D&D 5E About Morally Correct Outcomes in D&D Adventures [+]

[Shiroiken]

I like moral dilemmas in stories. I do not like having the author tell me what the "correct" interpretation of those stairs is.

Same, but I understand the popularity. In the moment, players really tend to hate moral dilemmas.

I guess I am unclear on what OP is suggesting. Would this be something like having the conclusion of the adventure list different outcomes and sort them by alignment? e.g. the "Lawful Good Ending," the "Chaotic Neutral Ending," etc.?

This is my thought as well. An author that puts forward a "best" outcome had truly make sure players will consider that the best outcome! Putting them in the perspective of alignment is probably the ideal solution (even though people would probably debate that too).

 

[Emoshin]

II guess I am unclear on what OP is suggesting. Would this be something like having the conclusion of the adventure list different outcomes and sort them by alignment? e.g. the "Lawful Good Ending," the "Chaotic Neutral Ending," etc.?

That’s interesting idea, but even in the heyday of the 9 alignments, I don’t know that there was a demand for that. I personally wouldn’t suggest that.

 

[Clint_L]

Same, but I understand the popularity. In the moment, players really tend to hate moral dilemmas.

This is my thought as well. An author that puts forward a "best" outcome had truly make sure players will consider that the best outcome! Putting them in the perspective of alignment is probably the ideal solution (even though people would probably debate that too).

I would reject any alignment-based endings out of hand. The game is moving away from alignments, so it would be strange to impose them on adventures.

So I guess my response is: yes to moral dilemmas and adventures with lots of possible endings, but no to telling DMs and players what the "correct" moral outcomes should be.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I think that adventure writers should aim to include at least one "morally correct" (or at least fitting in with generally "good" aligned morals.)
Even if this means that they would lose out of some of the rewards.
The reason being that a lot of the groups playing adventures will be of generally good aligned characters, and not including a potential good outcome will either lead to the party going completely off the rails of the adventure, or cause a "catch 22" type outcome which would probably regarded as a jerk move by a DM.

As to the moral code or framework to use, the current alignment guidelines for D&D would be a good place to start, simply because that is an existing framework that is already in the game that the players and DM are operating in.

 

[Shiroiken]

I would reject any alignment-based endings out of hand. The game is moving away from alignments, so it would be strange to impose them on adventures.

So I guess my response is: yes to moral dilemmas and adventures with lots of possible endings, but no to telling DMs and players what the "correct" moral outcomes should be.

I agree the concept has problems, but the OP has asked us to accept that concept for this thread, as noted by the [+] request. If you accept the premise of "morally correct" solution(s), you open the can of worms about which morality is superior. The only way to avoid this would be to use the built-in morality system of the game, which is alignment. You might not like it, but alignment based solutions are a far better option than the author simply imposing their personal views on the DM to use.

 

[GreyLord]

tongue in cheek...

I like to end all my campaigns with a TPK. That seems to end them well. Tragedy spawns them on.

Plus, we keep going on and on like the energizer bunny until something says it's time to end it. Nothing says its time to end it then with everyone dead!

That's also pretty moral...I mean...how else would you want a bunch of murder-hobos to end up? Rich and powerful? How is that justice or fair to all those poor humble orcs, goblins, gnolls, demons, and other innocent lives they have slain and killed over the years of their "adventures?"

(above is a jk, tease on how often TPKs tend to end the campaign/adventure for good).

 

[aco175]

I agree the concept has problems, but the OP has asked us to accept that concept for this thread, as noted by the [+] request. If you accept the premise of "morally correct" solution(s), you open the can of worms about which morality is superior. The only way to avoid this would be to use the built-in morality system of the game, which is alignment. You might not like it, but alignment based solutions are a far better option than the author simply imposing their personal views on the DM to use.

I fear that this would still be a problem. We would be asking for the author to decide on what the LG or good morality is, or worse, we would be relying on Wizards to decide and take the author out of it. We have had several threads on this site and still cannot decide much on alignment.

 

[DeviousQuail]

For me, it would be more useful for published adventures to suggest several potential end-states and describe how individuals and factions in the fictional world would perceive the means and the end results of the adventurers' efforts. It would not be useful for me at all for the author to present their own moral assessments.

This is where I stand as well. If you have factions, people, gods, etc as a prevalent part of the adventure there should be descriptions of what they think about a few expected endings.

That being said I wouldn't mind if the author includes what outcomes they think are "good", "bad", or "moral". If the author wants to spend the word count, go for it. We can all agree or disagree as we see fit. I just think it will depend on your intended audience if that's a good move, sales wise.

 

[Steampunkette]

I am not too familiar with that expression, but this is a safe place to discuss, as long as it's part of the +++++ and I think your points are valid! So no worries and all good on my end!

A runner with their knees chopped off in the middle of a race doesn't get far.

It's a positive addition to the thread, but still likely to derail. Either because it shuts down the idea of any author being able to write a universally or even broadly accepted moral ending because any ending is going to be based on their own morality, rather than that of the reader...

Or people arguing about different moral philosophies and identities instead of carrying the conversation further.

 

[aco175]

I wonder if a movie rating PG- R type of thing could work with morality. I recall having this when describing the amount of violence and gore in your game and wonder if it could fit.