how did you know I was a freshman comp-sci student playing a gung-ho marine?! (really did, though the GM preferred D&D so we ended up misjumping to a fantasy world. Gravbelts and powered armor vs dragon: we both died though my marine was blessed by a goddess for her bravery and came back. so in theory that was not entirely dumb: who knew magic existed and an animal could actually damage armor?)
The problem here is that the human experience covers such a wide range of variability that some people are reduced to tears by being called bad names and some people can get shot several times and go on like just another day and got work that still needs doing. If you're going to enforce a system on players, you almost need another stat, call it Guts, where 2 is crying at namecalling and 12 earns medals of honor. I just leave it to players to RP however their characters play want to be. We have one player who's very skittish and won't even walk into a peaceful TL4 farm village without having done tactical recon and watched the village for a day from concealment, even when the party is running against a time-critical goal. The other players walked into the village without him and started getting info from the locals and Mr. Skittish gave up and rushed to re-join the party.
I have one included, essentially it lets you try and be a hero. What you describe doesn't cover what I use morale for. It's usually for the unexpected, like surprise situations.
Coping with the unexpected is often down to training and experience as much as anything. To pull an example from RL, the pilot that landed with no engines on the Hudson River was in a situation not covered by any training or procedures, but he pulled everyone out alive. I am curious how your system works, thoiugh.
That's why I like 2e Boot Hill's Bravery attribute: it doesn't say you can or can't do something, but it may affect how steady you are while doing it.
I warn my players up front I don't pull punches: no fudging the dice, no 'balanced encounters.'
I've (literally) never seen morale as an agency issue, but that's because I've never seen player agency above that of a board game as valuable. I've long used "You describe what you attempt" instead of "you say what you do"... Agency applies only to the attempt, not the outcome of the attempt. By setting that expectation from the get go, the hobgoblin of the OSR, "player agency" (which wasn't an issue I even saw discussed until the 00's) was a total non-issue. It was always a game, and agency was never absolute. And if any portion of game exists, agency is inherently always limited, and hence a state of absolute agency in game a delusion.
The system uses training and experience as a baseline then applies situational modifiers to this. There is also an option for being a "hero" where you can attempt to pass a check to do something insane or reckless with a chance of catastrophic failure being possible too. The long-term version applies when you are in a situation for days that is wearing you out mentally and physically, like say, in a survival scenario. Yes, you can lose it mentally or physically and end up dead in those simply because you didn't take care of yourself. Your character has limits based on their rolled-up characteristics.
Well, yes, I agree agency only applies to the attempt. I've seen morale tables that require players to back down or break off an attack, though admittedly not recently.
Mine limits your actions or directs your range of responses. Nothing quite like the player being told, as they're in the middle of a gunfight, "You've had enough of this $4!+ and are royally p!$$ed off. You've gone berserk, so what next?" Or, of course, the ever popular "Run away!"
I can see that in a militia or adhoc adventure group, but not a team military or other that has worked together before. I’d say the tactics and leader DMs cover that eventuality. If I’m doing hardcore fight, the Striker morale/command system does a more detailed breakdown of keeping a unit together.
But, that would typically be the exception, not the rule with a player party. The typical party has persons from different service backgrounds, usually very diverse, who haven't worked together for any serious period of time. They have disparate weapons and equipment, some usually do not have a combat background, etc. They are essentially a small squad who are fighting together without much practice--and no, most of the time players are busy with other 'stuff' aboard ship besides training for combat as a military unit--if any as a unit.
Many of which wind up utterly wasted time...
Only if they were in after individual comms started seeing use.
