20 Virtues And/Or Vices
Recently, I wrote a different blog post that gave some background context behind me writing this, here.
I've been working on my own quasi-alignment system for well over a year now and I'm pretty happy about how it's been able to create NPCs (and PCs) with interesting motivations. It consists of 20 values in 10 opposing pairs, which I tried to phrase neutrally, and which I hope could characterize either a protagonist or an antagonist. I mostly have created it with fantasy adventure games in mind, although it's probably more universally applicable.
The complete list:
- Mercy vs Ruthlessness
- Courage vs Prudence
- Cunning vs Honesty
- Ambition vs Humility
- Impartiality vs Loyalty
- Self-Sacrifice vs Survival
- Passion vs Stoicism
- Asceticism vs Extravagance
- Frankness vs Propriety
- Novelty vs Tradition
How To Use
While you could go down the list and pick one of each, I find it's easier to make and portray a memorable character if you pick a small number that are important to them. I typically roll a few times. A d20, with 1-10 being the first part of the pair and 11-20 being the second allows you to randomly select a few. I usually do two values for NPCs and three for PCs. Picking just one tends to make characters that are, well, one-dimensional. I skip any repeats or any opposite pairs.
The first 6 are probably more deeply held values, with the last 4 being more something that can set the style, look, or attitude of the NPC, so you could instead roll a d12 and just consider the first 6. Or roll a d12 for one of the values and a d20 for the other.
Another option is to roll a 1d10 and pick based on what makes sense for the character. A classic heroic story might have the heroes always choose mercy over ruthlessness and courage over pragmatism, for instance.
Factions: I'll often also give one or two values for factions. Individual members of the faction might vary, but groups as a whole can have shared values. An order of knights might value courage and self-sacrifice, but the particular knight you meet might seem largely motivated by ambition.
Reaction rolls: A quick and easy social mechanic can be that matching values result in a positive reaction, and clashing values result in a negative reaction. It oversimplifies the breadth of human experience, but so do any social mechanics. Alternately, you could have it modify reaction rolls. Roll twice and take the higher if the values match, roll twice and take the lower if they clash. Then any result is still possible but shared values skews the results.
More On Each Set Of Values
This part is way too long, but I need to stop spending time on this and get the blog post out.
Mercy vs Ruthlnessnes
I've been struggling a lot with the second word; I'm looking for something both neutral and specific.
Do the ends justify the means? Do your enemies deserve a second chance, or will sparing them only lead to further evil? Someone who believes in mercy might see their opposites as cruel, and someone who believes in ruthlesness might see their opposites as weak or naive.
Protagonists who embody mercy could be healers, pacifists (religious or otherwise), or rogues who use stealth to avoid violence. Those who embody ruthlessness are probably antiheroes: they might be assassins, the person you call in when a hard but necessary task is needed; revolutionaries or those otherwise forced to exist in a ruthless environment. When they coexist in a party, there might be a tension between the two, but an understanding that different methods are needed at different times, and maybe a certain amount of pretending to not know what is happening.
Ruthless villains are sort of the default, but if this comes up, maybe they are willing to kill the party for relatively trivial reasons. A merciful antagonist might be a knight who insists on fighting everyone who wants to cross the bridge, but not to the death; a hive-mind of strange beings that decides you will be happier if you are absorbed into the colony and never allowed to leave; a king who is in denial about the harm he is causing and refuses to let anyone speak of any such unpleasantness.
This is one where the exact meaning of the values should be in line with your table's boundaries as to what to play in a game.
Courage vs Prudence
Someone who believes in courage might see prudence as cowardice, and someone who believes in prudence might see courage as foolishness, recklessness or irresponsibility.
Protagonists who embody courage might include berserkers, monster-hunters, or rogues performing extreme feats of acrobatics. Adventurers necessarily lean somewhat towards courage, but someone embodying prudence might be forced into adventuring through circumstance, or have learned through hard-won experience that prudence is the secret to a long adventuring career. Magic-users or stealthy hunters might better embody prudence. When coexisting in a party, it makes sense for each to fall into roles that take advantage of their predispositions.
An antagonist who exemplifies courage might fight until the last breath; glorify warfare as an end in and of itself, or might be an automaton incapable of self-preservation. An antagonist who exemplifies prudence might be a mastermind who plots behind the scenes, or one who only ever fights from a position of strength, falling apart if they are ever outnumbered.
In the context of adventuring this is mostly physical courage, but courage (and prudence) can take other forms in other settings. This is also one where courage could take different dimensions: a brave fighter may be afraid to take an unpopular moral stand. Interpret this as whatever form of courage is most relevant to your setting.
Cunning vs Honesty
An honest character might place a lot of stock in their word or in their honour; a cunning one is willing to use lies and deception. Think Gawain vs Loki or Odysseus. A cunning character might see an honest one as naive or gullible; a honest one might see a cunning character as dishonest.
Protagonists who are cunning are more likely to fall into a trickster archetype. Rogues, illusionists and performers might be cunning, whereas warriors who adhere to a code of honour are often depicted as honest. Religious figures are often expected to be honest. There are a lot of stories which pair an honest and cunning character together for comic effect, which might be good inspiration for how characters with opposite values can get along.
Antagonists who embody honesty might be supernatural beings incapable of lying; they might find it amusing to keep the letter but not the spirit of their word; they might implacably hunt the party down because they broke an oath; or they might think a strict code of honour is a substitute for morality. Antagonists who use cunning might use traps or spies; they might be monsters that mimic the player's voices; they might be supernatural beings with very dangerous ideas of a funny prank.
Ambition vs Humility
Ambitious characters strive for power (magical, political, or otherwise), wealth, fame, status, respect or personal excellence, and might look down on those who don't seek those things. A character that values humility has no desire to seek these things, and might be distainful or untrusting of those who do. They might have a more egalitarian outlook, or believe that everyone should stay in their proper place in the existing hierarchies of the world.
An adventurer who exemplifies ambition might be actively working towards wealth or power: ruling over a domain, acqurining powerful magic, or making pacts with dangerous beings. Many level-based games assume a certain level of ambition, and so if you pick this one, have it be somewhat more than the baseline. An adventurer exemplifying humility might have devoted their life to a religious order; they could be a rogue openly distainful of nobility; a druid who views the ambitions of human society as frivolous. Different attitudes towards this value don't have to clash if everyone respects each other's paths in life.
An antagonist motivated by ambition might be trying to take over the world (or kingdom, or town); they might be trying to unlock powerful magic better left alone; they could be friendly competitors who keep showing up at every turn to try and snatch away a goal only one group can achieve. An antagonist motivated by humility could be a spirit that punishes hubris; an official who thinks the party needs to be shown their proper place in the kingdom; cultists who seek to have everyone bow to the will of their god.
Impartiality vs Loyalty
Loyal characters put their friends, family, community, leader or organization ahead of the rest of the world, whereas impartial characters treat everyone equally. Loyalty is an often overlooked motivation for a group to stick together given any other obvious reason.
Loyal characters have a strong reason to stick together as an adventuring party; impartial characters need another reason, such as duty or money. They might be a mercenary, or be here because it's their job and they've been assigned to this task. Criminal organizations traditionally stick together through loyalty enforced by violence.
A loyal antagonist could be a henchperson, a closely knit group of evil friends, someone from a different community who hates your community, a monster who kills anyone who it things has wronged its unwitting friend, or an otherwise noble knight who tragically feels obliged to follow an evil lord. An impartial antagonist might demonstrate equal cruelty to their followers as to the players; or mercenaries who will oppose you as long as they get paid; a monster that attacks both you and your enemies equally; a literal force of nature; an unbribeable judge who is determined to bring the party to justice for their misdeeds.
Self-Sacrifice vs Survival
A self-sacrificing character is willing to suffer or even be willing to die for what they think is important. A character focused on survival is, well, focused on survival, which might include a loved one or close family members.
A protagonist who embodies self-sacrifice may be more of a traditional hero, or they may have given up a lot for power. One who embodies survival may be more of an anti-hero if they're in a high-powered fantasy setting: they might have a backstory where they have had to survive, or a well-meaning mercenary. In a post-apocalyptic or horror setting, being oriented towards survival may be more the default.
An antagonist motivated by survival might be focused on trying to extend their life, or be some kind of monster that is only dangerous because it feels threatened, or be someone who betrayed you to protect their family. An antagonist motivated by self-sacrifice might be a fanatic devoted to a greater cause, or they may have made a terrible bargain for power. They could be creatures that explode on contact or otherwise die like bees to protect a larger group.
There are some similarities with courage vs prudence. But a prudent advisor, say, might always advise avoiding risk, and then when their advice is ignored, stick around to help out until the very end. A brave mercenary might do any job for the right price, as long as there's a chance of survival, but they're gone as soon as the money stops coming.
Passion vs Stoicism
Passionate characters express emotions freely and exhuberantly, and might see those who don't as untrustworthy or insufficiently sincere. Calm characters value control over their emotions and might see their opposites as immature.
In terms of fantasy archetypes, barbarians and bards would generally be more passionate, whereas monks and paladins are more stoic. Magic-users might use passion to power their magic, or be required to be stoic to remain control. This and the remaining ones are somewhat less serious as values go, and so while you might play up character differences for comedy, there is no reason that within a party they would have to cause conflict.
A passionate antagonist might be a villain who flies into a terrible rage; a supernatural being whose songs leave you transfixed by sadness or your mind clouded by ecstatic joy, or an immortal undead who staves off the boredom of eternity with cruelty. A stoic antagonist might be an icy cold tyrant; a supernatural being that doens't understand your pain or fear; a religious figure who views strong feelings as weakness that leads to evil.
Asceticism vs Extravagance
Ascetic characters take pride in needing very little of the comforts of life. They might dress simply, own few things, prefer a lack of ornament, eat plain food, and abstain from drink or other intoxicants. An extravagant character might wear elaborate clothing, be fond of food or drink, or the other comforts of life. They may not necessarily pursue all of these: they could be a wealthy noble, or like the hobbits eat 6 meals a day, or spend every coin as soon as they get it.
In terms of fantasy archetypes, some religious figures might be expected to wear plain clothing and live plain lives, whereas others might wear elaborate vestments or hold feasts for the glory of their gods. A druid might distain the comforts of civilization, or believe that you should enjoy the bounty of the natural world as much as possible. A knight might revel in the wealth of their position or believe that a spartan lifestyle strengthens their ability to fight.
Extravagance can be a good motivation for a more heist-themed game: trying to steal the most elaborate cake, most beautiful cape, or rarest wine for instance can be more of a fun premise than just stealing money. Conversely, a more ascetic character might grow dissatisfied with the luxuries of living in a house like a normal person and feel driven to go seek out the simplicity and even discomfort of adventuring life.
An ascetic villain might include religious extremists, a frighteningly disciplined army, a miserly lord who hoards the taxes extracted from peasants, or a lich contemptuous of your weak and fleshy bodies. Good extravagant villains might include a vampire count, a greedy lord who wastes the taxes extracted from peasants, an elven court or a rival bard.
Frankness vs Propriety
Someone who values frankness might see the other as being dishonest or insincere; someone who values propriety might see the other as being rude or boorish. Propriety is likely to be valued when meeting the king; frankness might be valued more in the barracks. People often switch between these to some degree as needed, but others firmly stick to one or the other.
In protagonists, this probably depends more on your background than anything else. Courtiers, diplomats and merchants are more likely to value propriety, but frankness might mean you have the status to get away with speaking your mind. Warriors and others for whom power comes from action rather than speech might tend to be more frank, or they migh speak more carefully because an insult can lead to death. Magic and religion might require precise, careful and polite speech.
A villain who values propriety could be in a court full of intrigue and backstabbing, or the court of the fey where rudeness can lead to death. They could be someone who prefers to couch what they do in euphemisms. A villain who values frankness might respect the party for insulting them to their face (but still intend to kill them).
Novelty vs Tradition
Do you stay in your hometown or always want to see what is over the next horizon? Do you stick to the traditional obligations of your role or break from them?
A protagonist motivated by tradition might be a member of an ancient order or religion. They may have traveled far from home but keep to the things they learned in their childhood. Dwarves in fantasy often exemplify this. A protagonist motivated by novelty may have left their home out of wanderlust or a desire to see the world. They could clash with the expectations of where they grew up - for instance, a noble who ran away from home because court protocol was stifling, or someone who left town so they would not be forced to take over the family business.
An antagonist who values tradition might be hunting down one of the adventurers to make them adhere to an unwanted role; they might be an undead being who is determined to return the world to how it was 1000 years ago; a village where human sacrifice is just how they've always done things. A villain who values novelty could be a dragon that collects people like people used to collect butterflies, a wizard with a terrible new invention, or a monster that eats brains to absorb your experiences.
As a side note, this is a tricky one to give serious examples for, especially for antagonists who value novelty, because the notion of tradition vs novelty exists in the context of us living in the modern world, to some degree. In the past this might have manifested as a genuine belief that people should not step outside of the expectations of tradition and society. I don't think this is a likely attitude of player characters, though. Starting maybe with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, though, you start getting different attitudes about changes happening in society due to science or otherwise. Much as Tolkien denies it, LotR is probably in part about the industrialization of war, contrasted with the nostalgic and pastoral life of the hobbits. Or you could keep this confict as a set of minor character traits.
Poll results and more on develolping this list
To get some idea as to whether these alignments make sense, I asked on mastodon which one people think apply to them. I had about 25-35 answers on each question, and I got enough balance that I'm happy with it:
- Courage vs Prudence: 62% vs 38%
- Honesty vs Cunning: 61% vs 39%
- Ambition vs Humility: 20% vs 80%
- Loyalty vs Impartiality: 42% vs 58%
- Mercy vs Ruthlessness: 79% vs 21%
- Self-sacrifice vs Survival: 40% vs 60%
- Passion vs Calm: 40% vs 60%
- Asceticism vs Extravagance: 54% vs 46%
- Propriety vs Frankness: 29% vs 71%
- Tradition vs Novelty: 28% vs 72%
The least balanced one is ambition vs humility, followed by mercy vs ruthlesnness. These conflicts might be more prominent in stories than in real life, and these are two I feel I have to inclue regardless.
For the approximately 70/30 ones, we had propriety vs frankness and tradition vs novelty. I think this split is reflective of the values of the culture that I personally exist in, rather than a universal trend. For the rest I was pleased to see a more even split. These included some of the ones I was most afraid I had just made up, so I'm glad to see that they divide people in real life as well.
I cut two since when I started: one was "wisdom vs innocence" - I was trying to get at how some cultures value youth more (ours tends to, to some degree) and others value age more, but I felt it was both hard to convey in one word as well as hard to make it actually appear in how an individual character behaves.
The other one I cut was was justice vs - well I couldn't quite find a second word. Accepting things as they are. The desire to change the world for the better vs the belief that the current nature of things are unavoidable. Between struggling to find a way to concisely articulate the concept, and the fact that it has some overlap with other values, meant I decided to cut it, conveniently leaving the final list at 20.