Quote:
Originally Posted by talonthehand
That may be the case, but with how common digital piracy has become you may be the exception rather than the rule.
|
I'm not arguing that Honesty or even Legalistic is widespread (though I think Legalistic might be reasonably common). I'm arguing that the intent of Honesty is not to make an unplayable disadvantage that requires the character attempt to turn themselves in for speeding or shut-down completely when they realize that the law requires two conflicting courses of action or something. IME, the intent is much more straightforward then a lot of people seem to characterize it.
Relevant to the OP, I think (again) that if a character is doing things that are horrific by a reasonable person standpoint appropriate to the campaign and setting, then you can have them roll Fright Checks when witnessing the consequences (just as if they saw someone else do it!). Moral wounds are a real-life phenomenon as a consequence of interpersonal violence.
GURPS Tactical Shooting has rules for this, and
GURPS Horror: The Madness Dossier suggests inflicting Stress on Sandmen for doing horrible but necessary things even if they don't normally require a Fright Check. Obviously only do this in campaigns where moral decay is thematically appropriate!
On the other hand, as Bill says, such behavior is often thematically inappropriate to begin with so the real solution is to talk it out and maybe boot the problem player if you can't come to an agreement.