Where can I find different houserules for alternatives to Conflict/Morality

Thanks,
LordEnforcer

On 2/20/2018 at 2:48 PM, LordEnforcer said:

Where can I find different houserules for alternatives to Conflict/Morality

Thanks,
LordEnforcer

Well, since Lady Marcy ( @Maelora ) isn't feeling well and might not be around for a bit, I'd be delighted to explain the houserule she uses, and which I have adopted for my games!

While the Force as presented to us in the films is great, the Good vs. Evil nature of the Light and Dark is a bit...trite by now. Marcy and I both were looking for a variation that was more in-line with the Buddhist teachings of balance that the original concept of the Force was drawn from: A Yin-Yang, rather than Heaven vs. ****. So each character has both Light and Dark inside them, explores both during the game, and whichever they are more drawn to doesn't determine if they're bad people or not, only their actions determine that.

Marcy has said that the system she developed was based on the old Warhammer RPG that FFG used to do. I've not played, but the basic idea is that every character has two "Stances:" Light Stance and Dark Stance. When you're in Light Stance, you draw on white pips on Force dice, and need to spend Destiny Points and suffer strain to use the black pips. When you're in Dark Stance, it's the opposite: you draw on black pips, and need Destiny Points and strain to use the white ones.

The two Stances represent your current state of mind: Light is calm, peaceful, reflective, while Dark is active, passionate, in-the-moment. Each character picks one stance as their default: at the start of every session, and between scenes when they've had some time to rest and reset, that's the Stance they end up in. However, any actions they take can cause them to change Stance. Someone who defaults to Light Stance can nonetheless be changed to Dark if they end up in a situation where they start acting in a "darker" way, and Dark siders can change to drawing on the Light side in those moments when they find that peaceful, centered moment.

With this system, Morality doesn't exist, there is no number at all. You're in one Stance or the other, and your actions determine when you change.

Of course, how does that affect things that run off of Conflict? Well, in general, Conflict is disregarded. But for actual Force abilities that deal with it, the rule is as follows: if an ability would normally cause Conflict when you use it (including Conflict talents), you must be in Dark Stance to use that ability. If an ability has a restriction (like Heal's restriction that only Light-siders can use it, or Protect's restriction that Dark-siders can only Protect themselves), those remain. So to use Harm, you have to be in Dark Stance (because it causes Conflict), and to use Heal, you have to be in Light Stance (because it is restricted to Light siders). Conflict talents like Baleful Gaze and Terrify are likewise restricted.

The one other thing is Emotional Strength/Weakness, and Paragons. Characters retain their Emotional Strength/Weakness, except they're renamed Morality and Passion. If your character's actions are strongly aligned with their Morality (such as Courage, Love, Compassion, etc.), they temporarily become a Light Paragon: they switch to Light Stance, flip a Destiny Point to Light side, and gain +2 to their strain threshold for the duration that they continue to act according to their Morality. If they manage to stay like that for more than one scene in a row, they flip a Destiny Point at the beginning of each scene.

If they act strongly in accordance with their Passion (Anger, Fear, Jealousy), they become a Dark Paragon briefly: They switch to Dark Stance if they weren't already in it, ADD a Dark Side Destiny Point to the pool, and gain +2 wound threshold and -2 strain threshold for the time they're a Paragon. As before, if they remain Dark Paragon for multiple scenes in a row, they continue to add a new Dark Side Destiny Point to the pool every scene.

And that's it! I like it a lot; I don't have time to delve into the philosophy of it (hopefully Lady Marcy can help with that, if she's feeling up to it ), but I like this variation a bunch! It gives you the ability to explore both aspects of your character without getting bogged down in another sliding scale of numbers.

thank you

16 minutes ago, LordEnforcer said:

thank you

No problem! I enjoy sharing .

Houserule 1: You must talk to your players before the campaign begins, and tell them that you intend to use the Morality mechanics to explore the cinematic concept of Jedi/Sith, Light/Dark morality, and explain what that means.

Houserule 2: You must ensure them that you will not use the Morality mechanics to push their PCs story to a place they don't want/choose for it to go. And then you must make good on that promise, by following the books rule to warn the players when they're about to earn Conflict, and allow them to retcon stated PC actions if necessary.

Houserule 3: You must ask your players to engage the Morality mechanics. Letting them know that this is how they will achieve the PC they want (Light, Grey, Dark, whatever). And engaging the mechanic means helping you as GM identify Conflict-worthy actions (especially related to their Moral Strength/Weakness). Even encouraging them to go so far as asking for Conflict (or a Skill check to avoid it) when their PC is angry.

Houserule 4: You must allow the Force to accomplish extraordinary results, compared to normal/similar skill-based efforts, so that it is worth it to use Dark Pips when they pop up. The Force should always be a tempting "shortcut" for ingame problem solving.

Houserule 5: You must readily use the Fear mechanics - first time they get in a gun fight, or fist fight, first time they see someone die - or an ally go unconcious, first time they're in a ship when it's getting blasted, first time a Sil 3 beast comes at them, and so on. Remembering that fear is one of the paths to the dark side (use Threats to give Conflict).

Houserule 6: You must take a few notes before each session, identifying likely plot points that will/should/could come up in the session that are basic "adventuring protocol" that are Conflict worthy. "Well, these guards will try to cuff them, if they physically resist it, that's starting a fight - 1 Conflcit ea.", "They have to get in this building, and stealing the Janitos key is the easiest way in. They steal that, that's stealing - 3 Conflcit ea. cuz that Janitor loses his job for losing that key and can't feed his family.", "The PCs are infiltrating this facility in the vents. They see a scene in this room where a prisoner is being summarily executed without trial (murdered). If they don't stop it - risking exposure of their infiltration, that's Knowing Inaction - 1 Conflict ea.", "This contact WILL NOT give up his source for any price. But he can't stand pain... They coerce him they get the info but that's Coercion - 2 Conflict ea.", "They just knocked these Minions out, they're gonna wake up and identify the PCs faces to the Inquisitors. Only way to prevent that is killing them... that's murder. Will they do it?", and so on... Always remembering HR2.

Follow these houserules and you should have a highly functional Morality game going on in your campaign.

My Group uses a simplified variation of the Strife system that LoT5R uses. My GM wanted morality to function more like obligation and duty in game since he tends to have difficulty preparing detailed scenarios for each of us and our group is full of Role-Players who don't necessarily like the meta-gaming aspects of the FFG system of Morality. Also we have a mixed group of AoR, EoE and FaD meaning he needs something more robust and less reliant on his own preparations than the morality mechanic as presented. We created this system after many tries of bending and twisting the old morality methods and to no major avail. This is especially true when considering our GMs style as being a bit more hands off and presenting us with situations/problems to react/find solutions for rather than actively trying to engage our morality. We tried @emsquared 's suggestions combined with other house-rules (such as rolling one die for all morality for all characters, which are great by the way, use them if your group is better about preparation than we are) and though we did get better results it exhausted our busy GM to do so we all devised a system that works better for our group.

Here is the simplified version of those rules. The system isn't actually that complicated but it does have one additional moving part that can make things a bit more difficult to understand until you actually play around with it. A player's morality is calculated as normal under the additional rules at the start of the game. From there each character is given an additional stat called turmoil whose threshold is their natural strain threshold (basically excluding items). The player begins the game with a turmoil value of half their strain threshold to indicate their stance in the force. Not in conflict but not in balance. This turmoil value is synonymous with duty or obligation and is the value responsible for triggering a character's morality in a similar fashion as the duty/obligation rules. Turmoil always resets to half that strain threshold when an emotional outburst (turmoil = strain threshold) occurs or when a character achieves peace (tumoil = 0). Tumoil carries over between sessions as our GM uses it to see who's morality may trigger. i.e states of high turmoil increase the chance of morality triggering before a session and leading to greater swings in morality.

During the events of the session the GM on the fly rules a character's actions as peace generating or turmoil causing events. These events are minor in context of the force. Things such as Lying, Knowing inaction, and using fear as a weapon but for just reasons (such as stopping violence), succumbing to fear, etc. This value is determined by the GM like conflict was originally and has a range of 1-5 turmoil can be generated per action. Invoking the Dark Side generates 1 turmoil per dark pip used, in addition to the strain and destiny point cost. If a character's turmoil value meets or exceeds their strain threshold they undergo an emotional breakdown. The character gives into their emotions and generates a large pool of conflict. To resist this the character makes a Daunting (dicipline or cool) check (still working on how difficulty upgrades work in that context and what generates them). The value of this pool is obtained by rolling a die with the number of dice corresponding for the severity of the action. For instance a necessary white lie might only cause 1d4 to be rolled if that is what caused the breakdown. Using a darkside power (i.e force choke to cause harm) an enemy may cause anywhere between a 1d6 to 1d8 to be generated depending on how vicious the character was, ruthless killing may generate more if it was not done in self defense. Basically ANY morally questionable (not just evil) act is treated as if it might put the character in turmoil and may be the event that sends the character into an overly emotional state where they can't control their emotions generating conflict.

Likewise events can reduce turmoil. However it is harder to reduce turmoil with peace than the reverse. successful meditation reduces turmoil. This takes time and effort that cannot be dedicated to other tasks just like crafting or shopping. Other ways to reduce turmoil include performing minor selfless actions. Stopping violence without violence, overcoming fear (successful fear checks), telling the truth even if it is to your disadvantage. Again the 1-5 scale is used but the GM hands these out far less frequently and they need to be obvious minor ways that positive morality was invoked. The key to have this system work is that turmoil needs to be generated more easily than it is reduced and reducing it requires costs to the character. If a character reduces their turmoil to zero they must make a daunting discipline/cool check and they succeed they will gain harmony equal to the number of successes

Instead of random die rolls at the end of each session we use turmoil and peace as the generator of Conflict/Harmony. Harmony is the light points that increases morality, conflict decreases morality. Conflict and Harmony are more rarely generated in our system and are reserved for larger moments OR when a character's morality has been triggered. Sparing a hated foe and taking the high ground, Helping get others to safety in a dangerous situation without violence.. Killing a helpless foe mercilessly generates conflict. Actively harming others verbally or physically, using violence as a first resort, and using fear not only as a weapon but to also psychologically harm your opponents. the scale here for our group tends to run between 1-5 conflict/harmony for major actions and triggered morality. This does slow down the morality system a little bit but it really slows down light-side gain and really amplifies the slippery slope of the dark side.

Meditation: we introduced a new rule of meditation. This allows a character to alter their turmoil as they see fit. Generally and in our games it is used to decrease turmoil though. When you make a meditation roll you must spend several hours meditating and it can only be done meaningfully once per day. This is similar to the crafting/shopping rules. This check is similar to a medicine check for wounds in terms of how it scales with difficulty. The lower your turmoil the easier it is to reduce said turmoil with meditation. However it can only be done once a session at that difficulty. Every additional mediation upgrades the difficulty of the next meditation during that session. Triumphs allow one to gain harmony. Despairs can be spent by the GM on conflict during these morality rolls.

We also introduced ways for our GM to on the fly introduce story moments. He can spend two threat on any roll a FS character makes to give that character one turmoil. Likewise a FS character can spend 2 advantage to reduce his turmoil by one. Usually this is accompanied by a narrative about what the character might have seen or done to trigger that turmoil gain/reduction. It does act as an advantage sink though which is definitely very useful at higher XP thresholds.

We are still working out the Kinks with this system but it seems to work well for us. We tend to dislike meta-gaming and we also have a GM who doesn't do as much preparation other than the story outline and the different encounters we have. meaning the morality system just wasn't working out for us. If you can get the Vanilla Morality system working that is probably ideal, however these extra moving parts and the extra rules we have means it does work much better on the fly or during improvisation, especially with characters from other systems mixed in.

Ugh, where's my 'ill' emoji when I need it

I'd like to give thanks to Lady Absol for eloquently explaining our F&D Morality system! She certainly did it better than I could!

We had extensive talks about how we handled Obligation and Duty before F&D came out. We ended up removing the numbers on these, so it was a no-brainer we'd do the same on Morality. Our aims were as follows:

a) eliminate book-keeping. A clunky 1990's system feels odd in what's supposed to be a free-flowing narrative game. The Conflict mini-game feels really weird. By simply tracking what 'stance' a character is in, it greatly reduces keeping track of numbers.

b) eliminates arguments. I tired of 'alignment arguments' back in D&D. I want to spend precious table-time enjoying the game. So this means no player debate about whether an action was 'enthusiastic' or 'reckless'. The system is player-driven and the choices they make determine current 'stance'.

c) Let's use what F&D gave us. They gave us an intriguing game where - by default - you're not 'Sith' or 'Jedi', you're a Force Adept exploring the galaxy and learning about yourself and your powers. The game offers an intriguing system where 'Light-side' is not automatically 'Saint' and 'Dark-side' is not automatically 'Baby-eater'. So let's use that. Even by RAW, you can make a character who has an interesting mix of personality motivations.

Problem is... RAW only rewards a rush to one of the extremes. We wanted rules that allow a character to explore their personality without being penalised for it.

And that's the crux of an F&D game. Even if you fight for a cause or just for yourself, an F&D character's story is essentially a journey of the Self. You're exploring who you are, and your connection to the Force and the galaxy. Are you a burned-out Sentinel Jedi, anguished over the blood on your hands and the terrible things you've done for the Greater Good? Are you a Sith vigilante fighting tyranny and dictators and those who abuse their powers? Are you one of the Followers of the Temple, seeking self-enlightenment through Good Samaritanism, narcotics and the pleasures of the flesh? Or are you wandering the galaxy as a new two-being Tradition, with a small potted plant, healing the spiritual damage caused by the Galactic Civil War? Either way, you're discovering who you are and how you connect to the Force and the galaxy. Good and evil, law and chaos, your choices determine where you stand and how you deal with things.

Our solution likely isn't for everyone - it doesn't even try to match the binary nature of the movies, because we were going for something wholly different, in line maybe with a more Eastern philosophy. But it's easy to use and remember, it has no book-keeping or stat-tracking, and it's wholly driven by player choices. It allows you to explore your own extremes without penalising you for doing so.

Also, as a minor note, one of the things that came out of our conversations was that we never actually see a slow descent or redemption in the movies or games. Forgiveness is instant and immediate, as is 'falling to the Dark side'. Also, both happen fairly regularly with long-standing characters and there's seldom any consequences of it. Someone actually suggested this system as a joke to parody the endless Heel-Face turns in canon, , and we were surprised how well it worked when we treated it seriously.

Anyway, if any of this helps someone looking for something different, I'm happy. It's likely that this system could be 'gamed' but only if you have poor players, in which case it's the least of your worries. And why would you even do that in a narrative game anyway?

On 2/21/2018 at 9:42 AM, Absol197 said:

Well, since Lady Marcy ( @Maelora ) isn't feeling well and might not be around for a bit, I'd be delighted to explain the houserule she uses, and which I have adopted for my games!

While the Force as presented to us in the films is great, the Good vs. Evil nature of the Light and Dark is a bit...trite by now. Marcy and I both were looking for a variation that was more in-line with the Buddhist teachings of balance that the original concept of the Force was drawn from: A Yin-Yang, rather than Heaven vs. ****. So each character has both Light and Dark inside them, explores both during the game, and whichever they are more drawn to doesn't determine if they're bad people or not, only their actions determine that.

Marcy has said that the system she developed was based on the old Warhammer RPG that FFG used to do. I've not played, but the basic idea is that every character has two "Stances:" Light Stance and Dark Stance. When you're in Light Stance, you draw on white pips on Force dice, and need to spend Destiny Points and suffer strain to use the black pips. When you're in Dark Stance, it's the opposite: you draw on black pips, and need Destiny Points and strain to use the white ones.

The two Stances represent your current state of mind: Light is calm, peaceful, reflective, while Dark is active, passionate, in-the-moment. Each character picks one stance as their default: at the start of every session, and between scenes when they've had some time to rest and reset, that's the Stance they end up in. However, any actions they take can cause them to change Stance. Someone who defaults to Light Stance can nonetheless be changed to Dark if they end up in a situation where they start acting in a "darker" way, and Dark siders can change to drawing on the Light side in those moments when they find that peaceful, centered moment.

With this system, Morality doesn't exist, there is no number at all. You're in one Stance or the other, and your actions determine when you change.

Of course, how does that affect things that run off of Conflict? Well, in general, Conflict is disregarded. But for actual Force abilities that deal with it, the rule is as follows: if an ability would normally cause Conflict when you use it (including Conflict talents), you must be in Dark Stance to use that ability. If an ability has a restriction (like Heal's restriction that only Light-siders can use it, or Protect's restriction that Dark-siders can only Protect themselves), those remain. So to use Harm, you have to be in Dark Stance (because it causes Conflict), and to use Heal, you have to be in Light Stance (because it is restricted to Light siders). Conflict talents like Baleful Gaze and Terrify are likewise restricted.

The one other thing is Emotional Strength/Weakness, and Paragons. Characters retain their Emotional Strength/Weakness, except they're renamed Morality and Passion. If your character's actions are strongly aligned with their Morality (such as Courage, Love, Compassion, etc.), they temporarily become a Light Paragon: they switch to Light Stance, flip a Destiny Point to Light side, and gain +2 to their strain threshold for the duration that they continue to act according to their Morality. If they manage to stay like that for more than one scene in a row, they flip a Destiny Point at the beginning of each scene.

If they act strongly in accordance with their Passion (Anger, Fear, Jealousy), they become a Dark Paragon briefly: They switch to Dark Stance if they weren't already in it, ADD a Dark Side Destiny Point to the pool, and gain +2 wound threshold and -2 strain threshold for the time their a Paragon. As before, if they remain Dark Paragon for multiple scenes in a row, they continue to add a new Dark Side Destiny Point to the pool every scene.

And that's it! I like it a lot; I don't have time to delve into the philosophy of it (hopefully Lady Marcy can help with that, if she's feeling up to it ), but I like this variation a bunch! It gives you the ability to explore both aspects of your character without getting bogged down in another sliding scale of numbers.

that is an epic way to do (or really avoid) morality.......yoink

6 hours ago, Maelora said:

*Awesomeness*

And this is why Marcy is the best !

@Absol197 and @Maelora It is an interesting ruleset you have devised there. Being a purely narrative system I can definitely see how it solves many of the problems with the vanilla morality system that it seems some groups have. It does fit well with the established movie information now that you mention it and if you rework duty and obligation like you stated you have then i think it would fit fine in a game. I wouldn't use it for my personal though. I love narrative RPGs but i'm not sure how i like purely narrative game rules (I really hated playing the FATE system). However this seems like a good change and a sensible change to make a more narrative morality/duty/obligation system.

This is an intriguing system with merit, but I do have one question. At what point do you determine the point of no return, when someone relies on the dark for so long or just consistently does willful evil that they are just fallen?

2 hours ago, Woobyluv said:

This is an intriguing system with merit, but I do have one question. At what point do you determine the point of no return, when someone relies on the dark for so long or just consistently does willful evil that they are just fallen?

Assuming you meant that for Marcy and I and not for Earl of Madness... well, that's kind of the point. This Morality system isn't meant to be Good vs. Evil, so there is no point of no return, and the Stance you default to doesn't determine if you're a hero or a villain. Now, it's definitely easier to be a villain in Dark Stance, as it tends to draw on emotions that can lead one to dangerous or immoral actions, but Dark =/= Evil, and just as importantly, Light =/= Good in this system.

You could be a horrendous Force-wielding mass-murderer, but if you somehow do it from a place of peace and tranquility, your primary Stance will still probably be Light stance. Alternatively, you could be the embodiment of Justice, the hero of all and an almost literal Saint, Good with a capital "G" by any measure. But if you draw your strength from Righteous Fury, you most likely default to Dark Stance.

Now, if the character experiences something that changes who they are on a fundamental level, then their default Stance could certainly change. It would have to be something massive, though. For example, if one considers that Bruce Wayne was a fairly happy kid, you might say he defaulted to Light Stance before his parents died, and their murder was so wrenching that it changed him irrevocably, and he defaulted to Dark Stance from then on out. But things like that should be very rare, probably once-per-character-arc, if at that. And it's entirely a narrative thing - no steady crawl of numbers is going to change you on a level that soul-deep.

EDIT: I suppose the point of no return, such as it exists, is the moment when your character who defaults to Dark Stance decides to stop performing actions that would cause them to flip to Light Stance. That makes it a choice (albeit likely a subconscious one), rather than a rule telling you you're now a horrible person. Better to know you are through your actions than through math homework, right ?