Developing an RPG Morality System

[FROGGEman2]

That's a really good system you got going there!

I think that morality should reset in certain areas of towns, a much lighter take is needed.

See, when I decide to be evil, I always worry. Then I'm forced to play the game again.

But, if my evilness was only present in certain towns, I'd be having a lot more fun.

 

[steelyglint]

That's a really good system you got going there!

I think that morality should reset in certain areas of towns, a much lighter take is needed.

See, when I decide to be evil, I always worry. Then I'm forced to do it again.

But, if my evilness was only present in certain towns, I'd be having a lot more fun.

Yes, part of the fame/infamy system is that your character is only well known in the local area in which he committed the deeds for which he's famous. If you become very famous in an region word will spread to neighboring regions.

Perhaps a bard might spontaneously decide to write an epic poem about the PC. If the PC prefers to keep a low profile (because of the skeletons in his closet) he would have to choose how to deal with the situation. If he wants to make sure the tale is flattering, he might decide to have a little 'chat' with the bard.

 

[dstryfe]

Perhaps in the dictionary sense of the word ruthless one could be ruthless in the pursuit of justice, but not in the context I'm describing (which is perhaps not explained as thoroughly as it could have been).

Context is something I completely overlooked. We even talked of how 'Just' encompassed 'Merciful' and all...

No, I have not looked at the stat system, and yes, I will (the necessity of it is irrelevant). I still maintain that neutral traits should slow the growth rate (both positive and negative) of good and evil traits, especially in light of the one-way oppositions, which can be monkeyed with so that both are maxed (I'm the type of gamer who'd do that, by the way). I'm thinking that good traits could facilitate and hamper growth, for good and evil, respectively, while evil traits are the opposite, and neutral hampers both. Thus, an evil character finds the 'evil points' progressively easier to obtain, but redemption becomes more difficult (a real person might worry more about it than a character, but meh). On the other hand, good characters who slip up find that they aren't hunted for it, and can still keep all of their paladin spells (*shakes fist at the D&D 3.5 dev. team*).

Again, I ought to actually take an in-depth look at the stats before actually suggesting this stuff, but I've gone and done it anyway.

 

[SimuLord]

Have you looked at the traits system in a game like Crusader Kings or Sims 3 to see how the interplay between certain dichotomies can create interesting characters? Both games seem to leave moral/value judgments out of it (except Sims 3's downright parody of "good" and "evil") and just let characters with different traits interact with each other in certain ways.

Mind you, neither game has a real decision system in place, but the underlying traits system is as rich in each case as I've ever seen (and is a MASSIVE improvement over Bethesda's attempts at it in Elder Scrolls games and Fallout 3.)

 

[Valate_v1legacy]

Need to make the nuetrality branch off into insanity and self righeosness as well as good and evil.

 

[Rack]

Sorry to unload a bundle so late on in the topic, but based on where you're going with this I wonder if there's any advantage to drawing a line between Good, Evil and Neutral characteristics. Is Just really a good characteristic? (For that matter Mercy, as its most obvious counterpart seems strangely absent) Are dedications to peace and honesty marks of goodness or selfish moral indulgence? I know you're not interested in moral grey areas but painting such a stark picture seems unnecessary.

 

[steelyglint]

...snip...

I'm not sure I want it to be harder to gain traits based on what other traits you have, unless it's specifically related to opposed traits or something.

And yes, good traits may make it easier to get out of minor crimes. If the character ever gets taken in front of a judge, having many good traits and a reputation for being virtuous would certainly help him.

Have you looked at the traits system in a game like Crusader Kings or Sims 3 to see how the interplay between certain dichotomies can create interesting characters? Both games seem to leave moral/value judgments out of it (except Sims 3's downright parody of "good" and "evil") and just let characters with different traits interact with each other in certain ways.

Mind you, neither game has a real decision system in place, but the underlying traits system is as rich in each case as I've ever seen (and is a MASSIVE improvement over Bethesda's attempts at it in Elder Scrolls games and Fallout 3.)

I haven't played CK or Sims 3 (though I'm familiar with both since I've played a lot of other Paradox games like EU3 or HoI, as well as earlier Sims games). I did like the trait system in the Total War series, which I'm guessing is fairly similar to the one in CK.

Need to make the nuetrality branch off into insanity and self righeosness as well as good and evil.

Even though I removed the Psychotic trait there's probably some insanity present in any character with a broad array of evil traits, at least how modern doctors would describe the character. Self righteousness (to a fault) would be described by the Imperious trait, and if paired with the Pious trait could veer into the bad kind of religious zealotry.

Sorry to unload a bundle so late on in the topic, but based on where you're going with this I wonder if there's any advantage to drawing a line between Good, Evil and Neutral characteristics. Is Just really a good characteristic? (For that matter Mercy, as its most obvious counterpart seems strangely absent) Are dedications to peace and honesty marks of goodness or selfish moral indulgence? I know you're not interested in moral grey areas but painting such a stark picture seems unnecessary.

As long as you're talking about the specific traits, I'm happy to discuss it. The line is drawn partially because it's simply a convenient way for me to group them, and partially because in a civilized society (or at least the society of my setting) the good traits are those that would be considered positive and the evil traits are those that would be considered destructive to society. Evil traits tend to cause harm to others, good traits tend to prevent harm to others or alleviate suffering.

I consider mercy to be a part of justice, and therefore a part of the Just trait. Justice without appropriate mercy can be cruel or vengeful, for example when punishments are meted out only according to the letter of the law as opposed to considering the spirit of the law and the specifics of the certain case. Note that mercy (a component of Just) and forgiveness (a component of Peaceful) are different: mercy is shown to a transgressor by someone who has power over him, forgiveness is shown to a transgressor by a peer or victim of the transgressor.

It's true that a dedication to honesty or peace could potentially be detrimental to society if taken to the extreme. After all, any great city needs non-Peaceful people to stand on the walls and defend it against the barbarians at the gates. You can play a heroic character without him being Honest or Peaceful, or you can reserve your violent actions for cases of self-defense or the defense of others (which would not increase your Violent trait much) and reserve your deceptive actions for cases where the alternative would be harmful to others (which would not increase your Deceptive trait much).

 

[SimuLord]

Have you looked at the traits system in a game like Crusader Kings or Sims 3 to see how the interplay between certain dichotomies can create interesting characters? Both games seem to leave moral/value judgments out of it (except Sims 3's downright parody of "good" and "evil") and just let characters with different traits interact with each other in certain ways.

Mind you, neither game has a real decision system in place, but the underlying traits system is as rich in each case as I've ever seen (and is a MASSIVE improvement over Bethesda's attempts at it in Elder Scrolls games and Fallout 3.)

I haven't played CK or Sims 3 (though I'm familiar with both since I've played a lot of other Paradox games like EU3 or HoI, as well as earlier Sims games). I did like the trait system in the Total War series, which I'm guessing is fairly similar to the one in CK.

Indeed, the TW trait system is very similar to CK's system (and is more dynamic within the game itself since you, the player, generally control the characters directly in TW games where in CK the traits system is event-driven like every other game in the 2D Europa engine series.) Sims 3 works on a similar principle except the traits are predetermined by the player at character creation.