The Need to Achieve

Something in Luke/Fumer’s comment on this morning's post really struck me. He wrote:

I never liked superheroes, especially for RPGs. There’s no inherent power curve in the genre, like fantasy’s peasant-to-hero arc.

Leaving aside discussions on contrary examples (Mutants & Masterminds has a definite “level up” design principle while fantasy games like Stormbringer and Barbarians of Lemuria have made a real push to distance themselves from the D&D paradigm)…leaving ASIDE those discussions, my first reaction to this is “Huh? THAT's the issue?!”

Because if I’m reading this correctly (and Luke can jump in here if I’m off base), it seems like he’s saying there’s a real problem with adapting the superhero genre to the RPG medium because traditionally comic book characters are fairly static in their power structure. A character may be Green Arrow (relatively low power) or the Silver Surfer (off-the-charts power) with little rhyme/reason as to why there’s such a great discrepancy (other than it makes for different styles/types of stories), and there’s little dynamic change in terms of growth/development that occurs. In other words, Peter Parker will never someday become Thor just because he’s had 400 issues worth of adventures.

Um…is achievement a requirement of fantasy RPGs?

I suppose the snarky answer from some quarters would be: It is of the good games. But personally I don’t buy that.

I’ve run and run in long-term Marvel Superheroes games in the past, and with good results. Now Marvel is pretty much the LAST game you want to play if your main interest in an RPG is “achievement.” Unlike say, Heroes Unlimited with its XP/Level based system, the only reward from session to session achieved is “karma,” a dynamic resource that varies based on both the type of action taken (good or bad) and the magnitude of that action. The value earned during a game session can even be NEGATIVE, causing you to face a net loss to your personal karma pool due to your cowardly or infamous (i.e. “un-heroic”) actions. Should your hero actually kill or cause the death of someone in the course of the game session, your character loses ALL accumulated karma. This is especially devastating when you consider the only way to “advance” in Marvel (improve your abilities/powers) is to expend your hoarded karma points…usually in the hundreds or THOUSANDS of points (and acquiring more than a couple hundred karma in a single session is a fairly rare and momentous occurrence).

But as I said, we ran long term marvel campaigns, using recurring characters over a series of different adventures and had a great time doing it. I don’t think ANY of the characters ever “achieved” anything as far as advancement goes…the rate of improvement is just glacially slow, especially if your characters are already high on the food chain of superheroes. But achievement wasn’t the point…the POINT was to run a campaign of superheroes in a world filled with the same whimsy and weirdness as your average Marvel or DC comic title (we didn’t actually use the Marvel characters, preferring to create our own villains/heroes…the X-Men might have been present in our universe, but they were “off-screen” the entire time). And we accomplished that with flying colors, facing super-villain teams and angry deities and voodoo magic and cyborgs that looked like Robocop but carried an attitude like the Terminator. We had pointy-eared aliens in fishnet stockings and Wolverine-wannabes and sentient carrots and rocks (all thanks to the Marvel Ultimate Powers book). There was some drama and romance and lots of unrelenting ass-kicking with plenty of stuns and slams and people getting punched through walls and getting knocked several city blocks back.

[ I think there was an Eternal that could turn people into jellyfish (or jelly sandwiches…that part’s a bit hazy)]

The point was to have plenty of dynamic fun, and achievement played very little part in it. Achieving “levels” does not suddenly open up new areas of exploration…all areas of exploration are open from the beginning. The chance of death and dismemberment doesn’t change from a beginning character to an “advanced” one…challenge is always present and you always have a chance to face it down…provided you and your compatriots keep your karma pools stocked up and ready.

Because so many of us got into role-playing through the gateway of Dungeons & Dragons (or RPGs that were heavily influenced by D&D’s achievement paradigm), there’s a common perception that achievement or advancement or “getting better” is or needs to be an inherent part of the game. But that’s a real fallacy of thinking…I mean, you need to understand where the whole concept came from.

In the beginning there was Chainmail and Dave Arneson’s desire to run a fantasy dungeon delve. Chainmail is a war game, similar to Warhammer: you pick out your forces, each piece or unit being worth a certain number of points. There are soldiers with various armor types and weapons, and there are some “special types” including heroes and superheroes (worth 4 fighting men or 8 fighting men respectively) as well as monsters of a (Tolkien) fantasy nature.

When Arneson was running his exploration/subterranean campaign he needed a system of rules to work out the results of combat between the players and the monsters encountered beneath Castle Blackmoor. All characters used the simple man-to-man combat rules found in Chainmail (based on weapon and armor type) to determine the results of combat. Later, based on the actions taken (and surprising success) of one particular player, Dave decided to promote the player’s character to “hero” status, giving him the fighting ability of the “hero” piece from Chainmail.

As I've discussed before, by Arneson’s own admission achievement/advancement was never the intention of his original dungeon campaign; advancement was tacked on (with good result) only AFTER players had been exploring the ruins beneath Blackmoor for some time and had become attached to their characters. The objective of game play was simply for characters to acquire treasure; the point of his game was to play the game: a game of fantasy exploration. Period, end of story.

Does this make sense? I mean, do people really grok this? Let’s put it another way: a man designs a game of exploration into a dark and hostile environment. The characters the players will play will face “death itself” in the form of fiendish traps and hungry monsters. What would motivate such an individual to do this? MONEY…that greatest motivator of all. The possibility of making a fortune, of becoming rich (by whatever your relative standards are) will compel individuals to do all sorts of crazy things…work long hours forsaking family and loved ones, embarrass themselves on reality TV, take tremendous punishment on a football field or in a boxing ring, betray the ethics and principles they were raised to believe. The promise of wealth will compel people of different backgrounds and personalities to work together towards a common cause.

[which is part of the reason why the paladin class…with its total disdain of wealth…makes so little sense with regard to the premise of the Dungeons & Dragons game]

Treasure hunting is the in-game justification for the player characters’ actions in D&D…at least originally. Not achievement or advancement or “leveling up.” Those things (and land titles, etc.) were a BONUS, a reward for doing what they were supposed to. It’s only the last 12 years that have seen the erasure of this justification (with the de-emphasis on treasure acquisition).

A superhero game should be viewed and approached with the same spirit Arneson originally had for his Blackmoor campaign, at least in so much as Blackmoor had no expectation of achievement. Playing a superhero game is about exploring the life of a person with gifts not given to average mortals…even if those gifts are nothing more than the courage and conviction in one’s belief in fighting for Truth, Justice, etc. ACHIEVEMENT (if even possible) should be a secondary consideration.

After all, does the tide of justice ever, finally, sweep aside the evil and corruption of those who would prey on the weak and vulnerable? Well, we can certainly hope for that to happen in the REAL WORLD…but in the game world, curing the world of all its woes would mean ending the game (and the fun we’d presumably be having by playing). Instead of reaching some end point, the general consensus for such a game would be for players to “fight the good fight,” doing what they could, before hanging up their cape and cowl…or passing over the mask to the next generation of heroes when the time comes.

Now, if you don’t think it would be enjoyable to play a game where you (or rather, your character) has super powers and faces off against the Forces of Darkness, then you should probably be playing a different game anyway. But if you DO like the idea…well, then, why do you need any sort of achievement to be inherent in the game? You have enough to worry about, stopping the nefarious machinations of Doctor Doom or the Riddler (or whomever) without any bother with regard to advancement or improvement or “leveling up.” In my opinion.

Now regarding the other possible beef raised by Luke…namely, the wide disparity of power ranges between, say Daredevil and Superman…well, honestly, that’s one of the things I love about the genre. Intellectually, it’s pretty ridiculous for Captain America to be leading the likes of Iron Man and Thor (sure Cap is a war hero, but Thor’s been THE go-to warrior god for centuries! You don’t think he knows tactics?)…but it sure makes for great copy!

Of course, you have to account for this in your game design. If you don’t, then what happens when Dazzler gets punched by, O say, anyone with a strength class equal to or greater than Spiderman…for example, and single member of the otherwise “wussy” Wrecking Crew? Answer: One dead Dazzler, that’s what. A person with the ability to punch a (small) hole in a tank will inflict devastating injury on any character not made more durable due to their superpowers. Batman, for example. One lucky punch will quite literally “knock his block off.” You want to see the original caped crusader decapitated by the likes of Bulldozer? A guy who Spiderman one-shots without batting an eye?

[by the way, if you DO want to model that kind of super world, you’ll want to direct your attention to Heroes Unlimited…though you might want to divide SDC totals by a factor of five or ten]

In the superhero world, “fortuitous circumstance” tends to conspire to keep the more squishy heroes breathing, and when modeling that world (especially due to the disparate power level between characters), you’ll want to make sure there’s something present that provides that same “safety net.” Or at least, provides the option for folks who like that kind of thing. That, too, is part of the fun. In my opinion.

Regarding Justice and Forgiveness...

My recent post regarding my feelings on the military operation that ended in the death of Osama Bin Laden drew more than a few reactions here and elsewhere. To be clear, the point of my post was that I...anti-war, anti-military, pacifist-pinko-lefty-socialist JB...was proud of the actions taken and satisfied with the result.

However, that doesn't seem to be the part that irritated folks. What they took some umbrage with was my thoughts on Osama Bin Laden and our (humans) need to preserve life, and that his soul was good, etc. etc. insert hippy-dippy New Age stuff.

Fine. Let me explain my stance on THAT.

I happen to be a Christian, which to me means I am a "follower of the teachings of Christ." No, I do not believe that simply believing in Jesus (or anyone) is going to save you...real ACTION is necessary for the salvation of souls (whatever that means to you).

Part of following Christ's teachings is forgiveness. Forgiving of those who trespass against us. Forgiving EVERYone.

Not putting a bullet in their head first and then forgiving them.

We all "pay" for our crimes (by "pay" I mean, we all receive the justice that is our due) in this life or the next. Eventually, we all reap what we sow: Bin Laden, myself, George W., those punks that burgled my house and freaked out my wife.

But humans are limited in the scope of our understanding of the past, present, and future. Only the Universe/God can find a true balance of action/consequence...while man speaks of justice, may even dispense "justice" (in courts or whatnot) true justice can only be determined from a higher, enlightened (divine) perspective.

What we CAN do is forgive. We can forgive those who trespass against us. As the Christ showed us.

I try to forgive everyone: Hitler, the Israelis that invade the West Bank, the Palestinians that retaliate with violence, the jackasses that blew up the Twin Towers, WotC and Hasbro, the dudes that shot Gandhi and MLK Jr., etc. And, yes, Osama Bin Laden, too.

No person is so amoral and evil that we cannot forgive the person. If Lucifer rots in hell, it is because he prefers to rule in hell than serve God in heaven...it's NOT because God isn't all merciful and forgiving (God is All-Powerful by definition...he could turn Lucy into a cupcake if he wanted, what do you think "all-powerful" means?). The serial killers and serial rapists and suicide bombers of the world, the people that bilk the elderly out of their life savings and drive drunk and kill your child...these are awful, awful excuses for human beings. They need to be prevented from harming people.

They do not "deserve" death.

People who are "happy Osama Bin Laden is dead" feel the satisfaction of having something they fear expunged. But wishing someone dead is a trite and petty thought. All humans die eventually, and in the grand history of the world our lifespans are but a blink of the eye. Forgive and move on, work to make the world a better, happier place. I see folks that carry signs saying "Never Forget 9/11" and to me, it's like wearing a badge that says,

I will carry fear with me forever.

If you want to live in fear, that's fine. I've got news for you: you WILL die eventually. As will your spouse. And your children. And your parents. And your beloved friends and pets and everyone you know. Why waste the brief and precious time you have with them allowing it to be colored by fear?

Why waste a single moment of your life on hatred?

Yes, yes...JB bitches about WotC and WoW and 4th edition all the time. Passing thoughts, my friends...blog fodder that once posted I do my best to forget. And, hey...I'm human. It's hard to forgive sometimes!

But I KNOW that forgiveness, and loving each human being on this planet, even the Osama Bin Ladens of the world, is the RIGHT thing to do. And challenging though it may be, it doesn't benefit us in any way, shape, or form to hold onto a grudge or anger or fear.

I write this as a father who loves his son and would do anything in his power to save him. But saving him does not mean "going out and killing some people." Creating a world where deadly violence and lack of forgiveness is "standard operating procedure" is not "saving my child." It is simply creating a fearful Hell on Earth.

I stand by what I wrote in my prior post. I think that the military operation to apprehend Bin Laden was NOT a callous offing of life or piece of vengeance; I think that there are born warriors in our society for a reason, and in this instance they acted to the best of their calling. A man had demonstrated time and time again that a Live and Let Live policy was not going to suffice for our differences in opinions, and needed to be prevented from committing more crimes against humanity. We CAN be sorry that he chose to die rather than choosing to reform himself and work for a better tomorrow.

Now, can I get back to the D&D posts? Please?

Of War and Warriors…

This is a non-RPG post…skip it if you like.

Some people are “born warriors,” though not all of them follow the pursuit. I suspect I may have been one…certainly I am drawn to the tools, tactics, structure, and history of war…but for whatever reason, I have chosen not to follow a career in war. Call it cowardice, pacifism, an aversion to indentured (government) servitude…heck, it’s probably a combo of all these…but I have chosen NOT to be a warrior in this lifetime.

Now when I say “warrior” I am speaking of someone with the capability and desire for doing real, physical harm. I’m not talking about “fighting spirit;” most people have some type of passion (astrologically speaking, we all have Mars somewhere in our birth chart). Likewise, I’m not talking about hunters or woodsmen…some warriors born may find an outlet for themselves in the killing of animals, but shooting food is akin to being a farmer/gatherer/provider and does not necessarily mean being a “warrior born.” There are plenty of pacifistic hunters.

[likewise, using hunting or murder or sports as an outlet for dark rage and aggression doesn’t necessarily make one a “warrior;” simply a person with destructive, i.e. anti-constructive tendencies from looking on the darkest side of life]

But there are those who are warriors. Often they are drawn to careers like the military or law enforcement or the highest degree of sport and athletics. Of these, the first two are the more constructive use of their God-given talents (sports, enjoyable as they are, are mostly frivolous…and indeed, often debilitating to individuals due to over-work or specific muscle groups).

Now: war is a terrible thing. The worst thing, really. The purposeful taking of human life (and, yes, I consider collateral casualties as “purposeful;” pulling the trigger and unleashing destruction is a purposeful act) is the highest order of sin one can commit. Not only because it causes suffering (to the victims, to the victims’ families, and to the very soul of the killer), but because it removes HUMAN LIFE from the planet.

And human life is the very definition of the potential for creation.

Humans are capable of fantastic deeds…GOOD deeds…more than any other living creature on this planet. And no matter how awful and evil people are, they always have the potential to turn it around. I would point to the example of Alfred Nobel, founder of the Nobel Peace Prize that has encouraged and inspired (and rewarded) so many great humanitarian works. He created the prize in fact to make up for the death and destruction he had caused with his invention of dynamite. So much better to work towards a better world than simply wallow in your guilt and regret.

Taking of human life – the main result and end of war – is a snuffing of that potential from the world. And that is a terrible, terrible thing.

And self-destructive really…truly we are All One Body in this One Reality…beneath the trappings of the physical world we are simply small parts of One Universal Whole. Would you cut off your own nose because it offended you? No. But often, we are lost in the illusion of physicality (due to our own sense of self and selfish self-interest) and believe that we are somehow separate from those around us. That perhaps killing an individual whom we do not know is somehow better than killing one we do…or that someone who is different from us is somehow of lesser value.

Such is not the case. We are, in fact, of equal value. The brilliant, kind and caring doctor is of equal value to the world as the homeless junkie-addict begging for change. YOU may not be able to see one’s “intrinsic value” over the other (and certainly if you were mortally ill you might seek out the physician first), but it’s true. We are all angelic souls living in this physical world. Who knows how many people the junkie has inspired to good due to the very act of his being?

And don’t all babies start out equally sweet and innocent? All humans begin from that same mark…even those “divinely conceived” begin as creatures unable to walk or talk, and with a penchant for pooping themselves.

So why then do warriors exist? If war is simply a harming of ourselves (because the very act of harming another human is the soul’s equivalent of dipping your own hand in molten lava), then why are some born with the calling? Forget the fact that they COULD choose to do other things…why are these souls on this earth at all? As an evolved species who SHOULD know better about the worthlessness of war, why do warriors…good and bad…continue to incarnate into this 21st century?

Think of them as our body’s immune system; white blood cells, if you will.

Sometimes, the body suffers illness, most often due to our own mistreatment. When we are ill, we exhibit symptoms of that illness…and if illness is left untreated it can lead to worse things, including the death of the body.

Sometimes it is necessary to hurt part of the body to save it. Sometimes, a frostbitten finger needs to be amputated to save the flesh. Yes, it is our own damn fault we were frostbitten (we should have been smart enough to put a glove on that hand!), and we should mourn the finger’s loss…hell, we should TRY to save the finger if possible. But when time is of the essence, when keeping the finger means danger to the hand or the arm or the body, then the finger must go, so the body may live.

Osama Bin Laden was frostbite. And we called on warriors to cut him from our flesh.

It is not his ideals that were evil…there IS decadence in Western Culture and (at times) a real lack of spirituality. It is not his religion that was evil…Islam is no more or less valid than Christianity, and as with Christians sometimes teachings can be misinterpreted or misunderstood by their most devoted followers.

It was not even his soul that was evil…Osama Bin Laden was as much an angelic spirit in flesh as the recently beatified Pope John Paul. He started life as a smiling, happy baby just like my own son, I’m sure.

But his actions, and his continued actions, made him a cancer to our human body. He attempted to wage a war just as deadly and as damned as anything the world has seen in the last 200 years. That he killed fewer humans with his actions than the U.S. military has killed in the last 10 years is no consolation. He was but one man…if he’d had the means he would have killed as many or more.

I don’t say this out of fear or justification or vengeful wish for justice…I speak only of his actions. He killed. He encouraged others to kill. He continued to encourage others to kill. He offered no regrets for these things.

Osama Bin Laden’s death was not justice. Justice is not dispensed by humans, but by God or the Universe or the Great Wheel of Karma. But his actions WERE detrimental to the whole of our world. Not American society…our nation will have its Rise and Fall like all great nations before it…but to our human world.

The military men who took action to capture or kill Bin Laden were warriors who did the work of warriors. They exemplify the reason why some are born warriors in this world. After reading the account of the engagement, I am both happy and satisfied with the results.

This was not a remote control bomb or faceless airstrike on a “potential” target.

This was not the invasion of a sovereign nation with the intent to topple its government.

This was not the assassination of some “rabble rouser.”

Nor was there any gloating by the authorities who ordered the operation, no shit-faced smirking and proclamations of “mission accomplished” for bullshit publicity.

Osama Bin Laden’s actions have been criminal, and like any violent criminal it was appropriate to take steps to prevent future violent criminal actions on his part. The warriors’ orders were to capture or kill. I believe that they took those orders seriously. I believe that on this particular day, they were a credit to their calling…and that we should be proud of their actions.

I am sad, angry, and disappointed that we live in a world where violence and death is NOT confined to our games and entertainment and imagination. I grieve for all those killed…terrorists and innocents and warriors and wastrels. But sometimes a surgeon must cut the body for healing to begin…sometimes, sacrifice is a necessary part of the treatment of illness. I do not envy the burden on the souls of our warriors. But I can see now why some are born to the warriors calling. It is not for us to sit idly while some of our fellows seek the death and destruction of human life. We must strive always, ALWAYS to prevent the loss of life, even when it means finding a way to forgive those who do the most accursed deeds to ourselves and our loved ones.

Doing any less is asking for divine retribution.

All thanks to God for giving us warriors. May they be called to wage war as seldom as possible.

Development

There are two things I’m musing about today. The first is people hunting dinosaurs with guns…that’s going to be its own post. The second is an adequate development system for characters in a Fantasy-Punk RPG.

As in, “character development,” as opposed to advancement. I’m tired of the term “advancement.” Characters can develop in a number of ways, including “in-game effectiveness” without necessarily becoming “advanced.”

For example, in a world where characters are members of a freelance covert ops team doing black ops missions for competing corporations (and others able to pay their bill), there are a number of ways characters can develop (good and bad):

• Karmic Development: Doing good things reaps good returns and bad things the opposite.
• Reputation: Success and integrity (“professionalism”) increase rep; screwing up and hosing your buddies wreck it.
• Experience: Skills and abilities develop with practice, but age and fatigue build up as well.
• Relationships: These can be built or burned over the course of a career.

One thing that’s always semi-disgusted me with certain RPGs (like D20, though there are many) is the one-way development of characters: it only goes up. Characters get better and better only facing penalties as/if applied by a GM.

For example:

• D20 provides no “karma” penalties to dice rolls based on prior actions.
• A poor “reputation” has no required effect on reaction/skill rolls except as applied by GMs (perhaps as a “circumstance” bonus)
• Experience points only go up unless characters on subjected to permanent energy drain; aging penalties are only enforced if GMs keep a strict record of “campaign time,” and generally won’t affect most demihuman races in a “human scaled” campaign
• With regard to relationships…well, there’s always another adventure right? Always another meet in the local tavern and a tale of treasure and danger to pursue. Otherwise, there’s no game, yeah?

Again, GMs can certainly create their own house-rulings on this issue (“Your Chaotic Evil character is no longer allowed in the campaign as he’s created too many problems.”) but many times, GMs will attempt to find a way to justify the PC continuing to adventure as if nothing has happened. Only a failed save or reduction of hit points is going to end a character’s adventuring career, never blacklisting or fatigue or their “sins catching up with them.”

Personally, I’m tired of it. Stagnation and “player/GM burnout” are the outcomes I’d expect with a one-way advancement scheme.

I suppose you can keep your game fresh by continuously adding new game content (tied to advancing to new levels or purchasing new source books or whatnot). But it seems (to me) to be more elegant to include the balancing act, the tension, in the game rules.

Look at Call of Cthulhu. Yes, you have a constant upwards trend of character effectiveness (skill percentages only go up)…but you also have a downward spiral of Sanity. AND that sanity is inversely tied to one of the most useful skills I the game (“Cthulhu Mythos Knowledge”), which ensures the better your investigator gets at investigating, the more likely he is to end up in an asylum, gibbering and drooling.

In the past, my Shadowrun “campaigns” never lasted very long as characters generally went one of two ways: cybered to the hilt (the money sink) or magicked to the max (the karma sink). Either way, it was just “play until play gets boring because all the players are ultra-effective” and then FINITO. Great…so much for entertainment "limited only by one’s imagination."

But maybe my imagination IS limited. Or maybe players’ attention spans are too limited these days to care (“we only play for a year and it takes us two months of sessions to get through a single mission anyway”) and it’s effectively a non-issue. Fine and dandy; I have had my bouts with “gamer ADD,” myself.

However, I still think it is more interesting to look at character DEVELOPMENT over time rather than character ADVANCEMENT. And while some games may be better as one-way development trains (my space opera game only differentiates between “slow” and “fast” development in Old School style…reward the good game play, baby), I feel that any game with a dystopian setting (say, any game with the term “punk” in the theme or title) should have the possibility of two-way development (positive AND negative).

Just what I’m thinking. Today, anyway.

[***actually, this is just what I was thinking about two weeks ago...I wrote this February 3rd and never posted it (nor did I get to the "dino-hunting" post). Since that time, I've accounted for 21+ pages of the new 64 page game, and it DOES incorporate most of these "development aspects" in its design...all four plus a fifth, in fact. However, the "negative development" is definitely "toned down" compared to my earlier rant...in fact, there are no rules (currently) for decrepitude or age...though they might not be a totally bad idea to work in somehow!***]

Karma in RPGs

In my experience, bad things happen to bad people.

Not always, perhaps, and certainly not right away but in general the universe has a way of meting out punishment for our transgressions. There are laws of cause and effect, and there is a cosmic balance to life as we know it…and if we aren’t balancing our own debts, it seems (to me) that some unseen force helps us in doing such.

Now that doesn’t mean “bad” things don’t happen to good people…good people suffer all the time. Part of our lives on this plane is learning and developing as human beings and we set ourselves up for tests and trials that teach us and help our own spiritual growth. But people who act in ways that are out of synch with the universal have a tendency to need more and harsher lessons, hopefully in aid of getting “back on track.”

This is what I call KARMA, though some might refer to it as the law of “cause and effect” or the consequences of one’s actions.

Is there a place for karma in role-playing games?

Here are my two, semi-related thoughts on the subject:

1) RPGs try to include mechanics that model “life” (even a fantasy life) in an imaginary setting. As with religion it feels like this particular aspect of the human experience is most often left OUT of the game mechanics.

Even should one ascribe to the idea that “real world karma” will take care of “in-game karma” (for example, poor dice-rolling will eventually provide someone with their just desserts) more than a few RPGs prescribe GMs “fudge” poor dice rolls in favor of players…in effect CIRCUMVENTING karma.

2) RPGs often allow characters to do “bad things.” Shooting and stabbing and robbing and strong-arming people are “not cool” things in the eyes of the universe…and many “adventure” RPGs feature scenarios where players are proactively seeking to do just this.

Not that it’s necessarily “out of divine alignment” to take the fight to evil giants that are plaguing the civilized lands…but often in the course of executing justice, player characters will step over certain moral boundaries. And under the terms of the game system (“hey, I’m Chaotic Neutral!”) this is perfectly acceptable and justifiable.

But should it be allowed without repercussion?

I just think of my recent re-reading of the early Shadowrun novels, in which fortuitous occurrences happen to “good characters” and “bad characters” have a habit of suffering for their sins. Of course, this is a literary conceit…while the books are based on an RPG they are not RPGs but rather scripted stories (like any film or work of fiction). In this medium, the author is free to give bad guys their come-uppance…and is generally expected to do so in most action-adventure stories (see Star Wars and Indiana Jones for examples).

But how many times have I seen the adventurers in role-playing games perform unspeakable acts on nameless NPCs? I’m not just talking blatant torture or murder of helpless prisoners (though this is a common enough occurrence)…what about tasking your nameless henchman with walking point or testing the unknown potion? What about killing unarmed women and children (even orcish women and children?)?

Of existing RPGs, there are only two I can think of that have anything akin to actual karma mechanics (and, no, Shadowrun is NOT one of these, despite calling its experience points “karma points”). These are the original Marvel Superheroes RPG from TSR and Amber Diceless Role-playing.

Marvel characters tally a resource called Karma that can be used both as an advancement/development mechanic and as a save-your-bacon/metagame mechanic. Karma is gained from performing tasks one would normally consider heroic or “good;” not just beating up bad guys but making sure you help your sick aunt around the house, show up for work on time, or make that dinner date with your sweetie. You also LOSE karma points for failing to do good work, for performing crimes, or for killing ANYONE (the penalty for the latter is loss of ALL karma).

Now, while the carrot of good karma will certainly encourage PCs to act heroically, there’s really not much of a stick to the flip-side…after all, if your (randomly generated) stats are good enough, you may not need karma to save your bacon all that often. Why not kill villains who are a pain in the ass? Likewise, once you’ve lost ALL your karma, what’s to stop you from killing ANYone, or completely blowing off the people that are counting on you. With the Rules as Written, one’s Karma score never sinks below 0…when I was a kid, all bets were off once you hit the big zero (and THEN you got to play your character like any “normal” miscreant D&D adventurer).

Amber is a bit different. All characters have a score called “Stuff” which will be either positive (Good Stuff) or negative (Bad Stuff). Depending on the particular group, the amount to be considered “a lot” of Good or Bad Stuff is totally subjective. The GM is supposed to use a character’s Stuff rating as a guideline for determining whether or not things go in favor of the character.

For example: the character falls off a cliff and tries to save himself by grabbing a ledge on his way down. The guy with a lot of Good Stuff manages to land on the ledge and save himself with only some light bruising. The guy with a little Good Stuff lands on the ledge but probably gets the wind knocked out of him or twists his ankle in the process. The guy with “zero Stuff” manages to grab the edge on the way down, but needs to take some new action quick before his grip slips. The dude with a little Bad Stuff misses the ledge completely (“Aaahhh!!!”) and the guy with a LOT of Bad Stuff smashes himself up, breaking bones before continuing to plummet to his doom (“…”).

[being a diceless game, there are no mechanics for “skills” or “ability scores;” characters have traits that they can compare to each other to see whether or not they succeed in direct conflicts and everything else in negotiated or narrated through an arbitrary (i.e. GM fiat) drama mechanic]

The Stuff score reflects a character’s basic attitude (positive or negative), how people see/interact with him, and his overall “Divine Favor” (i.e. his store of good/bad karma). However, Stuff does NOT fluctuate in play…it is set during character creation and may or may not change during an advancement phase that only happens at infrequent intervals (after many sessions of game play)…also, IF a character’s “Stuff” changes, it is due only to advancement choices, NOT as a consequence to any in-game actions of the character.

Anyway, as you may be able to tell, I find both these approaches to “karma” less than satisfying. And I’m starting to wonder if NO approach to karma may be completely unsatisfying.

I suppose it all depends on how you use role-playing games (your particular group’s approach to the table). Usually, the only “karma” that I see occurring is a gruesome death as a result of a hasty action or un-wise decision. But there are times when it would be nice to have actual rules that enforced “divine justice” for players that insist on using their characters as throwaway avatars of violence and hedonism. The current game design for my space opera RPG discourages malefaction only by rewarding certain positive styles of game play. But I wonder if I need a stick in addition to the carrot.

Maybe I’m just tired of people at my game table acting like asses and saying, “hey, I’m Chaotic!”