|
Morale
Sept 2, 2012 22:17:34 GMT -6
Post by spacemonkeydm on Sept 2, 2012 22:17:34 GMT -6
What is a monster's morale? I am and has been always lost on this one.
|
|
|
Morale
Sept 2, 2012 23:39:57 GMT -6
Post by waysoftheearth on Sept 2, 2012 23:39:57 GMT -6
Hi Spacemonkeydm, I tried to summarise OD&D's morale rules here. You can also see it used in real play in my Delving Deeper demo game here (follow the combat with 8 1st level PCs versus 15 kobolds). Enjoy
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Sept 3, 2012 13:51:05 GMT -6
I like waysoftheearth's thread. I will say that each monster (or group of monsters) morale is determined randomly. Roll 2d6 to determine their score. If the monsters take heavy losses, or their leader is slain, or a wizard casts a particularly scarry spell, or a super-hero charges, or any other reason the DM decides warrants a "morale check." Then the DM rolls 2d6 again. If the roll is higher than the creatures morale score...they attempt to withdraw, flee, or surrender.
SCENE ONE A dragon swoops down onto a party of adventurers. The DM rolls 2d6 and it turns out that this particular dragon is a bit of a scaredy-cat (Morale: 4). Before the dragon even has a chance to breath every member of the party pulls out crossbows and the wizard casts a spell to make every bolt burst into flame, a hail of firey magic arrows arcs toward the flying dragon.
The DM decides this may be enough to spook the dragon and rolls 2d6 to check the dragons morale. He rolls a 5+, and the dragon flies off in search of foes without so much missile fire power.
SCENE TWO The Paladin Ser Gertrude and her Henchman Mary "Piggybottom" are walking through a forest when they see 3 ogres finishing the remains of 3 halflings. Now piggybottom is affraid of her own shadow (morale 2), but she loves her liege-lord with all of her heart (loyalty 18, +2 morale) so her final morale score is 4.
If in the course of the battle, or if some dire request is made e.g. "ms. piggybottom go sneak up behind those ogres and create a distraction..., and a morale check is called for, if Piggybottom rolls a 5+ then she will refuse the command, or cower in fear, pass out, or begin to cry uncontrollably until the battle is over and will be of no futher help to Ser Gertrude.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2012 15:41:06 GMT -6
Another way to do it is to consider an intelligent monster to be "your PC." That is, if you find yourself thinking "if this were my player character I'd be thinking about getting out of this fight," then the monster is too.
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Sept 3, 2012 20:58:12 GMT -6
Inspired by Ways table in the thread he linked above, I whipped up my own version of a dual reaction/morale 2d6 table:
[original image deleted by imageshack; see post below for newer version]
One thing I like about using the Reaction table for Morale is that you don't need to keep track of separate Morale scores for various monsters. Using this table after certain points in combat, such as loss 50% HP or numbers, will account for the toughness of the monster.
|
|
|
Morale
Sept 5, 2012 1:09:50 GMT -6
Post by blackbarn on Sept 5, 2012 1:09:50 GMT -6
Nice table, Zenopus, that table is the one thing missing from the LBB that would make sense of it all. I've been handling morale that way since I read the linked thread, and it works great.
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Sept 5, 2012 14:25:24 GMT -6
Thanks, blackbarn! Here's a revised version, where I changed "moves back" to "roll again next round". There's no "fighting withdrawal" option specified in LBB/Holmes, so in those rules "moves back" isn't really distinguished from "flees". In this version, the uncertainty of the the 6-8 roll is reflected in making another roll in the immediate following round. In the Holmes rules, one could also have the monster choose to Parry if 6-8 is rolled, which might be a way to implement the underused Parry rule more often (which is fun in that it has a small chance of breaking the attacker's weapon).
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 2, 2015 12:19:17 GMT -6
Post by aldarron on Feb 2, 2015 12:19:17 GMT -6
... I tried to summarise OD&D's morale rules here. .... Per OD&D: As probably most clearly seen for Skeletons/zombies and Purple worms, monsters who do not check morale, do not check morale prior to attacking, Therefor, those who do check morale must do so before attacking. The orc entry uses the plural "checks" indicating there may be more than one check in a fight. No particular guidance is given for when additional checks are called for. I presume a new check is required at the beginning of every turn, although a case can be made for a check every round. A CHAINMAIL rule that would seem to be directly relevant to morale checks in D&D combats regards when to check morale in Man to Man combat (page26). Mostly one only does this for the attacking army when using Man to Man to resolve a siege, but ; " in other cases morale is to be checked when 33 1/3% of an army has been killed...." Which would imply that individual style combats like "alternate" D&D matrix or the CM Man to Man should also check morale at 1/3rd casualties when a group fight is happening. In other words, pretty much what Gronan said in the other thread about morale and casualties.
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 3, 2015 10:15:49 GMT -6
Post by Stormcrow on Feb 3, 2015 10:15:49 GMT -6
Strictly speaking, D&D does not have its own morale rules for monsters. There is what's on pp.12–13 of Men & Magic, but this is really about the loyalty of those in service to player characters and how well they obey instructions. Yes, you can make the morale rules for party members work for monsters too, but this is not strictly according to the rules.
The D&D FAQ goes into more detail, saying that unintelligent monsters fight until death. The morale of intelligent monsters, it says, is up to the referee. You can use the rules in Chainmail, it says, or roll two dice, with 2 being bad morale and 12 being good morale, and no other values or procedures explained. Once again, you can make that roll of two dice on the reaction table in D&D, but it's still not spelled out for you.
Note that various monsters and other rules have +1 or -1 to morale dice, so whatever system you use to determine morale should work with those values.
Later editions of D&D would convert the Chainmail rules into something a little simpler, giving the conditions for checking morale (the same for all monsters) and a morale score for each monster. AD&D would make things more complex, using a similar system for morale-check conditions, but calculating morale based on situational modifiers to a base value.
In general, the simplest way to handle morale is to have your monsters react however you think most appropriate, as Gronan has said.
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 3, 2015 16:21:49 GMT -6
Post by geoffrey on Feb 3, 2015 16:21:49 GMT -6
From the second issue of The Strategic Review: I love OD&D.
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Feb 3, 2015 16:41:34 GMT -6
I like the "emergent play" of a lone kobold potentially having a steel-spined 12 morale and a red dragon who turns tail at the first sign of being hurt. All to often when things are left to DM's to decide "what's appropriate" you get a banal world.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Anderson on Feb 3, 2015 16:53:01 GMT -6
The 2-12 table, in its many incarnations, is pure genius. Possibly the best single game mechanic in the game or in any other.
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 4, 2015 5:01:09 GMT -6
Post by snorri on Feb 4, 2015 5:01:09 GMT -6
The 2-12 table, in its many incarnations, is pure genius. Possibly the best single game mechanic in the game or in any other. All the Apocalypse World family of games is a clever use of this mechanic
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 4, 2015 6:20:29 GMT -6
Post by derv on Feb 4, 2015 6:20:29 GMT -6
From the second issue of The Strategic Review: This suggests rolling up a morale score for monsters and then using a roll under mechanic with specified and situational modifiers changing the score. Generally, if you roll up or assign a morale score of 12, that is the same as saying "need never check morale". For hirelings, one could use their Loyalty score. In contrast, the Reaction Table does not require a morale score, but is more deterministic in it's outcomes. It also requires rolling high for positive outcomes, so modifiers would be applied to the roll instead of the score. Just an observation.
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 4, 2015 7:43:38 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Scott Anderson on Feb 4, 2015 7:43:38 GMT -6
I'm still thinking about whether to use separate morale and loyalty mechanics or whether to combine them. They're very similar in most ways. A failed morale score results in essentially the same thing as a failed loyalty score, but the loyalty score seems to imply that there are additional times where it would trigger- "deserts at first opportunity" &c.
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 4, 2015 8:47:40 GMT -6
Post by Stormcrow on Feb 4, 2015 8:47:40 GMT -6
This suggests rolling up a morale score for monsters and then using a roll under mechanic with specified and situational modifiers changing the score. Not really. It just advocates rolling two dice and eyeballing how high the total is. The higher, the more confident the monster. There is no cutoff point implied. It's really just the reaction table without the specific number groupings. "8. Ehhh... I guess they keep going for now, but they're not too pleased about it."
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 4, 2015 12:32:31 GMT -6
Post by geoffrey on Feb 4, 2015 12:32:31 GMT -6
This suggests rolling up a morale score for monsters and then using a roll under mechanic with specified and situational modifiers changing the score. Not really. It just advocates rolling two dice and eyeballing how high the total is. The higher, the more confident the monster. There is no cutoff point implied. It's really just the reaction table without the specific number groupings. "8. Ehhh... I guess they keep going for now, but they're not too pleased about it." Eyeballing things is my general refereeing style. There are so many factors that could affect an intelligent monster's morale that, rather than adding and/or subtracting a bunch of points from a 2d6 roll, I prefer to roll the dice and trust my gut.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Feb 4, 2015 16:09:58 GMT -6
I'm still thinking about whether to use separate morale and loyalty mechanics or whether to combine them. They're very similar in most ways. The way I read it loyalty is much like another ability score (strength, intelligence, etc.). It's (effectively) a score in the range 3-18 that is more-or-less fixed for the period of an adventure, unless exceptional circumstances dictate that it should be adjusted. It's up to the player whether he attempts to cultivate higher loyalty amongst his hirelings (or not!) by good treatment, increased payment, etc. Morale is a heat of the moment test. It's checked in specific (stressful) circumstances, in a similar way, perhaps, to a saving throw. A hireling's loyalty score can adjust a morale check: if a hireling is very loyal he is less likely to abandon his master under duress. If he is disloyal, then he is more likely to abandon his master under duress. From this perspective loyalty and morale are quite different. One is a stat, the other is a test adjusted by that stat.
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 4, 2015 16:48:25 GMT -6
Post by waysoftheearth on Feb 4, 2015 16:48:25 GMT -6
Strictly speaking, D&D does not have its own morale rules for monsters. There is what's on pp.12–13 of Men & Magic, but this is really about the loyalty of those in service to player characters and how well they obey instructions. Yes, you can make the morale rules for party members work for monsters too, but this is not strictly according to the rules. The D&D FAQ goes into more detail, saying that unintelligent monsters fight until death. The morale of intelligent monsters, it says, is up to the referee. You can use the rules in Chainmail, it says, or roll two dice, with 2 being bad morale and 12 being good morale, and no other values or procedures explained. Once again, you can make that roll of two dice on the reaction table in D&D, but it's still not spelled out for you. Note that various monsters and other rules have +1 or -1 to morale dice, so whatever system you use to determine morale should work with those values. Yes To be perfectly nitpicky the "Non-player characters" mentioned on p13 of M&M could imply the monsters too. My interpretation is that the FAQ is explaining that the 2d6 morale rule suggested in M&M can be made to serve both sides. Either way it's left to the ref to interpret the result since the reaction table isn't about combat outcomes. For that we need to either re-interpret the existing table (see above), or else just interpret the roll on the fly.
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 5, 2015 9:17:54 GMT -6
Post by Stormcrow on Feb 5, 2015 9:17:54 GMT -6
To be perfectly nitpicky the "Non-player characters" mentioned on p13 of M&M could imply the monsters too. The section is entitled "Loyalty of Non-Player Characters (Including Monsters)." This refers to NPCs hired as described on the previous page, plus monsters lured into service by means of the reaction table. The section discusses how well henchmen and hirelings will obey instructions during dangerous situations, such as combat. Men & Magic already addressed the players' own side; the FAQ addresses the monsters' side (where monster is used in its original game sense of "anyone encountered on an adventure"). Yes. Or use Chainmail.
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 5, 2015 17:00:47 GMT -6
Post by waysoftheearth on Feb 5, 2015 17:00:47 GMT -6
I agree with what you're saying stormcrow.
I was merely pointing out that even without the additional clarity provided by the FAQ we might find M&M's morale rule being applicable to monsters too. E.g., How else would we handle loyalty/morale checks for an Evil High Priest's retinue of evil mercenaries? And if they happened to be orcs rather than men? And if the EHP happended to be a...
But it matters not; the FAQ is as clear as can be.
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 5, 2015 18:40:00 GMT -6
Post by derv on Feb 5, 2015 18:40:00 GMT -6
I'm still thinking about whether to use separate morale and loyalty mechanics or whether to combine them. They're very similar in most ways. From this perspective loyalty and morale are quite different. One is a stat, the other is a test adjusted by that stat. Strictly speaking, I agree with this. But Loyalty is directly related to Morale. It is really an extra step between a PC's Charisma and negotiation skills that bears out a hirelings morale status. It serves no other purpose then effecting morale checks and possibly reflecting their disposition to their employer. It's worth noting that neither hirelings with very low scores (3 or less) nor ones with very high scores (19+) need check morale. Their reactions are already determined on p.13 M&M. As I implied above, any score can be tested. In the case of the Loyalty score, one could forgo using the Reaction Table and simply roll a d20. A roll under the recorded Loyalty score would be a passed morale check. The score would also be subject to any situational modifiers a GM would want to apply. Consider that even Chainmail's Excess Casualty Morale Check assigns scores by type. In this case, it's roll high on 2d6 (kind of the opposite of what Gary may have been talking about in the SR FAQ). Light foot need 8 or better and Mounted Knights only need 4 or better to remain in melee. Mounted Knights within range of their Commander would only need a 3+ and would not need to check morale again. Personally, I would consider this a middle of the road approach to handling morale when compared to the more deterministic approach of the Reaction Tables and the looser approach that relys on the GM's judgement calls and eyeballing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2015 1:31:13 GMT -6
There are a BOATLOAD of things that I'd look at the Loyalty score and ignore Morale.
Are any of your hirelings/henchmen cheating you? Cook overinflating the price of food, seneschal skimming from taxes, etc etc etc.
Those things would be hugely influenced by Loyalty but they have buggerall to do with Morale.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Anderson on Feb 6, 2015 6:09:10 GMT -6
There are a BOATLOAD of things that I'd look at the Loyalty score and ignore Morale. Are any of your hirelings/henchmen cheating you? Cook overinflating the price of food, seneschal skimming from taxes, etc etc etc. Those things would be hugely influenced by Loyalty but they have buggerall to do with Morale. That's a whole new way of looking at it for me. Thank you. So, can we say that morale is specifically for combat and other life or death situations, and that loyalty is for general outlook and non-combat situations? What kinds of modifiers would loyalty get? If morale had modifiers, certainly these are a subset of loyalty modifiers. Or more precisely, the Venn diagram overlaps to some degree. When I was working out domain management rules, I was strongly influenced by ACKs. I put together a table of "domain morale" modifiers which largely (but not entirely- some random chance involved) determine whether things are going poorly or going well in the domain from month to month. A number of these modifiers would seem to apply directly to henchmen's loyalty. At the macro level of domain play, its pretty abstract, but some of the same conditions should apply to this (new to me) concept of loyalty.
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 6, 2015 6:12:21 GMT -6
Post by derv on Feb 6, 2015 6:12:21 GMT -6
Question Mike- does M&M suggest that you can have high loyalty and low morale? Can you have low loyalty and high morale? In my opinion, they seem to coincide. Notice that I did not suggest getting rid of Loyalty, though.
It is questionable whether many use Loyalty scores or Morale at all. I would think few. Some one should do a survey.
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Feb 6, 2015 8:56:59 GMT -6
So, can we say that morale is specifically for combat and other life or death situations, and that loyalty is for general outlook and non-combat situations? Morale is whether your men will obey your instructions during difficult or dangerous situations; loyalty is whether they have the best of intentions for you at heart.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Morale
Feb 6, 2015 16:11:26 GMT -6
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2015 16:11:26 GMT -6
So, can we say that morale is specifically for combat and other life or death situations, and that loyalty is for general outlook and non-combat situations? Morale is whether your men will obey your instructions during difficult or dangerous situations; loyalty is whether they have the best of intentions for you at heart. Pretty much dead on. Your cook may buy only the highest quality ingredients, use the finest of his skills for every meal, bargain to get the best prices, remember what all your favorite foods are, etc, etc, etc, but the day the Orcs come swarming over the walls he's legging it in the other direction as fast as he can.
|
|
|
Morale
Feb 6, 2015 18:37:14 GMT -6
Post by derv on Feb 6, 2015 18:37:14 GMT -6
It might be of interest to some that the whole Reaction Table and Loyalty mechanic seems to have its roots in Chainmail. It's not referred to as Loyalty in Chainmail, so you could also think of it as Discipline or Obedience. On page 19 of "Historical Characteristics" under the description of Mercenary Troops and Peasants is the shadow of the system found in M&M. It even seems to humorously refer to the affect of Charisma on hirelings/mercenaries: on a die roll of 4-6 it says, "Carry out orders normally for the next three moves, no die checks required during that time. (You're really a winning personality)" On a die roll of 1 it says, "More pay! Stand, no attacking or movement." Sound familiar? I've been told this is exactly what "uncertainty" means on the Reaction Tables. Maybe I'm reading too much into it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Morale
Feb 6, 2015 19:19:01 GMT -6
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2015 19:19:01 GMT -6
Well, they were written by the same guy.
|
|
|
Morale
Jun 4, 2018 12:04:15 GMT -6
Post by tetramorph on Jun 4, 2018 12:04:15 GMT -6
Hey, @gronanofsimmerya, and other folks:
As someone who did not come to D&D through miniature war-gaming (my apologies), I have been interpreting morale to mean that the monsters / NPCs attempt to run away.
But the rules say that creatures that loose morale surrender or are subdued.
Then I realized something: retreat is NOT due to loss of morale. It is, itself, a tactical move, a strategic decision.
By the time the troops / creature have/has lost morale, they have lost the power to make a decision (or take rational orders).
Instead, they just throw down their weapons / roll over and ask for mercy.
Am I getting this more accurately now?
Thanks for the help.
Fight on!
|
|