|
Post by Drozgul on Aug 13, 2010 21:46:53 GMT -5
((As quoted from World of Darkness sourcebook.))
Morality:
Morality reflects a character's sense of compassion for his fellow human being and basic respect for the rule of law. This isn't an absolute value. As people grow and change over time their perspectives on society and morality often shift. Some individuals strive to become more compassionate and virtuous, while others, driven by desperation or embittered by dire circumstances, reject their old convictions and adopt a more callous and selfish approach to existence.
Your character's Morality is not fixed. Depending on his actions it can increase or decrease during play. A starting character has a Morality of 7 - a basic respect for the law and a realistic sense of compassion for other people. He believes in the need to uphold the law, and treats others as he would expect to be treated himself. He has the potential to become more selfless and virtuous, or has a long way to fall into the depths of human barbarity. The course he follows depends entirely on the choices he makes during the course of the chronicle.
Each Morality rating has a threshold of sinful behavior from your character must refrain in order to avoid degeneration to a lower moral state.
Morality/Sin 10/Selfish thoughts. 9/Minor selfish act (withholding charity). 8/Injury to another (accidental or otherwise). 7/Petty theft (shoplifting). 6/Grand theft (burglary). 5/Intentional, mass property damage (arson). 4/Impassioned crime (manslaughter). 3/Planned crime (murder). 2/Casual/callous crime (serial murder). 1/Utter perversion, heinous act (mass murder).
Within the game Morality is defined as thus:
Morality: An advantage trait representing a character's moral, ethical and even psychological standing and wellbeing. Morality is measured in dots, which can be lost to degeneration by performing unethical or criminal acts.
|
|
|
Post by Drozgul on Aug 13, 2010 21:59:57 GMT -5
Now that the word for word ruling is in place, let us discuss a recent in game action that a small group wanted to take, but later were unable to due to outside circumstances.
One character's wife was brutally murdered right in front of his eyes. a new friend of his has the ability to dredge information from a corpse if it has been such for less than three days. Had it been within this time constraint, the characters wanted to dig the body from its grave in a cemetary, and extract the information they were looking for.
One gamer argues the morality is labeled no worse than a 9 on the scale, another says 5 and no higher. Its not important at this juncture who is who at the table, at least I don't think so.
Now, The GM later rules that if we had gone through with it, for the sake of argument (I think) he would rule the value at a 7 on the scale.
The argument is not unfamiliar, just very case specific, and comes down to thus: Is it okay for the GM to place his own belief system against the values of the morality scale, and the players? And for that matter, is it really REALLY okay with either the player OR his character to dig up a dead body from the grave believing that its value of harm be no worse than not giving change to a bum on the street? While we're asking, can we agree or do we disagree that the crime of grave robbing is a fair comparison to arson?
Put it up and discuss please. I will look for and post the Geist scale as well for possible changes, since that was the system we were running.
|
|
|
Post by Drozgul on Aug 13, 2010 22:06:01 GMT -5
From Geist: The Sin-eaters
Synergy:
A Sin-Eater in alignment with his attendant geist benefits from the close connection, which grants a certain peace of mind and an affinity for the little details of the Underworld. Sin-Eaters who flout the needs of their geist or who reject or abuse their relationship to the Underworld can quickly spiral into a circle of degeneration that deadens the Psyche and makes the Sin-Eater’s job as a psychopomp very difficult to complete. Of course, no Sin-Eater is perfect, so more than a few give in to various temptations and find themselves dealing with the friction that grows when Sin-Eater and geist fail to harmonize.
Synergy takes the place of Morality, but is even less of a barometer of how “moral” a character is. It represents how well the Bound has integrated with the urges and drives of her geist, which may be a positive thing but not necessarily a good thing.
Sin-Eaters rarely fall into a perfect fit with a geist. Indeed, a Sin-Eater who has just had a near-death experience and awakened to a wider supernatural world is hardly in a position to be a boon companion and stable part of the new relationship. Still, most Sin-Eaters do adjust, with a little cajoling from the geist and help from a krewe. In game terms, this means that the typical Sin-Eater starts with a Synergy score of 7.
Over time, a Sin-Eater’s Synergy tends to fluctuate. Many Bound actually devolve in Synergy, because they find themselves pushed into the position of taking actions of dubious morality. While a Sin-Eater’s moral framework changes along with his new lease on life, the sheer stress of dealing with ghosts, traveling through the Underworld and arguing with other krewes means that something has to give. Most of the time, it’s one of the Sin-Eater’s principles. This usually isn’t so bad; it just means the Sin-Eater doesn’t necessarily live up to all of the expectations of the attendant geist. This friction can make some of the Sin-Eater’s supernatural talents harder to focus, since the geist can’t exert its influence as easily when it is not sympathetically bound to its host.
A rare few Sin-Eaters strive to mesh their own goals to that of their geists to the point of increasing their Synergy. This rise in correspondence causes the two beings to grow ever closer. High Synergy can aid a Sin-Eater in performing some tasks, such as opening an Avernian Gate. Of course, some of those same actions may cause internal discord on their own. Often, a Sin-Eater who chooses to pursue strong Synergy with his geist must make sacrifices, by giving up options that other Sin-Eaters would take for granted.
|
|
|
Post by Drozgul on Aug 13, 2010 22:09:07 GMT -5
Here-in we see that the primary change is that a Sin-Eater is more in tune with making sure his and his Geist's goals do not countermeasure each others' too much.
So its World of Darkness Morality, then Sin-Eater Synergy.
Sounds like the grave-robbing as a Sin-Eater may not be so terrible to them, in my opinion. However, and regular mortal having not rubbed shoulders with death so closely, would probably have a soul-hardening moment when the shovel head broke earth and he admitted his guilt in what he was doing.
I'm good with it either way, mostly because we couldn't follow through with it. But I'm curious to hear the other points of view.
|
|
Fenix
Journeyman
Who in the hell do you think I am?
Posts: 162
|
Post by Fenix on Aug 17, 2010 14:00:11 GMT -5
As I have stated before, just because the rules do not have it written in detail for each offense one can commit does not mean its not there.
I rated it a 7 because at the very least removing a body from the grave is theft and for this reason; someone has paid for the lot of land where the body is place for rest. So you are stealing the body from a resting place that was LAWFULLY paid for, not to mention that there are numerous laws that protect the dead from vandalism and grave robbing. If you struggle with this concept think of it as storing a item at the bank in a safe box, like a watch. Here watch=body; safe boss=grave. Some one pays for the protection of that item, and you are stealing said item from where it is placed, so at the very least it is stealing. (Whether its theft or burglary, it is still stealing at the very least).
Now it has been said that the rules have been set in place to protect players from a dm, true I will not argue that. But at some point the story tellers beliefs will flow into the game, it happens. And either it works or does not for the sake of the game.
When I read the Giest book I never saw where since you died your values are automatically replaced by synergy or that it does replace morality, it voids some items out yes, but not completely and it add others you must work around.
I have much to say about this topic, but right now I need to go jump start a car, so I will continue later
|
|
Lady Masquerade
Journeyman
Look into my eyes. Do you see who I see?
Posts: 174
|
Post by Lady Masquerade on Aug 17, 2010 21:01:08 GMT -5
I already stated my opinion in person, but I will repost here for further debate/discussion.
I understand the points that the players are trying to make about the DM's beliefs coming into play and either benefiting or hindering the players by those means.
It is my hope that this all boils down to Rule Zero in which the DM is god of his own world and what he says goes. It is up to him to differentiate his opinions/morals from those of the world/society that he has created for the game. If they happen to be exactly the same, as long as he in consistent, then that is what the characters will be held subject to. It is not a battle of morals on the part of the player vs. the DM, but in characters vs. the society's standards that are placed around them.
If, for example, the above listed morality scale is what is held in question, it comes down to the DM to decide what equals what, since there are only 10 specific examples of morality standards which cannot possibly cover any and all circumstances that will be faced during the course of the game. If in the DM's world he decides that graverobbing is equal to theft, then so be it. If it's equal to murder, then so be it.
Taking the movie Demolition Man for example, consider a setting in which everyone is held to a higher moral standard. Your morality score would reflect what wouldn't be below your character to do on a regular basis. Same goes for if you were in say a post-apocalyptic setting in which society has degraded and morality has lowered its standards. Your score would again reflect the same way and should still be rolled on when things happen that test your supposed morals.
At the same time, while the whole scale could shift down or up, there still may be some instances where certain things don't make sense in our world, but you have to remember that you're not playing in our world, you're playing in a World of Darkness that has corruptions and twists that may seem illogical but is commonplace to their society. For example, committing murder is equal to that of withholding charity. Granted, that's a stretch and the DM should make you aware of such things before the game even begins to prepare you for what you will be held accountable for.
All in all, I think this whole argument originated from player's personal beliefs clashing with the personal beliefs of the DM. The goal should be to play your character to what his/her beliefs are and for the DM to manage his world to what it's beliefs are. If they happen to coincide then, for goodness' sake, BE CONSISTENT. The only time a DM's ruling should be called into question is when two very similar situations result in two very different outcomes without a very good reason/variable. If the player still can't agree with the DM even when the DM is doing his level best to be fair and consistent, then the player should drop out and play a game that is more enjoyable to his tastes. Certainly there is no rule stating that every person needs to participate in every game that is presented. Being choosy about what you play and who you play with will almost certainly guarantee a better enjoyment for all those involved. But I'm getting sidetracked. And my rant is over anyway.
There is my two cents, and just like everyone else, feel free to rip it apart if you see fit. Constructively, please.
|
|
|
Post by labael on Aug 19, 2010 12:09:01 GMT -5
Aren't the bonepicker and the necromancer technically grave robbers?
Now theft is wrong, but digging a body up to get information, that is not theft. That's morbid. Sin-eaters are morbid. As long as the body was set back than no harm was done.
When anything is taken from the underworld, isn't that grave robbing? This is a major mechanic them of the game. It's what makes them monsters. Just as the werewolf can kill a human without much grief, so should this be place on the heart and mind of the sin-eater.
|
|
|
Post by Drozgul on Aug 19, 2010 16:57:41 GMT -5
Its not theft eh? So I can walk across the street with a shovel right now, and start digging on my Aunt Nancy and no police that see it happening will do anything? Sorry...but I doubt it, it is a crime, of trespass at the very least.
Even playing the Necromancer, if we gained access to the morgue to get to the body for info, I would agree. But grave digging I still don't think is okay. Would I be morbidly curious enough? Certainly! And does it being my wife have an effect? Believe it or not, it makes it EASIER for me. However, I still think the act of removing her from the ground is wrong, and I as my character could easily look past the rest. As it was the body of the woman who was laid to be at peace, and we would be disturbing that peace. That's my feeling on it...and I honestly really don't care so much as to that fact that since World of Darkness relies on tests of morality to create obstacles for characters, I find it a little...well, unnecessary, to ask the Storyteller not to test it when it comes up...especially if he is so sure that it should be so. Just like I should have done several in Hunter but didn't. That was my call, and I was wrong to not make rolls.
Why does it hurt the game so much for this to be a morality test anyway? I think that's what this debate really should be.
|
|
|
Post by Drozgul on Aug 19, 2010 17:08:10 GMT -5
When I read the Giest book I never saw where since you died your values are automatically replaced by synergy or that it does replace morality, it voids some items out yes, but not completely and it add others you must work around. "Synergy takes the place of Morality, but is even less of a barometer of how “moral” a character is. It represents how well the Bound has integrated with the urges and drives of her geist, which may be a positive thing but not necessarily a good thing." Right there on the page, beginning of the discussion of Synergy, second paragraph, as quoted from the book. But as always, you're the Storyteller, you can certainly say that Morality of mortals is still in play.
|
|
Fenix
Journeyman
Who in the hell do you think I am?
Posts: 162
|
Post by Fenix on Aug 20, 2010 15:47:05 GMT -5
Droz: Yeah I just reread that part of the book, let me restate what I was driving at so we are on the same page. You as a group are new giest, so you will still cling to mortality in some fashion (mostly rp I would hope, since dieing is not easy on anyone the first go around). I do not mean that you should be tested for both charts each time you act as you become more experienced bound, but that the transition from human to other then human should be smooth. I keep meaning to check the WOD boards to see if they have advice to settle or calm the debate a little.
Beal: The problem just walking around digging up a body is its not yours to dig up. If you get to it before its buried, or some how gain permission to dig then I would see no problem with (aside from my own of the dead should be left in peace). But just walking on a graveyard and digging a body up? Its wrong at the very least in the eyes of the law, again at the very least a minor ding to your synergy if its a high synergy. So as of now talking with the dead is not the issue its getting the body to do so that is, since there are decent and indecent ways to go about it.
Going to the underworld is a hit on your synergy when its high, destroying a ghost is also a hit for high synergy geists, but at your current level its like hitting a dog, you have your own view on if its "bad" or a none issue. Now you are dealing with the ghosts, in the underworld and you must play by their rules while down there (not a synergy test but a "law" to follow, kinda like jay walking). What you do in the underworld is what might test your synergy.
What has become clear is that I must reread the book each time before playing to get into the right mind set of the game so these issues don't come up. I see a area that I must improve on and research so later i can handle a dispute with little issue on either end, the game is not me vs you; and I don't plan on it turning into that kinda of game. It meant to be fun, not frustrating. But please, the group is a collection of newbies, so your choices should not be simple, you should have some reservation with some of actions for a little at least. We are all learning the system at the same time, so it will be rough till we find that happy middle.
|
|
|
Post by rjrock85 on Aug 24, 2010 7:29:40 GMT -5
Ok, now that I've caught up to the present discussion, I'll add my two cents.
As a Sin-Eater, we (our Geist and ourselves) have to deal with the dead all the time. Everywhere we turn there are ghosts wandering around. Sometimes we need to ask questions of a corpse; be it on a fresh crime scene, on a morgue slab, or 6 feet under the earth. Coming in contact with any of these corpses is an illegal act without proper authority. Disturbing the crime scene and the morgue corpse are both considered tampering with evidence, which I think we'd all agree, is illegal. Digging up a freshly buried corpse (which we would never actually have to do considering people aren't buried within three days unless its a speedy burial) is property damage (although not mass, which would be a 5). It wouldn't be theft, in my opinion, because we aren't stealing anything as long as we rebury the body. It would be like breaking into a safe (without damaging the safe) to check the time on the watch, and then closing the safe again. Or reading someone's diary in a locked desk. While all of these things are distasteful, which I whole-heartedly agree with, and against the law, we are talking about Morality/Synergy as per the game; they would fall under a selfish act, a morality test of 9 (it could possibly fall under Injury to another if you take a liberal definition of Injury and expand it to mean not just physical injury, which would be an 8). To us Sin-eaters, we know that the body is nothing but a husk that contains the soul...it is selfish for us to dig up a family's loved one to garner information to further our goals, if only for the sake of their sensibilities. It would wear on your conscience, of course, but it would be the kind of wear that a reverend would face if he had a secret addiction to porn, again a selfish act.
The fact that digging up a corpse without authorization is illegal and disheartening isn't in question, because it is both. However, whether or not you have authority should not make something easier to do as far as morality is concerned. If we take a hit to morality for digging up a corpse then the guy with the paper saying he can should too. Morality in WoD is absolute (unless you're a Hunter, but that's a different story), and whether or not your sin is justified or "legal" its still a sin to Morality.
The executioner, even though he is authorized to take a life, would still take a Morality 3 risk every time he pulls that switch...but just because he may eventually become Morality 2 that doesn't mean he's gonna go around getting into bar fights, although even if he did he wouldn't take a Morality hit.
A Catholic would refuse to exhume the corpse because it is an affront to his sensibilities, not because he may move down the ladder of the ephemeral stat of Morality. (And he wouldn't move down the ladder, unless he had a Morality of 9 or higher).
An Aztec priest who removes the hearts of thousands of sacrifices (even though it is a part of his religion and duty) would have a Morality of 1 at the highest. He may still view stealing from his fellows as wrong and not do it...but if he did he wouldn't take a hit to Morality because he's already monstrous.
To bring this issue to me personally, every time I shot a deer while hunting, I felt a tinge in my conscience and said a prayer for the animal and thanked God for the animal's sacrifice. But hunting an animal for sustenance wouldn't even be considered a selfish act on the Morality scale. Just because something goes against your conscience does not mean it is a sin against Morality.
In the World of Darkness, there is no moral relativism as it pertains to the stat of Morality (outside of the "Supers" of course, but they don't follow Morality so its a non-issue).
Now, whether or not the DM agrees with me on this won't break the game for me and force me to quit the game and pout; its just that I've never been one to just sit back and accept arbitrary adjudication without a debate. I'm just glad we reached some kind of accord, exhuming the corpse was originally going to be equal to Arson (which is just ridiculous) but was moved up to petty theft (which I can stretch to believe). If its a narrative element I don't usually debate the DM, but when it comes to mechanics, I feel I must. I'll admit I should have let him rule the way he wanted and then debated and reconciled during a break or after the session; I'll try my best to do so from now on so as not to bog down the game.
And no, digging up a corpse isn't theft, but it is illegal.
Also, "If, for example, the above listed morality scale is what is held in question, it comes down to the DM to decide what equals what, since there are only 10 specific examples of morality standards which cannot possibly cover any and all circumstances that will be faced during the course of the game. If in the DM's world he decides that graverobbing is equal to theft, then so be it. If it's equal to murder, then so be it."
The scale of Morality isn't meant to cover any and all circumstances that will be faced during the course of the game...its only meant to cover what is in the scale's categories. If it doesn't fit into a category on the scale then it isn't a sin against Morality. And again this doesn't make everything not on the scale free game as far as your character's conscience is concerned, it just won't affect your Morality score. On a side note, these games are collaborative storytelling games; if the players can't give feedback, then the game loses that quality...this isn't to say that the DM must accept the feedback, but to not even be able to question the DM is a ridiculous thought and a bit extreme.
That's it for now, if it seems bouncy or hard to read; I blame it on being sleepy.
|
|
Lady Masquerade
Journeyman
Look into my eyes. Do you see who I see?
Posts: 174
|
Post by Lady Masquerade on Aug 24, 2010 9:29:50 GMT -5
I see what you're getting at with that. Good post.
|
|