I haven't heard of one, so I thought I'd ask. What I mean by a complication mechanic is something similar to the Obligation/Duty mechanic in Eote and AoR, respectively. I've read a little about the Motivation system, but they don't seem like quite the same thing. One that that I like a lot in EotE was the Obligation aspect, and was hoping for something similar.

Not really. It's kind of a setting specific mechanic, and wouldn't mesh well with every setting, so I can see why they left it out. The new morality system is pretty brilliant, by the way.

No, there isn't. I'd like to see one, but don't really have a good enough grasp on Obligation/Duty to make one up.

1 minute ago, Cyvaris said:

No, there isn't. I'd like to see one, but don't really have a good enough grasp on Obligation/Duty to make one up.

There's no need; simply do a direct port from Edge of the Empire . No tweaking necessary, it should fit just fine.

I don't think a generic set of rules would be a good fit for that kind of mechanic. I would find it more appropriate in setting books.

Honestly I like the idea of obligation that im likely to use it in just about any game i play. Im not overly fond of trigger obligations, and the strain rules that go behind it, but i really like the idea of players giving their characters short one sentence hooks for the gm to use, and for the players to resolve and develop. even if you dont use the extra xp/money part of it, I think obligation/duty is a great way to bring the party into forging the story with the GM, which is always my end goal when running a game

i'm very fond of it as well. It was a nice way to incorporate a background element or complication into a game, and have it actually mean something. Truthfully, any good GM can do that without the mechanics, but I thought it was nice to see actual mechanics for it (and allow for a PC to get a small benefit for their complication as well).

For Avatar: The Second Age, I sort of analyzed and then synthesized at all three existing "obligation" mechanics into one: Honor. It serves the same purpose in the Avatar setting: a narrative plot hook and a mechanical impact; specifically characters can gain or lose Honor based on their actions, and thus become 'honorable' or 'dishonorable'. This can be reflected by the GM in the way that NPCs treat the characters. Some NPCs (foreign leaders, nobility, hot shot merchants, secret societies) might not even considering dishonorable PCs, while some characters (notorious pirates, secret societies and gang leaders) might prefer such a status. Sure the GM could keep track of this type of thing in his or her world without the mechanic, but it serve as a plot hook too. It also gives the GM the flexibility of using it as a reward--perhaps the character's goal is to meet with certain noble Earth houses who won't even consider meeting with someone who isn't cut from the same cloth, or worth their time.

But as @Lord Dynel points out, any good GM can pull of this sort of thing without the mechanics.

I'm also working on a similar Fame/Infamy mechanic for players looking to get into pro-bending, movers, or to be big personalities/heroes.

that also sounds quite a bit like force and destinies morality scale sehlura

3 hours ago, DarthGM said:

There's no need; simply do a direct port from Edge of the Empire . No tweaking necessary, it should fit just fine.

Yeah Duty doesn't work as well, excepting perhaps in a modern spy/paramilitary game. But obligation is the goods whenever you use it.

You would have to use a different one for each setting. For example, for the OmniSphere, in the superhero setting I am using a Reputation system, while on Nightmare Earth I will be using the Sanity rules, and on my urban fantasy world I will be using a special Agency mechanic where your free-will is on the line. It is different for every setting.

Can someone give me a better sketch out of how Obligation works? It seems...obtuse to say the least every time I read it. My biggest problem is the "number" part of it and a player taking a larger obligation. What exactly is the mechanical effect of that besides the extra XP or money? Does it increase the range of numbers that can be rolled to trigger an Obligation?

@Cyvaris In EotE, everyone in a party has an Obligation with a specific value (usually 10 for a 4-player group). These values are then placed in a table of numbers from 1 to 100. For example:

1-10 = Player 1 (10 Obligation)

11-25 = Player 2 (15 Obligation), etc.

At the start of every game session, the GM rolls 1d100 to see if Obligation comes into play. If the number rolled was within the range of a player's Obligation, their Obligation gets triggered for that session and somehow becomes an issue that needs to be resolved or addressed in that session.

If a player increases their Obligation at either character creation or during play, the chances of their Obligation being triggered increases. An Obligation with a larger value tends to also be more important to the PC or carry more severe ramifications than a lower value Obligation. If the Obligation values for the whole party exceed 100 then the group as a whole must deal with their problems, debts, issues, etc as the combined Obligations have started to jeopardise or impede their current goals.

In my experience, Obligations are best used when they add to any stories or plots that the PCs are currently involved in. Resolving or dealing with Obligations can be stories in and of themselves but are not really intended to form the core of a campaign.

You could rename Obligation/Duty into something more neutral. Renown and notoriety come to my mind. The higher your renown/notoriety, the more likely something positive or negative is to happen. Some slimmed kind of morality mechanism from Force and Destiny might work just fine.

12 hours ago, Johan Marek Phoenix Knight said:

You would have to use a different one for each setting. For example, for the OmniSphere, in the superhero setting I am using a Reputation system...

That gave me a streamlining meta-idea similar to the mechanics used in "space trader" sims like Elite Dangerous (and Freelancer before it), in that you track the party's reputation among all of the various social,economic, and political factions in your setting. If you're the type of GM to sow worry and dread (or sunshine and happiness) in your group, every time an incident occurs or decision is made that would signifcantly alter the group's standing, mutter in grand Telltale fashion "X will notice that.", and update your tracker accordingly.

What you're tracking is a value that when positive is the number of Boost dice (negative being the number of Setback dice) given for any check where the group's faction reputation becomes a factor. This could be when talking to representatives of that faction, negotiating prices in markets operated by that faction, or seeking information in places where that faction chiefly operates with the goodwill of the people. (Minimizing your bad reputation with enemies also makes them easier to bribe.)

And perhaps at some breakpoint in reputation, the additional dice are replaced by a permanent upgrade/downgrade (just to reduce the number of dice involved)

Make the update of the reputation tracker an important moment, and you will reduce the murderhobo tendencies. (Except, I guess, in that it might also potentially force players into a "leave no witnesses" mindset too, but that's another salacious story to tell.) But with a system this pronounced, I also see opportunity for groups to have entire mini-adventures whose sole purpose is to improve their reputation for the purpose of making those crucial sales/negotiation rolls easier.