Why was morale removed from the game?

[Raven Crowking]

Hey RC, could you just start signing my name at the bottom of your posts?

Nah, then you'd be hated by the masses, too.

OFF-TOPIC: I am looking for some people to run a playtest module for RCFG in January; could I interest you? If so, PM me.

RC

 

[ExploderWizard]

Yes, that's exactly my point. To a large extent, most of combat is about grinding away at the monsters during the encounter. Morale (and other "save or die" effects) steps out of that process.

I want more out of combat encounters than a grind. Anything that helps step out of that model is a good thing for me at least.

 

[Korgoth]

don't let it happen again. or we might have to revoke your card and confiscate your minis.

any pics of the minis btw?

Sorry! And alas, no digital camera. I spent all my money on minis and Conflict of Heroes games.

I think the newly-released Lasalle may finally push me over the edge and into Napoleonics. After my US 3 AD I've got some Polybian Romans (also 15s) to do up. After that... it may be time for Kutuzov's boys (in 10mm).

 

[Janx]

I'm not picking on you, Janx, but this is what I mean by fiddly. That's a lot of stuff to keep track of in the middle of a fight.

I don't disagree. 2e's list of modifiers was lengthy like that too if I recall. That's some of the discouragement against a Morale system. It seems the 3e rules model was 1d20 + your number + maybe a modifier versus a DC

Whereas the older systems didn't mind adding up a bunch of modifiers as part of the process. 1d20 + my base + something - something else + another bonus, etc versus a DC

BTW, i like Mustrum's idea of the morale track...Bolstered, normal, shaken, something else


Ultimately, I think it comes down to this, as a DM, if the NPCs are losing, they should consider running. Determining this systematically reduces DM arbitrariness and acts as a reminder to the DM to actually consider retreat for the NPCs. Without any morale rules, 3e/4e tends to result in NPCs fighting to the death more often than not.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Which die rolls is the DM not "rightfully authorized" to overrule?

That is an entirely different thread because there are STRONG feelings on the part of some that no, the DM should NOT overrule dice rolls even if he has the power to do so.

 

[Korgoth]

3.0 was particularly funny, with a 2nd level Rogue having maxed out intimidate, & bluff, with skill focus in Intimidate and an 18 Cha would be rolling 1d20+14 and trying to get higher than 10+ class level or 10+HD of an opponent to intimidate them. Automatic success against 4th level opponents!

The really bizarre thing is, if you invested all those resources into Intimidate, chances are you were actually worse at combat than somebody who just invested everything into butt-whoopin'. So DeathDealer the Barbarian (who dump-statted CHA and instead of Skill Focus: Intimidate took Ultra-Murder Cleave) and JR Oppenheimer the Pyromancer aren't intimidating in the slightest, but have to rely on Pipsqueak Wussensissy the hobbit to bully the monsters.

 

[Dausuul]

I don't disagree. 2e's list of modifiers was lengthy like that too if I recall. That's some of the discouragement against a Morale system. It seems the 3e rules model was 1d20 + your number + maybe a modifier versus a DC

Whereas the older systems didn't mind adding up a bunch of modifiers as part of the process. 1d20 + my base + something - something else + another bonus, etc versus a DC

Um... what D&D were you playing? 3E was loaded with modifiers, many of which changed on the fly.

 

[Janx]

The really bizarre thing is, if you invested all those resources into Intimidate, chances are you were actually worse at combat than somebody who just invested everything into butt-whoopin'. So DeathDealer the Barbarian (who dump-statted CHA and instead of Skill Focus: Intimidate took Ultra-Murder Cleave) and JR Oppenheimer the Pyromancer aren't intimidating in the slightest, but have to rely on Pipsqueak Wussensissy the hobbit to bully the monsters.

I concur. Intimidate based on CHA sucked so much, that my half-orc barbarian that kicked so much butt he killed an 18th level sorcerer in 2 rounds in his first encounter ever and he NEVER successfully pulled off an Intimidate check throught 20+ levels.

Everytime I could remember, I'd roll intimidate. Never once did it work. And this was a guy with a track record for killing things in ridiculously brutal order and generally being a bad ass. Everybody was scared of him, even the party what had his tribe's tattoo on their back (thanks to some friendly gnolls who respected how bad ass I was and were kind enough to brand my slaves for me while we were all unconcious after being mauled by a bear). All this bad-assedness was thwarted by crappy rules. Every time.

Ok, getting mauled by a polar bear wasn't bad ass. That part sucked. But I did go back and kill that thing and made a fine cloak out of it. (thereby tying this thread to the cloaks thread). I think the gnolls were so helpful because they were afraid of the bear, and if it didn't kill us, we might be bad assed enough to go back after it. Which I was.

Where was ?

Oh yeah, Intimidate sucked. It was another rule that used the wrong freaking stat to model something.

Sure, there was the optional rule to use a different stat. I don't recall my DM falling for that trick, because with my base 20 STR, I don't think I'd have ever failed if that was the case. I think he took a perverse pleasure in knowing that the most dangerous being in the northland couldn't roll a frickin Intimidate check to save his life. He liked making me do it the hard way. And by hard way, I mean killing them with critical hits, which was another thing I was famous for with this PC.

This all tracks back to the lack of good Morale rules. You are an NPC. You are facing the nearly 7' killing machine who has a reputation for brutally killing everything, including things that are known to be bigger and stronger than you. What do you do?

Apparently, in 3e or 4e, you let me cut you down with a couple of critical hits while your friends wait for me to repeat the process on them. As a barbarian, I have the most HP of anything in the game, so it's pretty much irrelevant what you can do damage wise. Sit back and enjoy the slaughter, because there's no rules to tell you to run away.

 

[Festivus]

Something being fair doesn't mean that it's fun, and it's that problem that the DDM Morale rules ran into. High levels of randomness - and with morale often coming down to a single roll, that's what it was - work very much against a game wanting to be a skill-based, tournament game.

Luck tends to even out when there are many rolls that go into the result. Morale really stood out in DDM: much more important than any other type of roll.

Cheers!

One of the (many) reasons I stopped playing DDM 1.0 was because of being "run off the board" far too often. I agree with Merric, it didn't work well in the skirmish game (or perhaps it worked a little too well).

I like controlling when my monsters are going to turn tail. Even if I went back to playing basic D&D I probably wouldn't use it (I never did way back when).

 

[harpy]

One of the things that I also find unfortunate with 3e/4e not having morale rules is that there are a lot of elements in these newer systems that could play into a "break their morale" strategy as they currently exist.

Cleave or Whirlwind feat - with both of these feats you could potentially drop several opponents in a single round. Depending on how the morale rules were structured, these kinds of instances could cause a morale check, increase the likelyhood of one, or modify a check.

Massive Damage Threshold - This is another rules instance that could trigger morale in some manner. If a PC dumps out 50+ damage, not only is a creature have to save vs dying, but that impressive blow could also cause some kind of morale effect.

It's an area of the game that would have potentially bolstered the martial characters further, giving them a psychological attack that would help lessen the gap between the martial and spellcasters powe scales. It wouldn't solve it, but it would play into what being a bad ass is all about.