Good vs. Evil

Or “Why Adding Morality Can Enhance A Game”

 

Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos:  some generic terms for generic moral sets.  Nearly all role-playing games have some sort of alignment system embedded within the rules.  Some systems define the terms very specifically and others are much more loose and leave a lot of room for interpretation by players and game master alike.  Unfortunately these generic moral sets do little more than help determine who is the bad-guy and who is the good-guy.  In many campaigns the alignment is either ignored (how frequently does alignment matter in a hack and slash game), used as a justification for a character’s action (“But my character is Chaotic Good!  Killing the pick pocket for the better good does not bother him in the slightest!”) or as a way for the GM to keep the players under control (“I’m sorry, but killing everyone in the temple mercilessly is evil, being good your character loses some experience”).  While all of these uses have their place at a given time, as a group they are found sadly lacking.

 

Society is more than just good versus evil or law versus chaos, no; society is more complicated than that.  Each culture has its own, unique, moral structure which cannot easily be placed in some two dimensional box, so why aren’t games set up to deal with this?  The easy answer is that it would be complicated and be a lot of work to deal with: and I can’t say that I disagree.  The more complicated answer would probably be that gaming companies don’t want to put themselves in the position of being social arbitrators, discussing the various advantages and shortcomings of different societies: once again I can’t say I disagree with them.  So how do we compensate for the wishy-washy, mechanical and formulated morality found in most role-playing games?  I’ve been putting some thought into this and how it can best be worked out for gaming.

 

Rather than aligning the moral set of the characters within the generic boxes created by most gaming companies, the players should be required to write out their character’s particular moral code, with some specificity.  Does the character prescribe to a ten-commandments-like moral code? Does the character fit an ends justify the means approach?  How do they view the world around them?  What do they base their decisions on?  This might seem like a daunting task, but the goal is not to overwhelm the gm or players, but to force them to think about what they do and why.  I recommend creating a list of questions that the players need to answer before getting a campaign started.  The gm should have an idea as to what aspects are important in the campaign and should tailor the questions appropriately.

 

Now that the characters have a moral code in place, the gm can determine whether or not the player is violating their moral code and what the consequences for doing so should be.  I favor a ten point system where each infraction is awarded a number of points equal to the severity of the infraction.  When a player has reached ten points then they must suffer some consequences: Experience Penalty, Negative Reaction Adjustment, etc.  The character can atone for their moral lapse in some way and in the same vein can get rid of points by maintaining a strong moral position and setting an example.  If ever the character decides to undergo some sort of a moral conversion the player must let the gm know that they wish to do this and the gm can set some sort of trial or hardship that must be passed before the conversion can take place.  Trials can range from quests to personal sacrifices; whatever the gm and player decide would be appropriate.  I’ve found that this system works well, because it is a little more free-style and can be used to cover for all of the moral spectrum.

 

No character is an island, and a character’s moral code will be shaped by the society that they have come from.  Keeping this in mind it is important for the gm to figure out the average moral position for any given society.  Yes, this can create a considerable amount of work for the gm, but the amount of work is totally predicated on the gm’s personal vision and how small a societal unit he/she wants to work with.  Creating the moral code of a nation may be easier and more flexible than creating the moral code for a county or city.  When it comes to towns and cities I tend to just make templates moral codes for a given nation and modify them with a little tweaking for any special locations.

 

So why use moral codes instead of generic alignment.  First it’s more realistic.  Good, evil, law and chaos are all big, abstract concepts that are left wide open for interpretation.  I think they work well for creating a general sense of what the character’s moral code might be, but something more specific is really needed.  People don’t think in terms of good and evil for the most part, they think in terms of right and wrong, and boy is that a subjective set of standards.

 

Second, using morality as a standard helps generate and stimulate questions of right and wrong amongst characters and players.  The characters, and players by extension, will have to think about what they are going to do rather than just dive in headfirst.  Our personal moral codes lead us through life, why would our characters be any different?

 

Finally, it lends itself well to considering the position of others.  Gaming worlds will not be so black and white anymore.  There will be more shades of gray involved, which is much more like the real world.  People with different moral codes will have to be able to work together, which means that the character’s will have to deal with the moral codes of others and moral codes that are different, but not necessarily opposed to their own.

 

Moral discussions are often found lacking in gaming (at least by my experience) and it is about time they started happening.  People learn from what it is they surround themselves with, and why shouldn’t gaming be used to help stimulate greater social conscience?  Role-playing games are often attacked because they are portrayed as morally ambiguous or negative.  If morality is given a stronger place in gaming, perhaps some of its detractors will become supporters in the end.