Morale

[Man in the Funny Hat]

The violence of your response is intriguing Mr. Hat.

Not violence - vehemence. It's just that I've gone round on this topic before. As I said, for those who want morale rules it's just not going to affect me. People want morale rules and stats, they should game and be happy. Personally, not only do I not see a need for it but I see it as doing something that the DM not only could, but SHOULD be deciding himself.

I like a loose system. So in play, a morale roll is like a reaction roll. Or a wandering monster chart. Or a treasure composition table. None of these are dictating to the DM, but they are results that can be used.

What I've seen with morale as regards D&D is that even those DM's who use them do not use them with any consistency. They ignore the fact that they are there often enough to beg the question of why they think they are in any way necessary. Then when they are used DM's use them more as an excuse. If the DM thinks the monsters should run away for reasons of morale - then they should run away. If the DM NEEDS them to run away, such as to prevent a TPK - then they should run away. Or stay, or change targets, or tactics, or whatever.

I don't think you have built much of a case for your argument.

Not argument - opinion, based on past discussion and personal experience.

Of course, you are free to ignore the rule, and this post and the need for any coherent rebuttal. But if you do, take a step back and chill out first.

I thought I made a clear point of indicating that others could and would do as they will. It's just my opinion that for an RPG morale rules are an outdated concept that actually usurps or dismisses roleplaying authority that should always be actively exercised by the DM. Morale rules cannot possibly encompass all the factors that go into morale on the scale of combat that D&D features. It is the very sort of thing for which D&D was created - for the DM and the players to be the ones to determine what the monsters, NPC's and the PC's themselves do AND WHY.

 

[S'mon]

If the DM thinks the monsters should run away for reasons of morale - then they should run away. If the DM NEEDS them to run away, such as to prevent a TPK - then they should run away.

To prevent a TPK? But the monsters are winning!! That's the last time they should flee!

Seriously, I'd be very annoyed at any DM who had losing monsters fight to the death, while winning monsters turned and fled. That's terrible DMing.

 

[Spatula]

I like the idea of a morale system. As a DM, however, I have never actually managed to play the morale rues as written in AD&D, despite my best intentions to do so. Nor have I ever witnessed another AD&D DM use the morale rules as written. There's just too much going on in a fight to calculate the situational conditions and modifiers each round. That is, each round for each opponent, you have to determine if a morale check is called for, and then figure out what the check actually is, if a check is needed. It's too much.

A more workable system, for me, might involve monsters having a morale rating, along with some guidelines that apply to each rating. But it would be up the DM to figure out what happens ("well, they're Cowardly, but they're defending their home, so...") without involving dice and modifiers.

 

[Kynn]

What do you guys think of the player-facing morale system in 4e D&D?

 

[S'mon]

Why do you think that? This is what I use and I am always looking to improve my mechanics.

1. Will saves are inappropriate because they don't model bravery. Especially obvious in 3e, with the Cleric & Wizard having good Will save, the Fighter having crappy Will. Even a Fortitude save would be better.

2. Because you're modelling a 'break point' in group social dynamics. Either no one flees, or everyone flees. You could roll for every individual NPC then if a majority fail, the group flee. But far better to set a single number and roll against it.

3. A bell curve system such as 2d6 or 2d10 vs target number is much better at modelling the result of a large number of individual decisions leading up to the collective break point, because a small deviation from the target number has a larger impact on whether the group as a whole fights or flees.

 

[LostSoul]

Interesting. Let me describe my system as it stands:

I'm using 4E where the check is 1d20 + (Will Defence - 10) or applicable skill. The leader makes the check. There are a number of triggers (including actions taken during combat) that require a check at the end of each round. Actions taken in the round following a failed morale check are not determined by the system; for example, goblins tend to flee, while hobgoblins often fall back in an organized retreat, and orcs might go berserk. What the failure of the morale check requires is a change in tactics.

I guess what I'm modelling is the NPC leader's ability to direct his troops. One of the reasons I want to use that is because PCs have to make checks for their own troops. I want the PCs to use their character resources (skills) to keep their hirelings in line. (I don't require checks for henchmen.)

This system works in play but I've never been satisfied with it. Any thoughts?

 

[Hassassin]

How about some sort of "morale damage" for the enemy group. Whenever a morale affecting thingy happens, the enemy leader (if one exists) gets to resist (half damage). Once there are no morale points the enemy routs, or if the leader saves, falls back in orderly fashion.

E.g. Goblin: 5 hp, 3 mp. Morale effects: bloodied (-1d6), dead (-3), kill (+1d6).

[sblock=5+1 goblins]5 goblins + leader (+2 morale). Total mp 6 x 3 + 2 = 20. Morale DC 15 (10 + number commanded?).

1st round: 1 goblin bloodied another dead, leader fails save. 2d6+3 = 12 morale damage. 8 mp left.

2nd round: the bloodied goblin dies and another bloodied, leader makes save. (1d6+3) / 2 = 3 morale damage. 5 mp left.

3rd round: an unwounded goblin dies, leader fails save. 1d6+3 = 8 morale damage. The remaining 2+1 goblins rout.[/sblock]

[sblock=1 goblin]1st round: goblin takes 3 damage - bloodied. No leader so automatically fails save. 1d6 = 3 morale damage - routs.

The goblin had a 2/3 chance to rout when bloodied.[/sblock]

 

[NewJeffCT]

I believe their should be a simple, but optional, morale system for monsters and NPCs. While it should ultimately be up to the DM, I like having a baseline to use for various monsters because it gives me an idea of how to play them. If a goblin has poor morale, it may fight differently than a hobgoblin with good morale, which will fight differently than a mindless undead monster with no morale.

There should be some easy to use modifiers as well and a simple line about what the creature typically does if it fails its morale check. (organized retreat, surrender, scatter, flee in panic while wetting itself, etc)

Some possible Modifiers:
+4 if defending young/lair/home;
+2 if outnumbering foe by more than 2:1;
+4 if outnumbering foe by more than 5:1;
+1 if led by a strong leader;
+2 if led by a strong & reputable leader (i.e., the goblin war chief who defeated the mighty ogre Grongor and freed his clan from slavery)
-2 if no strong leader present;
-4 if outnumbered by foe;
-2 if more than 25% of number killed/incapacitated in one round
-5 if more than 50% of number killed/incapacitated in total

If you keep it to a d20 scale, you then give most monsters a baseline number, and maybe one additional morale item (i.e., gains +6 for defending lair, instead of the normal +4)
Goblin, Kobold 10
Orc, Gnoll 12
Human, Halfling 13
Hobgoblin 14
Dwarf, Elf 15

Just my opinion.

 

[Grazzt]

To prevent a TPK? But the monsters are winning!! That's the last time they should flee!

Seriously, I'd be very annoyed at any DM who had losing monsters fight to the death, while winning monsters turned and fled. That's terrible DMing.

Agreed. If the monsters have the PCs on the ropes, unless they stop to do the cliche' "Let me tell you of my evil plans so you have time to recover and kick my ***" thing, the monsters should finish them off.

 

[Grazzt]

If you keep it to a d20 scale, you then give most monsters a baseline number, and maybe one additional morale item (i.e., gains +6 for defending lair, instead of the normal +4)
Goblin, Kobold 10
Orc, Gnoll 12
Human, Halfling 13
Hobgoblin 14
Dwarf, Elf 15

Just my opinion.

Could also add a line in the stat block for Morale. List it as a modifier that is added to a 1d20 roll against some DC (say base 10 + whatever). Frex, in a goblin's stat block add a line like "Morale +0"