Worlds that are not dualistically divided between good and evil.

[Zurvan]

I'm loking for a RPG that is not the same old Good vs. evil theme.

Is there something more grey out there?

I prefer medieval fantasy but I can work with modern urban rpgs too.

[Leon]

Iron Kingdoms.

The Setting for the Tabletop War games Warmachine and Hordes. At its most basic its a world at war ~ Both Hot and Cold at varying times through its history with enough space and depth to cover pretty much anything you want to do. It has its own system these days but also had a 3.5 Version that you may be able to find resources for still.

[Red Fel]

I'm a big fan of Ironclaw. Medieval fantasy, low magic, a few monsters, but mostly it's personal conflict. Royals versus royals. Royals versus peasants. Orthodoxy versus heresy. Church versus nobility. Merchants, nobles, craftsmen, clerics and occultists. Stir well and serve with claws.

There are evil people. And there are good people. But mostly, it's people versus people, not Good versus Evil.

[TandemChelipeds]

Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay? Warhammer's pretty much evil vs. evil, or at least evil vs. unwashed peasant masses.

Dark Heresy, if you're willing to but some space opera peanut butter in your grimdark fantasy chocolate. Also, Rogue Trader and the entire rest of the Fantasy Flight Games WH40k RPG catalogue.

Seventh Sea is more along the lines of the 18th century, but it doesn't have an alignment system, and revolves far more around in-universe nationalism than morality. Legend of the Five Rings, for samurai games revolving around intrigue and conflicting notions of honor and duty. Exalted, if you don't mind power levels OVER NINE THOOOOUUUUUUSAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND! And even if you do, you can just play a peasant and enjoy farming dirt in the shadow of living gods. I mean, it has a system of Virtues, but they drive you crazy if you get them too high, so they aren't strictly a good thing.

Regular old DnD, with the right DM and houserules.

[Knaight]

Basically any RPG that isn't D&D doesn't push the dualistic division. This gets particularly true if the game focuses on intrigue, complex social dynamics, etc.

That said, for medieval fantasy I'd recommend REIGN specifically. It's deliberately very grey, it's a very good system, and it's generally just a joy to read.

[VoxRationis]

Even D&D doesn't necessarily put a lot of emphasis on the matter; it really depends upon the DM and the setting. I know for a fact that in several of the campaigns I've both run and played in, alignment has basically been irrelevant to both character-making and setting.

[Jeff the Green]

Even D&D doesn't necessarily put a lot of emphasis on the matter; it really depends upon the DM and the setting. I know for a fact that in several of the campaigns I've both run and played in, alignment has basically been irrelevant to both character-making and setting.

Uh huh. Eberron's gray and gray, and Dark Sun is black and gray. In my home setting the fundamental conflict is pure matter (elementals and outsiders) vs. mixed matter (everybody else, but especially fey). There's definitely Good and Evil outsiders, but they're all fundamentally anti-life. Some are just nicer about it. Most humanoids consider allegiances to family, clan, or country far more important than alignment.

You just have to choose to emphasize some other element over Good and Evil.

[Pex]

Ars Magica

There's no true morality consideration at all unless a player wants one. If anything it's a three-way conflict among Magic, Faith, and Reason with the player characters inherently on Team Magic but allow for Faith or Reason aspects in the character. Order of Hermes is heavily political and intrigue. The campaign can easily ignore game flavor text and just have the players be a party of Wizards and warrior Companions doing familiar fantasy adventuring stuff.

[Sidmen]

I'd like to throw Exalted into this race too.

Nobody is good in that setting - the gods overthrew the ancient primordials because they were being forced to work. And the primordials were surprised by this because the gods were built to do those jobs and weren't even really considered "alive". Sure, there are the "super evil" guys - the Neverborn, but they just want to die and end their torment (which they think means they have to take everything else with them).

The vast bulk of the game is centered around the Realm - a dynastic monarchy that would be the Evil Empire if it weren't actively defending the world from Fae invasions and Demonic cults. Sure, they're pretty much jerks, but no more than the Romans were. The only reason they're cast in the "bad guy" role most of the time is because they've been lied to and convinced that most of the Player Character groups are evil demons out to destroy the world.

[Eldan]

Uh huh. Eberron's gray and gray, and Dark Sun is black and gray. In my home setting the fundamental conflict is pure matter (elementals and outsiders) vs. mixed matter (everybody else, but especially fey). There's definitely Good and Evil outsiders, but they're all fundamentally anti-life. Some are just nicer about it. Most humanoids consider allegiances to family, clan, or country far more important than alignment.

You just have to choose to emphasize some other element over Good and Evil.

Even Planescape is classically more about Law vs. Chaos and the fifteen factions.

[Zombimode]

Basically any RPG that isn't D&D doesn't push the dualistic division. This gets particularly true if the game focuses on intrigue, complex social dynamics, etc.

The calling out of D&D is actually irrelevant because this is dependent on the setting and not the system. I've never played in a setting that was "dualistically divided between good and evil".

[vasharanpaladin]

The calling out of D&D is actually irrelevant because this is dependent on the setting and not the system. I've never played in a setting that was "dualistically divided between good and evil".

Get back to us on this when they release an edition that enables Dark Is Not Evil just as easily as the opposite.

Seconding Exalted. It's basically Classical mythology; the gods aren't necessarily good so much as they were strong enough to wrest control from the original creators of the world and silence anyone who complained. The PCs aren't necessarily "good," either; they just have power, the will to use it, and potentially a propaganda machine to make them "good" after the fact.

And the closest thing to a God of Evil is the Ebon Dragon, who defines himself as the nemesis of everything, which means he's a Complete Monster to everything in existence on a personal level.

[Eldan]

Get back to us on this when they release an edition that enables Dark Is Not Evil just as easily as the opposite.

What do you mean by enable? Shadow magic, for one, is not evil at all. As are a number of shadow creatures. And no one stops you from writing your own setting where good shadow demons are fighting evil lantern archons.

[BWR]

Ars Magica

There's no true morality consideration at all unless a player wants one. If anything it's a three-way conflict among Magic, Faith, and Reason with the player characters inherently on Team Magic but allow for Faith or Reason aspects in the character. Order of Hermes is heavily political and intrigue. The campaign can easily ignore game flavor text and just have the players be a party of Wizards and warrior Companions doing familiar fantasy adventuring stuff.

At least in 5e, the default is that there is a God and the Abrahamic religions are basically right. If you play by that rule, there is most definitely Good vs. Evil. It doesn't come up much, however.

Planescape was very definitely as much about Good vs. Evil. It was also Law vs. Chaos. And Evil vs. Evil and Good vs. Good and Good vs. Law etc, etc, etc, Exploring the definitions of these terms and testing/proving their limits and superiority/inferiority was an integral part of the setting.

L5R can very easily by played ignoring the Taint and Shadowlands, focusing on the politics and samurai drama of the empire. Honor is not the same as good, and duty and loyalty is more important than personal morality.

[Sith_Happens]

The calling out of D&D is actually irrelevant because this is dependent on the setting and not the system. I've never played in a setting that was "dualistically divided between good and evil".

I have. It was called Hyrule. Nice place, you should visit some time.

[Red Fel]

I have. It was called Hyrule. Nice place, you should visit some time.

To be fair, Hyrule isn't dualistically divided between good and evil. It's trialistically divided (is that a word? it is now) between Courage, Power, and Wisdom. Or, in common parlance, between Good, Evil, and Damsels In Distress.

Seriously, P-Zel needs her own game. Tingle got his own game, for crying out loud, P-Zel has earned it. Smash Bros. doesn't count. Also, we need to start calling her P-Zel.

[Sartharina]

To be fair, Hyrule isn't dualistically divided between good and evil. It's trialistically divided (is that a word? it is now) between Courage, Power, and Wisdom. Or, in common parlance, between Good, Evil, and Damsels In Distress.

Seriously, P-Zel needs her own game. Tingle got his own game, for crying out loud, P-Zel has earned it. Smash Bros. doesn't count. Also, we need to start calling her P-Zel.

There was one, though, in the Triforce of Terror.

[Blackjackg]

I'm a little surprised by the folks that say D&D isn't necessarily dualistic. Admittedly, most settings don't divide the multiverse into one group which is Good and another group which is Evil, but at least on an individual level that duality is written into the rules. Looking at 3.5, for instance, the Paladin class, alignment Domains, and alignment restrictions on Summon Monster spells are just a few examples of that fundamental duality in the core rules. Is it the only duality at work in D&D's rules? No. Is it possible to houserule it out? Sure. But it does represent a fundamental metaphysical divide in nearly every official D&D setting (Dark Sun being one possible exception).

Fortunately, as has been said, most other game systems avoid that particular shortcut. Even White Wolf's World of Darkness is all about shades of grey. Just pick a genre and browse titles until you find one you like.

[Zombimode]

Looking at 3.5, for instance, the Paladin class, alignment Domains, and alignment restrictions on Summon Monster spells are just a few examples of that fundamental duality in the core rules.

None of your examples point at any duality the world is divided by. They indicate that D&D has alignments, which by themselves don't constitute a divide.

[Blackjackg]

None of your examples point at any duality the world is divided by. They indicate that D&D has alignments, which by themselves don't constitute a divide.

They do indicate that the alignments are diametrically and aggressively opposed to one another. The paladin must be Good and has the ability to Detect and Smite Evil (or, if you play with the ACFs, Evil paladins Detect and Smite Good). The Evil Domain grants Protection from Good and Dispel Good, and vice-versa. Among the defining features of Good is that it opposes Evil, and of course the feeling is mutual.

I admit, the Summon Monster thing is less an indicator of diametrical opposition than the other two, but since Good characters cannot summon Evil monsters and Evil characters cannot summon Good monsters, it still serves as a reminder that the boundaries between Good and Evil are clearly defined-- it's possible to be neither, but it's not possible to be both.

But even setting aside the Summon Monster thing, it's still clear that written into the rules of the game is a objective, definitive and active division between Good and Evil.

[Arbane]

Pretty much ANY modern-day game that's isn't In Nomine (that one's demons vs. angels).

Scifi games like Traveller, Transhuman Space, or Eclipse Phase. (Cyberpunk games, too, though there the morality tends to be 'bad vs. worse'.)

RuneQuest's world of Glorantha has Everyone vs. Cosmic Chaos, but that's not dualism so much. (And lots of other rivalries, hatreds and disputes as well.)

Really, Good vs. Evil dualism seems to be mostly for High Fantasy and superheroes these days.

[Jeff the Green]

They do indicate that the alignments are diametrically and aggressively opposed to one another. The paladin must be Good and has the ability to Detect and Smite Evil (or, if you play with the ACFs, Evil paladins Detect and Smite Good). The Evil Domain grants Protection from Good and Dispel Good, and vice-versa. Among the defining features of Good is that it opposes Evil, and of course the feeling is mutual.

I admit, the Summon Monster thing is less an indicator of diametrical opposition than the other two, but since Good characters cannot summon Evil monsters and Evil characters cannot summon Good monsters, it still serves as a reminder that the boundaries between Good and Evil are clearly defined-- it's possible to be neither, but it's not possible to be both.

But even setting aside the Summon Monster thing, it's still clear that written into the rules of the game is a objective, definitive and active division between Good and Evil.

That's not what dualism means. It means there are only or primarily two opposing forces at work. This is true in some settings where Law-Chaos is downplayed, but it is not true in all of them nor is it built into the game.

[LibraryOgre]

Ars Magica

There's no true morality consideration at all unless a player wants one. If anything it's a three-way conflict among Magic, Faith, and Reason with the player characters inherently on Team Magic but allow for Faith or Reason aspects in the character. Order of Hermes is heavily political and intrigue. The campaign can easily ignore game flavor text and just have the players be a party of Wizards and warrior Companions doing familiar fantasy adventuring stuff.

I disagree with this.

First of all, Reason was only around in 3rd edition; 4th edition was released about 18 years ago, and has been a free PDF for 11 years.

Secondly, though, while you can choose to deemphasize it, Mythic Europe is all about Good and Evil; the Divine is good, the Infernal is Evil, and both are everywhere.

[Octopusapult]

The calling out of D&D is actually irrelevant because this is dependent on the setting and not the system. I've never played in a setting that was "dualistically divided between good and evil".

Was coming to say this. You don't need a new system / RPG, you just need to change settings / GM / campaigns.

[Ettina]

D&D can be made non-black/white by just fleshing things out a bit. For example, wererats are supposed to be evil, and they'd gladly kill humans, but they are very loyal to the other wererats in their warren. Whereas a typical adventuring party would defend innocent humans, but happily murder wererats. The only reason wererats are considered evil is because we're supposed to be on the humans' side.

[Zavoniki]

World of Darkness with just about every splat and New or Old doesnt have a divide between good and evil necessarily. You have a Morality track which represents good - evil... sometime. For example in New Changeling its called Clarity and represents how sure you are your not hallucinating the real world, and are actually back in Arcadia being tortured by your Keeper.

[BWR]

D&D can be made non-black/white by just fleshing things out a bit. For example, wererats are supposed to be evil, and they'd gladly kill humans, but they are very loyal to the other wererats in their warren. Whereas a typical adventuring party would defend innocent humans, but happily murder wererats. The only reason wererats are considered evil is because we're supposed to be on the humans' side.

And because wererats happily hunt and eat humans, often infect them to procreate and the disease causes severe personality change.

[Ettina]

And because wererats happily hunt and eat humans, often infect them to procreate and the disease causes severe personality change.

Yeah, but humans do nasty things to 'evil' races all the time.

[DontEatRawHagis]

Dark Sun in D&D. The world is a blighted wasteland where there really are no good guys. Each city is run by an evil sorcerer king or corrupt government. Slavery is common place. Halflings are cannibles. Elves are raiders and theives. Magic eats away at nature. And even the Preserver magic users that chose not to destroy the land are a "freedom fighter"/terrorist organization that is so secretive and disorganized that they are the closest to actual good guys, but are very self centered and willing to do evil acts as log as they defeat defilers.

Or Paranoia the RPG. Where the computer is law and everyone is against each ther.