best" choice. I want players to take choices without worrying about whether they are going to be hosed by the system for taking a given path. And since my resolution system is very similar to Dogs in the Vineyard, I see no reason why the rewards system can't be too, especially since I was already considering it.

When a character indulges a Vice or invokes their virtue and uses it in a conflict, that vice or virtue may go up a die. When a vice or virtue is used against its character, then the statistic has a chance to go down IF THE CHARACTER SUCCEEDS. If the character fails, then they have actually acted as their virtues and vices dictated. In this way winning conflicts and losing them will still cause a character to change over time. I don't know what type of fallout system I'm going to be using yet. I don't want to copy Dogs, for a number of reasons, but I know I need to have consequences for failure, or for degrees of small failure within the success. I'm not using hit points or wounds or anything like that, so I think further modifications to vices and virtues might be a good idea. Maybe I could allow increased die size for success in an area, and decreased die size for failure. The problem I run into is that as I work with my system more and more, the more I see it as just Dogs with some mechanical tweaks and a different setting. I don't even know if that is a problem, really.

Thanks again,

--Norm

[Luke]

Norm,

Dogs is not about returning to the state of Grace. That means once you get out there and start actually playtesting your design, it's going to rapidly diverge from the inspiration.

So do it! Roll dice. Get some friends together and ask their forbearance as you try out some clumsy new mechanics together. Play out a session or at least a conflict. Make notes and then head back to the drawing board. Best part about games is that you have to play 'em to design 'em!

-Luke

[Ayyavazi]

That seems sound advice. I just need to find a group willing to play this part of the process. The only thing I have close to it is a few friends just barely introduced to role-playing last week. I have to get the bare bones of the system written up and then start the first round of playtesting I guess. Thanks again. I'll start a thread in playtesting as soon as I can. Until then, I'll post my thoughts here as they congeal.

--Norm