I'm a little put off by the d10 roll at the end of a session to gain/lose morality. It seems odd and not particularly thematic that a player who accumulates no conflict points gains less morality than someone who generated say 4-5 simply because the first player rolled a 2 and the second player rolled a 9. I think I would rather have seen a way to get "positive conflict" that, while requiring more work form the DM, better reflects the light and dark paths (and more closely resembles the LS/DS meter found in the video games).

More than anything, it's a balancing mechanic. If you codify the positive stuff and make it simple to gain, it's easy to abuse. Being nice and giving stuff to somebody is +1 to a character's Morality? Expect them to be handing out a single credit to 100 people. And this ultimately just trivializes darker actions and dark side point/power use.

And just as a player with no conflict can roll a 2, they can just as easily roll a 10. The point is that they were careful enough to not take on any Morality and that they guaranteed that their Morality would raise (or stay the same if they're at 100). The player with 4-5 conflict is entirely at mercy to luck and even on a good roll, is earning less than they would have otherwise if they'd kept their nose clean.

If you want to just turn it into direct changes to Morality through good/bad actions, you definitely can as long as your table isn't going to try and take advantage of it and won't try to argue with you that an action deserves more positive points.

I think another reason was to prevent predicability for the players. You can't determine exatly when or how you will lose or gain morality, so a player can't say "If if do actions A and B and C, I will have 72 morality in 2.621 sessions", because the roll is random. They won't know that their next act of rescuing kittens/puppy kicking will result in gaining/losing morality, just that it could go either way. I wish I could remeber exactly where it was, but I think F&D's Game Master discusses the roll. Either there or in the character creation chapter.

I think another reason was to prevent predicability for the players. You can't determine exatly when or how you will lose or gain morality, so a player can't say "If if do actions A and B and C, I will have 72 morality in 2.621 sessions", because the roll is random. They won't know that their next act of rescuing kittens/puppy kicking will result in gaining/losing morality, just that it could go either way. I wish I could remeber exactly where it was, but I think F&D's Game Master discusses the roll. Either there or in the character creation chapter.

I think I've seen someone reference developers stating this in the path. They felt it would add a little more weight to deciding if one will or will not flip that dark pip or the like because you never know what you will roll so it's harder to min-max your point decisions.

If they make it too predictable then players will have a tendency to use that information to decide exactly how many pips they will flip, etc.. because they know if they will still gain/lose over all. With a die roll they don't know the exact number and need to decide if they still like the odds or not.

I'm a little put off by the d10 roll at the end of a session to gain/lose morality.

Join the club, but don't expect to get much traction with the opinion. A similar thread went real south real quick and will probably happen here too. (and, yes, the OP in these two threads is kinda different, but if you read past the first few posts, it clearly became very similar).

The Episode of the order 66 podcast on force and destiny they discuss the thinking. The reason they wanted it to be random is as has been stated to make it so you can't game the system. In past systems it was very easy to game the system so as to ride right on the edge of being a darksider. They did not want that. They wanted the temptation to be more real...I can afford a couple conflict..I'll be fine....

Keep in mind that Conflict is not the same as the PC's Morality Rating, Conflict is the measure that leads to the PC's Morality Rating. Conflict itself doesn't need to always be generated by evil acts, it's also the having to choose action or inaction vs results and vice versa. So you should be giving out a fair amount of Conflict. Not as often as Setbacks or flipping DPs but a few per session even to those not actively doing the action. Remember you earn Conflict by inaction or the acts of other PC/NPCs as well.

A good Rule of Thumb is that if you have to ask if something generates Conflict, then it does.

If the d10 roll at the end of every session is really sticking in your craw, there are a couple options you could pursue.

- Use a smaller die type, such as a d8 or even a d6. However, you'll wind up with PCs micro-managing their Conflict far more often, since there's less chance of a gain or a break-even if the average die result is lower.

- Change the roll from the end of each session to the end of each adventure. Again, you'll see the PCs doing far more micro-managing, especially if your adventures tend to run 3 to 4 sessions.