Karma.

[Damhoof]

The karma system appears very barren at the moment. I propose that all characters aspire to become ministry mares! Like wasteland heroes proper. This is just my take on it, and I would appreciate input.

Aspiring harmony / discord: The 5 virtues of equestria. Pick an aspiring harmony, gain the opposite aspiring discord.

These skills may be used once per day / Session.

Fluttershy:
Kindness: 5-50 additional healing to a medical potion or healing spell that you use. if you dont mind that is.
Cruelty: 5-50 extra damage for 1-5 rounds. Provided you have made snide and cruel remarks about it first.

Pinkie Pie:
Laughter: Removes fear or confusion from the entire party, provided you sing a song to inspire them or take a speech check to convince your enemies that they “gotta share, they gotta care!”
Anger: Damage you take for the remainder of combat is reduced by 2-20. You constantly find excuses to be angry and threatening towards friends and enemies alike. Rage is one helluva anesthetic.

Applejack:
Honesty: Honestly, them dice don`t matter between friends anyway. Guaranteed hit on all attacks for 1-5 rounds on any action taken.
Liar: Ah haven`t made mah turn yet! Mah attacks were critical 20s all across dis here board. You gain an extra turn were all your attacks are criticals.

Rainbow Dash:
Loyalty: If one of your party members are about to get struck by a critical blow. You have a 10-100% chance to take their place. Damage prevented this way is cut in half.
Betrayer: For the remainder of combat, whenever you are the target for damage there is a 5-50% chance to push an ally into harms way. If this roll succeeds you gain an extra attack on your next turn.

Rarity:
Generosity: Vendors feel generous around you this particular day and give all party members a 2-20% discount on goods. You feel an urge to aid those less fortunate wherever you see them.
Greed: Vendors struggle to make you part with loot but stretch themselves far to buy, because obviously if you struggle this hard then the loot must be valuable. All items you sell are worth 5-50% more caps. If you manage to convince the greedy side of you that the caps are worth parting with a share of your dragon hoard.
Items or caps you pick up cannot be shared with the party. Only sold at the same 5-50% increased rate.

Twilight:
Friendship: All your friends get 5-10-15-20-25-30 extra AP for the remainder of combat
Faithless: Your party is useless. It is always up to you and for that you gain 2-20 extra to all skill-throws and 2-20 extra damage for the remainder of combat

[LuckyLeaf]

Karma itself is just a way of tracking the general demeanor of the character in an absolute scale of morality. It can be used as a reference fore interactions between characters (though it is just a simplistic replacement since video games can't deal so easily with the complexities of actions, consequences and reputation implications.)

It seems what you suggest is more related to the concept of virtue in FoE.

[Damhoof]

True, true, but you could still use the karma system to measure how virtuous the character is. As in you decide the character upholds this virtue the highest, and by adhering to that virtue then the character will go upwards or downwards in the grander scheme of things.

[Fridge]

I've got three big problems with this idea off the top of my head, one bigger than the other two.

Number one: What if one's inherent virtue isn't one of the big six? I mean, LittlePip herself isn't a big six mare and she deserves as much cool stuff as any other pony would get. Of course, the GM could work with the player and make a set of their own, but that's just more trouble and speculation to deal with.

Number two: What if the player aspires for neutrality? It seems that doing that, given the numbers you're bringing up, would utterly shaft them compared to other ponies who are more focused. I mean, you could make it so that you get around the half way point whenever you invoke them, but I find that most ponies are more inclined to do one thing and one thing really well.

Finally, number three and the big one here: I'm afraid introducing that concept will screw with game balance, especially for those who are creating their own virtues and therefore have no standard for what equates to balanced. I mean, some of that is absolutely great early game, but will drop like a stone in usefulness as a campaign goes on. A pony that picks kindness for example, may start the game with a cool +25 or something to throw into healing, which is almost, if not broken at that level. Alright! But as the campaign goes on, a measely 50 HP for one healing potion might not be as an attractive an option as five turns of +50 damage. In addition, things like betrayer that throw other party members under the train is a great way to start inter-player friction, and I've seen inter-player friction kill games. Not only would a group of players have to be legendarily cool with each other for that not to come up again, it's bad form regardless.

TL;DR: The idea sounds good on paper, I'm just not entirely bought on the 'practice' bit.

[Damhoof]

I've got three big problems with this idea off the top of my head, one bigger than the other two.

Number one: What if one's inherent virtue isn't one of the big six? I mean, LittlePip herself isn't a big six mare and she deserves as much cool stuff as any other pony would get. Of course, the GM could work with the player and make a set of their own, but that's just more trouble and speculation to deal with.

Number two: What if the player aspires for neutrality? It seems that doing that, given the numbers you're bringing up, would utterly shaft them compared to other ponies who are more focused. I mean, you could make it so that you get around the half way point whenever you invoke them, but I find that most ponies are more inclined to do one thing and one thing really well.

Finally, number three and the big one here: I'm afraid introducing that concept will screw with game balance, especially for those who are creating their own virtues and therefore have no standard for what equates to balanced. I mean, some of that is absolutely great early game, but will drop like a stone in usefulness as a campaign goes on. A pony that picks kindness for example, may start the game with a cool +25 or something to throw into healing, which is almost, if not broken at that level. Alright! But as the campaign goes on, a measely 50 HP for one healing potion might not be as an attractive an option as five turns of +50 damage. In addition, things like betrayer that throw other party members under the train is a great way to start inter-player friction, and I've seen inter-player friction kill games. Not only would a group of players have to be legendarily cool with each other for that not to come up again, it's bad form regardless.

TL;DR: The idea sounds good on paper, I'm just not entirely bought on the 'practice' bit.

1) Thats not my concern. I merely saw a karma system that did nothing, and that is the epitome of redundancy, and Littlepip was "contrary to popular opinion" not anything special.

2) All players start out at karma of -10 towards 10 or 0. If a player aspires for neutrality then they will simply have to justify getting an ability for starting the game out as a mediocre wish wash with no aspirations. Need i remind you that mediocre wish washery does not give you anything special?

3) Following sunrises or even kkats rules. This game isnt even remotely balanced at all, and level 20 characters will have still have about 250 hp. 50 additional hp on top of a healing potion just because of a moral ability is broken regardless of level. Thats why its a once per day "Flavour" ability. These are just suggested abilities that i thought up during the day. it would be better if you suggested something else or had a constructive comment rather than simply point out how bad it is to suggest revisions on a system of points that essentially does nothing.

[Fridge]

But it does do something. It's a count of your notoriety and how the world sees that particular character in general, while also being a guideline to what your character's personality is. Similar to alignment in D&D, except in this case, you have to earn it. In addition, it's a social assistance stat, meaning that if you go into a thieves' den with the karma of a saint, you're probably standing on very thin ice and if you don't start a fight while you're in there, odds are they will. This leads to similarly karma'd individuals having more of a chance to talk things out with each other, while opposite karma'd individuals might have some penalties to trying to get anything out of each other without devolving into violence. DM's use it to determine what the mood of the story should be, and figure out if the players want to be big damn heroes, dastardly whiplashes, or just wasteland wanderers trying to get by and adjust their games accordingly. Neutrality isn't just being wish wash, it's a serious character choice that leans towards either wanting to stay out of the limelight, being an opportunist, or just being a pony that just wants to please everyone.

I'm not trying to get on your back or say that this is entirely a bad idea. I've made some constructive criticism in this particular case, like starting off with 50/50 effectiveness while you're neutral and having one side increase and the other decrease depending on how your karma changes. I said that one could ask their GM assist them to make their own virtue instead of just being a cut-and-paste "big six" and throwing 99% of everypony else that aspires to a particular different virtue under the bus.

I just prefer the way it is currently, whether GM's actually use karma like that or not.

[SilverlightPony]

But it does do something. It's a count of your notoriety and how the world sees that particular character in general, while also being a guideline to what your character's personality is. Similar to alignment in D&D, except in this case, you have to earn it. In addition, it's a social assistance stat, meaning that if you go into a thieves' den with the karma of a saint, you're probably standing on very thin ice and if you don't start a fight while you're in there, odds are they will. This leads to similarly karma'd individuals having more of a chance to talk things out with each other, while opposite karma'd individuals might have some penalties to trying to get anything out of each other without devolving into violence. DM's use it to determine what the mood of the story should be, and figure out if the players want to be big damn heroes, dastardly whiplashes, or just wasteland wanderers trying to get by and adjust their games accordingly. Neutrality isn't just being wish wash, it's a serious character choice that leans towards either wanting to stay out of the limelight, being an opportunist, or just being a pony that just wants to please everyone.

I'm not trying to get on your back or say that this is entirely a bad idea. I've made some constructive criticism in this particular case, like starting off with 50/50 effectiveness while you're neutral and having one side increase and the other decrease depending on how your karma changes. I said that one could ask their GM assist them to make their own virtue instead of just being a cut-and-paste "big six" and throwing 99% of everypony else that aspires to a particular different virtue under the bus.

I just prefer the way it is currently, whether GM's actually use karma like that or not.

QFT

[RainbowYoshi]

But it does do something. It's a count of your notoriety and how the world sees that particular character in general, while also being a guideline to what your character's personality is. Similar to alignment in D&D, except in this case, you have to earn it. In addition, it's a social assistance stat, meaning that if you go into a thieves' den with the karma of a saint, you're probably standing on very thin ice and if you don't start a fight while you're in there, odds are they will. This leads to similarly karma'd individuals having more of a chance to talk things out with each other, while opposite karma'd individuals might have some penalties to trying to get anything out of each other without devolving into violence. DM's use it to determine what the mood of the story should be, and figure out if the players want to be big damn heroes, dastardly whiplashes, or just wasteland wanderers trying to get by and adjust their games accordingly. Neutrality isn't just being wish wash, it's a serious character choice that leans towards either wanting to stay out of the limelight, being an opportunist, or just being a pony that just wants to please everyone.

I'm not trying to get on your back or say that this is entirely a bad idea. I've made some constructive criticism in this particular case, like starting off with 50/50 effectiveness while you're neutral and having one side increase and the other decrease depending on how your karma changes. I said that one could ask their GM assist them to make their own virtue instead of just being a cut-and-paste "big six" and throwing 99% of everypony else that aspires to a particular different virtue under the bus.

I just prefer the way it is currently, whether GM's actually use karma like that or not.

This.

[Damhoof]

But it does do something. It's a count of your notoriety and how the world sees that particular character in general, while also being a guideline to what your character's personality is. Similar to alignment in D&D, except in this case, you have to earn it. In addition, it's a social assistance stat, meaning that if you go into a thieves' den with the karma of a saint, you're probably standing on very thin ice and if you don't start a fight while you're in there, odds are they will. This leads to similarly karma'd individuals having more of a chance to talk things out with each other, while opposite karma'd individuals might have some penalties to trying to get anything out of each other without devolving into violence. DM's use it to determine what the mood of the story should be, and figure out if the players want to be big damn heroes, dastardly whiplashes, or just wasteland wanderers trying to get by and adjust their games accordingly. Neutrality isn't just being wish wash, it's a serious character choice that leans towards either wanting to stay out of the limelight, being an opportunist, or just being a pony that just wants to please everyone.

I'm not trying to get on your back or say that this is entirely a bad idea. I've made some constructive criticism in this particular case, like starting off with 50/50 effectiveness while you're neutral and having one side increase and the other decrease depending on how your karma changes. I said that one could ask their GM assist them to make their own virtue instead of just being a cut-and-paste "big six" and throwing 99% of everypony else that aspires to a particular different virtue under the bus.

I just prefer the way it is currently, whether GM's actually use karma like that or not.

You could have fooled me with that initial post. You see part of why I made this suggested revision is because less roleplay savvy players have inconsistent characters. I wanted to punish that with a karma system revamp.

I have reached the conclusion that with your proposed changes this system could become infallible. I agree virtues beyond the elements of harmony do exist. That is why one could propose an ability based on the DND alignment system and then whenever a character deviated you could punish that with a drop in the overall effectiveness of that ability. It is more hazzle than it is worth so i shall not adamantly promote adopting it as you made the excellent point of DMs using the current system. I now see the error of my ways.