Having talked about Alignment and Reaction Rolls, I think I can manage another thread on classic mechanics that help mitigate some of the concerns around moral essentialism (and the corresponding racial essentialism) in modern D&D. Today that's going to be Morale...
1/

Like the Reaction Roll, Morale is a simple concept, a mechanic for modelling when a non-player creatures (including henchmen and NPCs) decide combat (or optionally anything else) decide they've had enough and flee, surrender, or seek a truce.
2/

Morale and the concept of it runs through the rules for combat in the earliest editions of D&D, which includes morale effects for items, a discussion of henchman loyalty and morale and notes on various monster moral, but throws the issue back to Chainmail for mechanics.
/3

Pg. 13 of the Chainmail's 2nd edition has basic morale rules as shown below, and it's worth noting that they are very important to the game and OD&D. Chainmail is a medieval war-game, where units and armies breaking is the main way to win. Morale in it is complex and central.
/4

OD&D isn't a war-game though... and the novel addition D&D makes to tabletop play is playing individual avatars, characters. Thus rolling morale for them (as opposed to units of soldiers) apparently felt frustrating, meaning morale checks have always been limited to NPCs.
/5

Players have always had the option to run away, and it's classically it's been an important one, though out of favor with the linear design of balanced combat adventure paths where the only way to proceed is through the specific combat built for player victory.
/6

Morale, even in OD&D was for monsters, henchmen and NPCs, and while important it's not the same central mechanic as it might be in a war-game. 1981's Basic D&D has a clean and simplified version (also in AD&D) on page B27.
/7

Note that B/X also defines Morale as an optional rule, and this perhaps is the beginning of the end for the rule, its added complexity and the nuance it can bring to adventure design.
/8

Even as an optional rule Morale is specifically noted for creatures in the Basic, far more then in AD&D - which offers % based general mechanics but doesn't weigh them by creature type as it does in B/X - see this Troglodyte form the Basic rules:
/9

Even 5th Edition D&D includes a morale system! On page 273 of the Dungeon Master's Guide. Like most of 5E's rules it's more complex and tied to the unified DC mechanic, but it's there.
10/

So we've got a variety of Morale systems, but it's rarely or ever mentioned as a mechanic in WotC's 5th editon adventures? Why is that? To answer that we need to know what Morale does?
11/

Morale functions to:
A) More quickly wrap up larger combat encounters.
B) Allow PC victory through intimidation schemes.
C) Reintroduce Role Playing and Faction Intrigue after combat.
D) Compel player moral decisions.
E) Complicate and circumvent linear adventure design.
12/

(A) Checking for morale means that when an enemy is having the stuffing beaten out of it my the party it's likely to flee or surrender. The combat will end one way or another without having to continually roll another round of combat.
13/

(B) Dangerous enemies with cowardly natures (such a hordes of weak creatures) or special fears can be induced to flee or surrender through players' exploitation of them.
14/

(C) Morale failure will lead many creatures to surrender, especially sentient beings such as orcs, goblins and human enemies. This means that the players will have a second chance to engage in roleplaying and demand answers to questions or interact with factions.
15/

(D) With surrendered enemies players will also need to decide what to do with their captives. Slaugthering them for being "evil" is pretty monstrous by most standards, but releasing them or even taking then in for trial (assuming its possible) can create complications.
16/

(E) With monsters surrendering, revealing clues, offering to serve the party and running away to plot revenge it becomes harder to create linear adventures because it becomes harder to predict what situations will occur, and who players will respond.
17/

So my discussion of the advantages of Morale mechanics may leave you wondering how to include them in your game? Mechanics aren't really a problem, though I like the variation and simplicity of B/X's morale stat. What about the ethics of play and design change to include it?
18/

Morale does require that the GM think about a few things - have some theory of mind for monsters, much like a reaction roll require figuring out what monster want, morale requires figuring out how they react to fear, and what they fear.
19/

Morale lets the GM or designer add character and behaviors to monsters that differentiate them as much as special abilities. Ghouls that paralyze a victim and try to run off with them when injured only to attack again are a lot scarier then ghouls that fight without pause.
20/

Again the mechanics (OD&D complexity, B/X simplicity or 5E's WIS based DC check) don't matter much, what matters is the possibility of psychological victory in combat and the issues of flight and surrender that it raises.
21/

Like Alignment and Reaction Rolls it's the addition of moral complexity that makes it less suitable for WotC's 5E adventures as complexity means smaller scale adventures, less narrative push and most of all a loss of designer control over story beats and climaxes.
22/

Art here is from a variety of 80's, 90's and contemporary D&D/fantastic sources - Jeff Easley is in here, as are others. Mostly it's just themed around flight.