THat's not what I meant lol. I meant the game is more challenging playing as a light sider. In my experience.

I want to find a way to balance that. SOme sort of ...corruption mechanic or something.

On 10/24/2018 at 5:13 PM, Luahk said:

As established. I am in agreement with with that sentiment and my previous post about my PCs simply having fewer and fewer lines that they will not cross is in line with them not being 'evil' just very willing to get the job done.

They aren't 'murder hobos' lol you guys with these ******* sayings get me. It's just that I want something that challenges them the sameway it does for the light sided folk.  So far all I can do is push them in a way that the Imperials are q  uite aware that they'll be seen as expendable and so they don't like them and it has building consequences narratively and in leadership checks. 

If that's how you want to play it, then you need the aforementioned downward spiral of negative consequences for "doing anything to get the job done." It starts out small and personal, but eventually the fallout is too great that they cannot get the job done by being evil because they're sacrificing everything they're supposedly trying to work for. Oops. "Hey, you destroyed the Empire, but you also destroyed the Rebellion. Good news, however, there's a power vacuum just waiting for you to fill. Enjoy your Iron Throne of Sorrow..." That's how those stories go.

2 hours ago, Lorne said:

If that's how you want to play it, then you need the aforementioned downward spiral of negative consequences for "doing anything to get the job done." It starts out small and personal, but eventually the fallout is too great that they cannot get the job done by being evil because they're sacrificing everything they're supposedly trying to work for. Oops. "Hey, you destroyed the Empire, but you also destroyed the Rebellion. Good news, however, there's a power vacuum just waiting for you to fill. Enjoy your Iron Throne of Sorrow..." That's how those stories go.

Another thing to consider is the wear and strain on the human (or alien) psyche after prolonged acts that are considered morally questionable. The reality is that most people who do bad things, or "whatever to get the job done", don't sustain a healthy, balanced psyche over time. They very often become Conflicted about their actions, and how to deal with them.

This is an issue that I see come up with gaming tables where players want to be an anti-hero, or the "bad guy". The extra layer of disconnect (sitting at a table with friends eating snacks while the character is in a soul rending ordeal that will permanently alter their psyche), makes for a lot of players that just don't actually consider that. They shrug, and basically think to themselves (it's not bothering me, therefore my PC isn't bothered by it either). When it's far more likely that their character is VERY bothered by what they did, unless they are simply playing a homicidal sociopath. But if they are trying to be a "good guy" who is doing bad things, a lot of consideration should be put towards how the person would actually DEAL with the things they've done.

To me, that's what the Conflict/Morality meter is supposed to try and help with, or at least in theory. It's supposed to give you a measure to gauge how fractured, and Conflicted your PC is about what they are doing, and how that manifests in their playstyle. You don't even have to make much of a big leap to see examples of this, as pretty much all of storytelling, that involves a characters "dance with the devil" kind of morality, shows this. Star Wars is a great example. Anakin doesn't become an emotionless monster as he falls, he starts to lash out erratically at those around him. He starts to show signs of poor hygiene (at least to me his hair started looking really greasy and unkempt in Revenge), he starts seeing plots and schemes all around him in those he used to trust. He starts hiding more and more things from his friends, people who might've been able to help him if he'd confided in them. And that's just Star Wars. As much as I hate to use Breaking Bad, it's a great example of someone who is going down that Morality scale, trying to "do the right thing", or "whatever to get the job done". And it effects him deeply. And not just him, those around him suffer as well.

And this is where I think most players (at least that I've played with), fail to bring what's needed to the table. They don't want to play Walter White, not really. They want to play the romantic, pop culture "he's a badass" Walter White that society has propped up in meme culture and what not. They don't want to play up the idea that he spent hours crying in a basement after killing someone for the first time (most players don't even bat an eyelash at killing in a game), they don't want to play up the idea that he might become an abusive husband to his pregnant wife (most players won't even bother having a family, because that ties them down with *gasp* backstory and plot hooks!), they don't want to play up the idea that what he is making is making the world around him far worse, due to the powerful narcotic he has unleashed upon the world, they just want to pretend they are Scarface, so they can quote "Say hello to my little friend!".

On 10/24/2018 at 7:13 PM, Luahk said:

They aren't 'murder hobos' lol you guys with these ******* sayings get me.

The term is used because a lot of players typically make characters without any family ties, and no actual place to call home. And they typically have no problem with, and sometimes a distinct desire to kill things. Thus murderhobos. They just wander the galaxy, homeless, without family, killing people that get in their way. I'd like to say it's an inaccurate description of a typical PC....but I've been gaming for 20ish years, so I can't really say it's not been what I typically see around me.

26 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

(sitting at a table with friends eating snacks while the character is in a soul rending ordeal that will permanently alter their psyche), makes for a lot of players that just don't actually consider that. They shrug, and basically think to themselves (it's not bothering me, therefore my PC isn't bothered by it either)

Nailed it. Some players get this and some don't. It's the players that don't that pose the biggest challenge and necessitate a mechanic.

16 hours ago, Luahk said:

THat's not what I meant lol. I meant the game is more challenging playing as a light sider. In my experience.

I want to find a way to balance that. SOme sort of ...corruption mechanic or something.

There is.

It's called Conflict.

If the GM is doing their part and putting moral dilemmas in front of the group, ones where taking and sticking to the moral high ground makes things more difficult for the group, but taking the easier/less difficult option requires doing things that earn Conflict, then it works as intended. But if the GM isn't doing that, and simply offers choices with no real moral dilemma or consequences, then yes the Morality/Conflict mechanic falls apart because the GM isn't doing their part. The reward for making and sticking to the light side decisions is less Conflict points per session and a pretty steady ascension to light side paragon status.

I've often said that F&D's Morality system is one that requires player engagement to properly function, but it also requires the GM to pull their weight. It's a contrast to the far more "hands off" mechanics employed by Obligation and Duty, where the GM simply has to roll a set of percentiles to see if something triggered, figure out how it works into whatever adventure they've planned, apply whatever mechanical penalty/bonus is called for, and that's it .

Morality on the other hand requires the GM to consider how the PCs' decisions will impact not only the world around them but the PCs themselves. KungFuFerret brings up an excellent point in how a number of players want to be Walter White or Tony "Scarface" Montana or Frank "Punisher" Castle without also having to deal with the psychological fallout that comes from the lifestyles those sorts of individuals live and helps make those characters a lot more interesting.

5 hours ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

There is.

It's called Conflict.

I

Physical I meant @Donovan Morningfire

9 hours ago, Lorne said:

If that's how you want to play it, then you need the aforementioned downward spiral of negative consequences for "doing anything to get the job done." It starts out small and personal, but eventually the fallout is too great that they cannot get the job done by being evil because they're sacrificing everything they're supposedly trying to work for. Oops. "Hey, you destroyed the Empire, but you also destroyed the Rebellion. Good news, however, there's a power vacuum just waiting for you to fill. Enjoy your Iron Throne of Sorrow..." That's how those stories go.

This i do. But a good rper or a character that does not spiral out of control can manage to inspire through action and his ends. History is filled with leaders who were tyrants but their achievements meant their followers were willing to stand by them anyway.
In Lore...especially in Old Republic Lore..this is very true.
Especially as certain things can become normalised by the amount of people doing it and the culture you're in. The man in the high castle depicts a believeable Reich that kills the infirm for the sake of those to live. It's an extreme but when we see the way that people living in the Reich live we can believe it.
The Sith Empire is based in part on Empires from real life with an Emperor and Sith who have not only saved the species but are steadily delivering on their promise of dominating the galaxy thus the cruelty becomes the norm.
Yes the Morality system can work and yes I pose the challenge of the effects of actions. That's not what i'm seeking guidance on nor is it why I responded to this post.

Keeping in Lore.
Conflict covers Darth Bane in the first book feeling hesitation..regret in the casino and even being scared of his own power. He's not a bright stalwart but he's not a bad dude. Whereas much later and further down the track he deliberately inspires terror to get a brief bump in power.
It does not cover the consequences of prolonged use of the darkside. That is what I want. A system which does that.

6 hours ago, KungFuFerret said:

The term is used because a lot of players typically make characters without any family ties, and no actual place to call home. And they typically have no problem with, and sometimes a distinct desire to kill things. Thus murderhobos. They just wander the galaxy, homeless, without family, killing people that get in their way. I'd like to say it's an inaccurate description of a typical PC....but I've been gaming for 20ish years, so I can't really say it's not been what I typically see around me.

I am now amused and enlightened thanks.

6 hours ago, KungFuFerret said:

And this is where I think most players (at least that I've played with), fail to bring what's needed to the table. They don't want to play Walter White, not really. They want to play the romantic, pop culture "he's a badass" Walter White that society has propped up in meme culture and what not. They don't want to play up the idea that he spent hours crying in a basement after killing someone for the first time (most players don't even bat an eyelash at killing in a game), they don't want to play up the idea that he might become an abusive husband to his pregnant wife (most players won't even bother having a family, because that ties them down with *gasp* backstory and plot hooks!), they don't want to play up the idea that what he is making is making the world around him far worse, due to the powerful narcotic he has unleashed upon the world, they just want to pretend they are Scarface, so they can quote "Say hello to my little friend!".

Sorry for now triple posting but I am at work and somehow missed this entirely.

Err..as I covered I am blessed at my table to not run into this yet and so didn't need this explaining to me. But I thought i'd just respond and say that whilst i have made and heard others make that same point lots of times it's not been put quite like that. Nice.

1 minute ago, Luahk said:

Sorry for now triple posting but I am at work and somehow missed this entirely.

Err..as I covered I am blessed at my table to not run into this yet and so didn't need this explaining to me. But I thought i'd just respond and say that whilst i have made and heard others make that same point lots of times it's not been put quite like that. Nice.

I wasn't really directing the comment regarding your table specifically, hence why I didn't quote your comment for that post. It was more of a general statement of my thoughts on the Conflict/Morality system, and any similar system in gaming really, and where I think the biggest flaw in it is, that usually leads to the most complaints about it. Before this system, it was the World of Darkness game lines that all had some Morality component, and as someone who played those games for years, table and in online-forum/chat venues, I can assure you the same debates and criticisms come up, over and over.

I think the biggest issue with any system like the Morality one, is that it's really only optimal when it's a two-way agreement between the GM and player. But a lot of people view it as some kind of punishment system for "bad playing" or whatever.

2 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

I wasn't really directing the comment regarding your table specifically, hence why I didn't quote your comment for that post. It was more of a general statement of my thoughts on the Conflict/Morality system, and any similar system in gaming really, and where I think the biggest flaw in it is, that usually leads to the most complaints about it. Before this system, it was the World of Darkness game lines that all had some Morality component, and as someone who played those games for years, table and in online-forum/chat venues, I can assure you the same debates and criticisms come up, over and over.

I think the biggest issue with any system like the Morality one, is that it's really only optimal when it's a two-way agreement between the GM and player. But a lot of people view it as some kind of punishment system for "bad playing" or whatever.

The word Punishment here is the one I focused on.

You said earlier most players in your experience. I haven't experienced that in table top RPGs but in other roleplay venues I seem to run into it ...every time which is why in general I don't make as much time for it these days. It's my biased and elitist opinion that those people are not prepared to roleplay in as much as they just want the story to unfold in the fashion they see it and want to play that out. Like a WWE event or something.

2 minutes ago, Luahk said:

The word Punishment here is the one I focused on.

You said earlier most players in your experience. I haven't experienced that in table top RPGs but in other roleplay venues I seem to run into it ...every time which is why in general I don't make as much time for it these days. It's my biased and elitist opinion that those people are not prepared to roleplay in as much as they just want the story to unfold in the fashion they see it and want to play that out. Like a WWE event or something.

Eh, I think it's just more conflicting goals from roleplaying. I don't think there is any "right" or "wrong" way to play any type of game, unless you are just totally going against the stated theme of the game. But even then...*shrugs*, it's not my table, so if they are having fun, who am I to judge? The issue is when the conflicting goals are at the same table. Again, this is just my personal experience, but I mostly focus on the story, drama, and narrative aspect of gaming. I like the theatrics of it. I'm the kind of GM that will go find audio clips on youtube for ambient background while I'm playing up a scene for effect. I'll prowl deviantart for concept images to convey the alien landscape I'm trying to put my players into. I'll adopt voices and physical mannerisms to my NPC's (for my own narrative help, and to convey a sense of it to my players). When I have a villain give an Evil Monologue, I'm hoping one of my players will reply in kind, with a Heroic Retort, all while flying in on a flaming airship, piloted by the sole surviving child of one of my villain's previous slaughters. I WANT that level of dramatic play to it, because that's what roleplaying is to ME. But, not everyone wants that. Some want to just make a cool character, run them through combat simulations, and see how effective they are, while chit chatting with friends and eating snacks. And the story part of it, is secondary, even tertiary for them.

Which is fine. There's nothing wrong with that style of play, but it does make for frustration, if I've spent time trying to drum up a reaction from my players, and some of them (if not all of them), just stare at me blankly and say "Yeah I roll to shoot him". With zero reciprocation of the drama part. Then I, as the GM, feel like I'm putting too much effort into it, because I'm apparently the only one that finds that part interesting, so I lose interest in GMing the table, etc etc. But if everyone wants to just do the simulation grind, then that type of game style can be fun for everyone.

Again, in my experience, a lot of the people i play with IRL, frequently treat table gaming like a video game. They interact with NPC's at a minimal level, to obtain a quest, or an item, or a clue, and then that's it. The NPC resource has been tapped, and is no longer of relevance to them. Just like in a lot of MMO's. Heck I've done it myself sometimes when I'm not paying attention to my character. Which is fine, plenty of gaming systems are tailored to this kind of playstyle. Like Gloomhaven, which is a really cool game btw, but the narrative aspect of it is sort of secondary to the scenarios you are playing. You CAN inject roleplay into it, but it's hardly a requirement.

Seriously everyone, Gloomhaven is a cool boardgame/RPG system. It's kind of a neat hybrid between storytelling, and simulation gaming.

Anyway. Yeah, gaming can be weird, depending on who is at your table. I'm glad your players are more of the "we take our drama/actions seriously" vein, as that is usually the best kind, when exploring morality heavy stories and campaigns.

2 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

Eh, I think it's just more conflicting goals from roleplaying. I don't think there is any "right" or "wrong" way to play any type of game, unless you are just totally going against the stated theme of the game. But even then...*shrugs*, it's not my table, so if they are having fun, who am I to judge? The issue is when the conflicting goals are at the same table. Again, this is just my personal experience, but I mostly focus on the story, drama, and narrative aspect of gaming. I like the theatrics of it. I'm the kind of GM that will go find audio clips on youtube for ambient background while I'm playing up a scene for effect. I'll prowl deviantart for concept images to convey the alien landscape I'm trying to put my players into. I'll adopt voices and physical mannerisms to my NPC's (for my own narrative help, and to convey a sense of it to my players). When I have a villain give an Evil Monologue, I'm hoping one of  my players will reply in kind, with a Heroic Retort, all while flying in on a flaming airship, piloted by the sole surviving child of one of my villain's previous slaughters. I WANT that level of dramatic play to it, because that's what roleplaying is to ME. But, not everyone wants that. Some want to just make a cool character, run them through combat simulations, and see how effective they are, while chit chatting with friends and eating snacks. And the story part of it, is secondary, even tertiary for them.

Only two of us DM and we do....everything here.
But I do take issue with just the ....video gamey obtain quest...fight baddies...complete quest stuff. I don't find that fun. I was more reffering to people that aren't interested in anything other than...erm..winning? Like they get upset at things that don't fit in with their plans for the direction they had the person growing in I guess.

We treat the RP table as a real working universe and try, where possible, to add even more detail to the setting so that it feels like something you'd encounter in reality. (with space wizards)
I tried, long before I knew this existed, to RP on SWTOR and everyone was RPIng as Darth or Master this. Everyone had already their own Fleet and was super important and pals with main character x-y and It baffled me how many people came onto a game where thousands of people were playing and expected to be playing as integral pieces of the organism. Back in line with your post earlier everyone wants to play that general with the fleet but they don't want to do the hard graft of working through the ranks of figuring out resource allocation and eventually getting trusted with the responsibility of a large group of vessels that represent a giant investment from their nations. Just before I stopped playing a character just claimed outright that he had a brand new fleet gifted him directly from Darth Marr. I asked if he'd done anything with his guild to substantiate that claim..some background RP to help flesh the story out of how he got this incredible responsibility. He just told me OOC that him and a couple others felt like he deserved it. I get that...I just don't want to be part of it. So I left. Much as now I would really struggle with someone who isn't willing to go through the hard bits to get to the cool. THat, to me, makes it cooler. Without it I feel it's sad and hollow.

On 10/10/2018 at 8:50 AM, penpenpen said:

Just to make things clear before anyone answers, if your ONLY reply to this topic is going to be pointing out that the morality system sucks, don't bother posting unless you're planning to follow it up with some constructive thoughts and ideas.

On to the topic.

So you character just happened to drop below 30 morality, despite not really going out of their way to do evil stuff, but maybe just spending a little too many dark side pips. Now dark side pips are their standard force power fuel, and as such, regardless of why they're used, Conflict will start adding up at quite an accelerated rate. You character is still not doing evil stuff as such. He's generally quite a nice guy (or at least not terrible), despite his morality plunging down through the single digits.

How would you approach this from an in-game role-playing perspective? Should the GM act a bit as the devil on his shoulder, encouraging him to give into his darker emotions? As he flips a destiny point to the dark side each session, maybe take that and run with it describe his dark side use as, if not malevolent, just wrong, perverting the natural order of things?

Maybe a character shouldn't be able to cross to the dark side without really "earning it" through his actions, instead ending up stuck at 30?

What are your thoughts?

Well it is what it is, might as well enjoy it being evil and all now.

That and; if there is a pressing enough need, those that fall to the dark side can become anti-heroes/anti-villains (the fo rather then immediate villains. There might be a pressing need for several force users to work together; especially in this era when the Inquisition/Empire is simply much bigger then them, thus simply and immediately infighting or splitting up immediately mightn't be viable, there is a big bad empire out there hunting the PC's thus, despite their emotions might have little choice but to continue to work together until the that threat has subsided or one or more factions within that party has accomplished that goal.

Needless to say, I don't expect any alliance between Dark and Natural force wielders to last beyond the need. The former will inevitability conduct twisted self interest business that might require the PC to be alone and the other party, depending on their individual outlooks. Once the emperor dies and the empire has largely subsided? The need that unite them won't no longer. Those anti-heroes might become villains in serving their self interest, or those anti-villains may finally get what they want and abandon's the party in their time of need, or better yet, sticks in the knife and completes the assession to a living GOD! FOR A GOOD CAUSE! GAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAH

*Cough*

Yeah, plenty of compelling angles to keep a party with a dark sider going, just at some point the plot is going to come to a head; the PC's mightn't be the heroes in this setting and some may fall short of the guard posts.