Post/Author/DateTime	Post
stargate525 07-07-06, 01:00 AM	Ok ladies and gentlemen, this is how this is going to go. I'm going to break down the SRD reputation variant, point out what I don't like by bolding it, then move on. Once I'm finished, I'll summarize everything at the bottom of the post, and offer what I think will fix it. (those of you too lazy or knowledgable to follow the breakdown can feel free to skip ahead and await me there). Now, we begin. What I Don't Like About It. Hard and fast rules for how far a character’s reputation spreads are more trouble than they’re worth; whether reputation applies in any situation is best left up to the GM. But in general, the “radius” of a character’s reputation slowly increases as she attains higher levels. This is not something that I don't like, in fact I like that phrase alot. However, as we can see below... But what happens if she then visits the planar city of Glyff? She’s never been to the place before, and most Glyff residents have never been to the Material Plane, so her reputation doesn’t follow her there. But once she accomplishes something (often an adventure) that earns her a measure of fame in Glyff, her reputation “radius” expands to encompass that city. Not only do Glyff residents tell tales of her most recent adventure, some might be curious enough to find out what she accomplished on the Material Plane before coming to the City of Portals. ...this general premise does not always hold true. So to counter that they put this little passage in. With the event-based reputation variant, a character who is a newcomer to her location has a reputation score of 0 until she earns at least a ½-point increase by succeeding on an adventure in that location. Once she has done so, she gains the benefit of her full reputation score. When using level-based reputation increases, a character is entitled to benefit from her full reputation score once she has been in her new location for at least one level’s worth of adventuring, even if the adventures themselves didn’t bring her any reputation increases. No. No, no, no, no, no. Don't tell me that if I had done amazing things in my homeland, got shipwrecked on a desert island and then saved the indian cheif's daughter they'll treat me like they did in my homeland. Or if I've been looting orc caves for a level and have never surfaced, they know of me? This is, at best, a leaky patch to fix a gaping oversight in the design of the reputation rules. What a character’s reputation represents lies in the character’s interaction with the NPCs or monsters. Most characters with a high reputation bonus (+4 or higher) are considered well known within their profession or social circle. Whether this notoriety has a positive or negative effect depends on the point of view of the person who recognizes the character. Huh? If you want good people to like you and evil people to hate you, this works alright. But what if you're neutral? Or evil? What happens if I do something evil guys love and good guys hate? What happens to my reputation score then? What I really don't like here is that they are lumping a positive and a negative modifier together, and expecting the players and the DM to sort it out. Reputation Checks Sorry about that, but this must be said; REPUTATION SHOULD NOT BE A DICE ROLLING MECHANIC. At least not in this sense. Either your reputation is there or it isn't, but rolling a check like this is moronic. When an NPC or monster with an Intelligence score of 5 or higher has a positive opinion of a character’s reputation, the character gains a bonus on Bluff, Diplomacy, Gather Information, and Perform checks equal to his reputation bonus. When an NPC or monster with an Intelligence score of 5 or higher has a negative opinion of a character’s reputation, the character gains a penalty on Bluff and Intimidate checks equal to his reputation bonus. I agree that reputation should have an effect on skill checks. I do not think it should fluctuate with the reputation score itself like this. I don't even think there needs to be a set of guidelines for this. If the player thinks the guy is a saint, he'll trust him. If he thinks he's a crook, he won't. DMs should act accordingly. A player character has a reputation score based on his class levels; Table: Reputation Scores, summarizes this information for the standard player character and NPC classes. ahem... No. This makes no logical sense. Simply becuase a person is more powerful does not mean that they are more famous. Take Aragorn from the LoTR trilogy. Obviously a powerful character, but not famous in the slightest until very late, and only becuase of what he was doing at the time. Had he been the equivalent of a 1st level commoner, he would be just as famous. Event-Based Reputation A valiant effort by Wizards, but in the end it falls short. Using these guidelines, characters could buff up their reputation on public quests that are high in fame but low in XP. I agree that there should be rewards, but not like that. How I Plan to Fix it. Alright. So far I've argued that the current reputation system is; Nebulous regarding handling of expanding circles of notoriety. Clumsy in defining Fame and Infamy. Powerful, giving hefty bonuses to diplomatic skill checks when smaller (or nonexistant) ones would suffice. Level-based. Simply becuase I'm powerful does not mean I'm famous. Exploitable. Doing enough stuff in your hamlet will get you noticed by the king across the ocean? How? How I plan to fix these problems is thus; Design a system in which expanding circles of fame are clearly defined. Make a true difference between fame and infamy. reduce the effects reputation has on rolls, and allow the DMs to decide on checks. Remove the level-basis for fame. Try and Remove the exploitability of aspects of the system. First up... Design a system in which expanding circles of fame are clearly defined. Alright. Currently fame is handled as a single number. What if it wasn't? Why don't we make it more like the base attack bonus that we all love and adore? For instance, instead of having; Fame Score We could have; local fame/regional fame/national fame/international fame/continental fame/planar fame/etc. Not only does this give a more natural progression of fame, it also clearly shows how famous you are wherever you are. Instead of trying to extrapolate what you did where, and what applies to your specific location, just look at the darn number. Using this system, and hence the progression (5/0 -> 6/1), we need to make fame much easier to aquire. In the old system 20 or 25 was about the maximum. In this system, we'll choose a number, say... 50. Now, that 50 is a cap for each section of the rating. So theoretically the best you could get is 50/50/50/50/50/50, although that would be unlikely. so using the progression, the best you could get doing only local things would be a 50/45/40/35/30/25. ... Far too high. Alright. obviously with a cap of fifty using 6 as the magical crossover number is too low. How about 11/1 instead? 50/40/30/20/10/0 Still too high methinks. Some more options available; 16/1: 50/35/20/5/0/0 21/1: 50/30/10/0/0/0 26/1: 50/25/0/0/0/0 31/1: 50/20/0/0/0/0 I've bolded the one I think is the most realistic. If you've worked that hard in one little hamlet, the monarchy should have noticed, at least a little. Now that we have progression down, what does this mysterious number actually mean? This is just a rough estimate, but with fifty as the max... 1-5: A few knowledgable people have heard of you, although no one of great importance has yet, or if they have they don't care. Most people on the street, when told your name, will go 'who?' 6-10: More people have heard of you, although your name isn't getting you into many parties yet. Most commoners still don't know who the heck you are. 11-15: People who matter have heard of you, if only to be sure to keep an eye on you. Your name begins to hold some clout, although you will still be kept waiting awhile to see the Wizard. 16-20: Many of the people have heard of you, though only a few have a strong opinion one way or the other. People might buy you a drink in the tavern. Your name carries some clout in the right circles, and if told your name, most people will go 'oh yeah, that guy. Didn't he slay a doorhandle or something?' 21-30: People know you. If not by your name then by 'that guy you should see about your dragon problem'. You can get into restaraunts without waiting, but they'll still make you pay. 31-35: Your famous. You start getting a fan club, you need to start carrying a pen for autographs, people get mistaken for you. Your name has lots of clout, and it will only get more form here. You might start seeing some 'discounts' as well. 36-40: You have a lot of fame. everyones knows of you, and finding a place that doesn't is difficult. You're beginning to trip over your fans, and are running through ink pretty fast. 41-45: You're very famous. You're a household name, and must have been living under a rock if you don't know it. People often come up to you to express their fandom, and you have a hard time going out in public. 46-50: You are the epitomy of fame. You're a household name, so much so that children are liable to know your name before those of their neighbors. Your visiting any town is a major event, you have a hard time moving more than fifty feet away from your house without some form of parade starting up in your honor, and people are seriously considering founding a church that worships you. alright. Now that that's done... How, do you ask, can you get your reputation up above 10 at the national level? By doing fameworthy things at that level. Kill the kobolds annoying the hamlet and you'll get local fame. Kill the dragon threatening the country and you get national fame. The nice thing about this is that doing big stuff also nets you lesser fame. For instance, if you get 1 national reputation point, but only had fifteen in the regional, your regional score immediately gets bumped up to where it would normally have been, in this case 21. The bad part about this is that it only reaches down one level. so lets say the score was 36/15/0, and you got that national point, your new score would be 36/21/1. Scores lower on the list must always be at least five higher than the one next highest, so a score of 36/34/14 is invalid, and so is 50/30/10/6. Okay, I think that sums it up, so onto the next one. Make a true difference between fame and infamy. Simple, just make a different scale. Evil acts count towards infamy, and good towards fame. For determining game statistics, they cancel each other out, perfect. reduce the effects reputation has on rolls, and allow the DMs to decide on checks. Alright. Reputation affects diplomatic skill roles by adding a bonus equal to one tenth of your appropriate score rounded down. This seems to be a much more manageable bonus to me. Reputation also affects the starting attitude of people you meet by one tenth of your appropriate score rounded down. This makes people generally friendlier to you anyway. Remember, fame and infamy cancel each other out. Remove the level-basis for fame. You don't get a bonus for your power, except you can go on higher-level quests which gets you more fame. Level has a direct link to reputation no longer. Try and Remove the exploitability of aspects of the system. I would hope I've already done that. The only problem I forsee is the DM handing out too much fame. 1-3 points for decent quests (finding a lost item), 4-7 for bigger quests(rescuing a princess), and no more than 12 for truly amazing quests (the one ring into the mountain of doom) would be my off the top of my head rule of thumb. Now then. If you're still here, congratulations. I would welcome your input on how to further polish and refine this system to perfection. Right now I know it's a little number heavy regarding getting fame, and any way to reduce that is welcome.
FlameLover 07-07-06, 07:38 AM	I prefer handling fame in a much more abstract way. When a character does something particularly note-worthy in an area, they will get a type of fame and a rating for it between 1 and 5. For example after slaying the local orc bandits around a village, a character may earn Hero of Village [1]. The number represents how far-reaching it is - 1 is local, 2 regional, 3 national, 4 international, 5 planar. When interacting with someone who would be positivley influenced by the reputation, you get a bonus on social checks equal to the rank. When interacting with some who'd dislike you for the reputation, take a penalty equal to the rank. This is very similar to what you have done, except less rulesy and a bit more free-form. For example you might have a reputation of Drunkard [3] meaning you're known across the kingdom as being a heavy drinker. It does seem to miss a level, although I can't plae my finger yet on what. Anyway, that's my 2 cents.
Mufflon 07-07-06, 09:45 AM	Design a system in which expanding circles of fame are clearly defined. Alright. Currently fame is handled as a single number. What if it wasn't? Why don't we make it more like the base attack bonus that we all love and adore? For instance, instead of having; Fame Score We could have; local fame/regional fame/national fame/international fame/continental fame/planar fame/etc. I see a few flaws in this method, for example: What would happen if one were to do some adventuring in a small hamlet, then do some more in another continent and finnaly travels the planes and preform a bunch of heroic feats, how would your final reputation score look. Make a true difference between fame and infamy. Simple, just make a different scale. Evil acts count towards infamy, and good towards fame. For determining game statistics, they cancel each other out, perfect. This assumes that all evil is alinged and all good is aligned. Consider the following example: A lawful evil group of PC:s decide to help the Devils in thier Blood War against the Demons. They are very successful at it an earn a great measure of reputation. Now there are two ways of handling this: Either they gain Fame, for killing Demons, but that would make the evil Devils like them LESS. or they could gain Infamy, for helping Devils, but that would make the Demons like them MORE. Also consider this: A high-level group of PC:s has saved the world from a great menace. Most would consider this to be a good act, and it would thus grant them great Fame. But that would make all the evil people, who also were saved, dislike them, which to me seems quite unreasonable. ahem... No. This makes no logical sense. Simply becuase a person is more powerful does not mean that they are more famous. Take Aragorn from the LoTR trilogy. Obviously a powerful character, but not famous in the slightest until very late, and only becuase of what he was doing at the time. Had he been the equivalent of a 1st level commoner, he would be just as famous. Not in the slightest? I beg to differ. He in know throughout most of the regions in which the rangers operate he is indeed quite famous. For example: Though Butterburr don't know him by name he has clearly heard of him, he actually seems to be quite famous in Bree. Consider Gandalf, though he has certainly commited his share of high-profilde deeds before Frodo sets out, but I'd say he's pretty famous just for being a very powerful Wizard.
stargate525 07-07-06, 12:59 PM	I see a few flaws in this method, for example: What would happen if one were to do some adventuring in a small hamlet, then do some more in another continent and finnaly travels the planes and preform a bunch of heroic feats, how would your final reputation score look. I would need exact numbers on how much fame they got in each place, but it would look something like this... 50/45/40/35/30/10 I think. Like I said, it still has a couple of kinks. Also, the levels need not be like that. They could have many more levels or even fewer. This assumes that all evil is alinged and all good is aligned. Consider the following example: A lawful evil group of PC:s decide to help the Devils in thier Blood War against the Demons. They are very successful at it an earn a great measure of reputation. Now there are two ways of handling this: Either they gain Fame, for killing Demons, but that would make the evil Devils like them LESS. or they could gain Infamy, for helping Devils, but that would make the Demons like them MORE. I don't know exactly how that would work, to be honest. Also consider this: A high-level group of PC:s has saved the world from a great menace. Most would consider this to be a good act, and it would thus grant them great Fame. But that would make all the evil people, who also were saved, dislike them, which to me seems quite unreasonable. Nor this. Would you prefer to have a third one of non-aligned fame that is thrown in regardless? Not in the slightest? I beg to differ. He in know throughout most of the regions in which the rangers operate he is indeed quite famous. For example: Though Butterburr don't know him by name he has clearly heard of him, he actually seems to be quite famous in Bree. Consider Gandalf, though he has certainly commited his share of high-profilde deeds before Frodo sets out, but I'd say he's pretty famous just for being a very powerful Wizard. perhaps, but I was only using him as an example. It's still possible to become very powerful without becoming famous.
fatal error 07-07-06, 07:35 PM	I think the greatest problem with a reputation system lies in the parts of fame and infamy. As the poster before me has said, similar alignments don't always mean cooperation. Even if you added a type of fame for all 9 alignments, there'd still be two rival lawful evil thieves' guilds that wouldn't like you for doing the same things. And this is where things become particularly interesting for me, as I'm interested in creating a reputation system for a city-based campaign setting. Since it has lots of guilds, it seems like it would be almost impossible to have a system with enough differentials in reputation (many more than just fame and infamy) without being prohibitively complex.
Death_Knight 07-13-06, 11:04 AM	This is quite a bit more complex and a little more rulesy, but I have found it works quite well and is not that difficult. (I don't know if anyone here has played freelancer, but that is where the idea came from.) The basic idea is come up with a scale, I usse one of 0 to 100 where 0-33 is bad, 34-66 is neutral, and 67-100 is good. Then simply assign a value of how the characters are viewed by that orginization. If you attack a nations army, both your reputation with that nation and their allies goes down, but not as much for the allies. In addition to that scale each group has a notability scale as well. This is something more along the lines of 1-25 where 1 is the standarrd no name peasant, and 25 is the ruler of the orginization, or a major hero.
pathwalker 07-14-06, 01:44 PM	Consider a baron that controls a town. He overtaxes (infamy), has harsh laws (infamy), but evertime a threat comes up, he saves the entire town without loss of life (fame). If there was one value, it would end up around 0 at this point. Add a second value, "Reknown", how well known you are known for both good and ill combined. For bookkeeping/numbers, here's a few ideas/examples I thought of: The character goes into a town, and starts taking out thives and thugs. He gets +1/+1 (reknown/fame) for the town itself, and +3/-3 for a thieves guild (a more direct effect on them). Only record a faction if the character has a direct effect on them. For the rest of the factions, just base on thouse numbers when the character runs into them: The Church of Order (a direct opponent for the thives guild): +4/+4 A random faction that doesn't care about the thives guild (overall town rating): +1/+1 A noble that secretly allies with the thives guild: +3/-3. A group of bandits outside of town (who have a bit of an alligance with the guild itself, but could still get on their own): +1/-1 World reknown: Rather then a set number, having word spread is based on how well places are linked. Doing stuff in the capital city would affect the character fame in the country much more then some backwater town. Saving 3 cities from a major threat (at +10 renown/fame a pop), might get the character +6 on a country basis, and +1 on a world basis. Planar reknown: How about just no on this one. Unless the character in a planescape campagn, in which case some of the major planes might just be considered countries, saving one world don't make even a dent in the grand sceme of things. Cleanup: So, the character just save the world not once, not twice, but trice? Well, can probably forget about the rating for the town where the thieves were killed, or even the guild itself (Whatever ill will the survivors harbored, just saved every one of 'em. Well, except for Bob. He still harbors a grudge when the character killed his brother Billy. But that's another story). -Pathwalker P.S. Tune in next week for "See Bob", including the lines "See Bob.", "See Bob Stab.", and "Stab bob stab." But we all know how this one turns out, 'Bob vs world hero', don't we?
ElSanto 07-15-06, 12:49 PM	Startgate you suggested a third “non-good/evil” type of fame for the problems raised by Mufflon but I don’t think that is a good idea. You see I don’t think there is a real difference between fame and infamy most of the time and trying to make a difference between them is silly. Bono campaigns to end hunger, control AIDS, and heal the environment, while Don King is a known killer, who supported dictators, and stole money from his employees but they both have met with the President. Mob bosses dine with movie stars all the time. In game terms, being well known as evil or good will have the same effects on most checks. Let us say that the infamous Dark Lord walks into a shop run by Wendell the commoner. Wendell knows the Dark Lord has killed many strong and powerful forces of good and slaps around shop keepers when he does not like the service he gets. Is Wendell going to be unfriendly to the Dark Lord and treat him with less respect than he would a good person reflecting the minus that comes for his infamous reputation? No, Wendell will show the Dark Lord his finest wares and offer them to him at a lower price because he fears the Dark Lord’s wrath. On the other hand let us say St. Justin the famed Paladin busts into a thieves den and starts demanding information about where a kidnapped girl is. A low level thief may not like, St. Justin, but he knows that Justin might show him mercy if he helps him so to save his own skin he’ll spill his guts while giving him a sob story about wanting to change. Maybe Justin lets the thief go, maybe he doesn’t, but at least he didn’t get his teeth knocked in like Justin did to Greasy Pete. The Evil adventurer can intimidate good decent folk into telling him what he wants to know on his gather information checks, while decent folk would want to help out the good. Evil people would fear a good adventurer’s righteous wrath and tell him what he wants to know to avoid trouble, and gladly help the evil people in the hopes he will reward them when he comes to power. Being a well known evil will cause a large number of good people to move against you. Being a well known good will cause a large number of evil people to move against you. I’d scrap the idea of fame and infamy and just go with fame.