Improving Reputation

[barsoomcore]

I'm on board with the penalty to a failed Reputation check, and with PCs using an NPC's Reputation against them. We should probably note that a character can only make one Reputation check per encounter (so if you use your Rep to impress the minions, you can't then use it against the big bad standing behind them). This limits the "bitchy Sauron" problem.

So having a very high Reputation doesn't mean you can just trot out 20's again and again. What it means is that basically every time you meet people, you can impress them. As opposed to lesser Reps, who need to think carefully about who they're going to try and impress.

Totally agreed that once Conviction has been used against Rep, that character can't be purchased via rep.

The size of a group of minions -- I'm inclined to say heck with it, they're minions. My next instinct is to go to the Combat Unit template in the Bestiary and use, say the Attack Bonus modifier for unit size as a modifier to the Reputation check Difficulty.

Versus groups... Hm. I don't THINK so. But I dunno. If a Conviction point gives you resistance to everyone's Rep, then it's a no-brainer for any NPC to do that at the outset of any encounter, and that means Rep is just not going to ever come into play (in fact, it means every party will do best to have only low-Rep members). If it doesn't, though, then any NPC is going to have to go through a buttload of Conviction to resist Rep attempts.

What about this: when faced with a group, a character can spend a point of Conviction to use the Reputation of the highest-rep member of the group against them (pick one if there's a tie). That member cannot purchase 20's with their Rep, but other members of the group can -- but they still have to accept the penalty of their compatriot's negative Rep.

Yeah?

[The Shadow]

I'm on board with the penalty to a failed Reputation check, and with PCs using an NPC's Reputation against them. We should probably note that a character can only make one Reputation check per encounter (so if you use your Rep to impress the minions, you can't then use it against the big bad standing behind them). This limits the "bitchy Sauron" problem.

OK, that does help quite a bit. And it makes sense too - once someone is impressed, further attempts to impress them are definitely going to hit diminishing returns.

So having a very high Reputation doesn't mean you can just trot out 20's again and again. What it means is that basically every time you meet people, you can impress them. As opposed to lesser Reps, who need to think carefully about who they're going to try and impress.

One thing I like about this system is that if the Narrator wants to introduce factions, it's easy - just maintain different Reputation scores. So Strider has a massive Reputation with the Wise, but none among Country Hicks. :)

But if the group doesn't want to mess with that, they don't have to.

The size of a group of minions -- I'm inclined to say heck with it, they're minions. My next instinct is to go to the Combat Unit template in the Bestiary and use, say the Attack Bonus modifier for unit size as a modifier to the Reputation check Difficulty.

I was going with the Combat Unit stuff too, though I'm still not sure of the details.

Versus groups... Hm. I don't THINK so. But I dunno. If a Conviction point gives you resistance to everyone's Rep, then it's a no-brainer for any NPC to do that at the outset of any encounter, and that means Rep is just not going to ever come into play (in fact, it means every party will do best to have only low-Rep members). If it doesn't, though, then any NPC is going to have to go through a buttload of Conviction to resist Rep attempts.

Not at all necessarily. First and most obviously, a Conviction spent against Rep is a Conviction not usable for, say, re-rolling Toughness.

Second, there's the good ol' Prisoner's Dilemma. If the "rational" thing is for the party to have all low-Rep members, then the bad guys have no more incentive to spend the Conviction, which means all of a sudden it's in the party's interest to have a high-Rep member, and so on.

What about this: when faced with a group, a character can spend a point of Conviction to use the Reputation of the highest-rep member of the group against them (pick one if there's a tie). That member cannot purchase 20's with their Rep, but other members of the group can -- but they still have to accept the penalty of their compatriot's negative Rep.

Hmmm. Perhaps a bit too complicated. My thought:

1) If a bad guy spends a point of Conviction on Reputation, he cannot be purchased that entire scene. Conviction is precious, and should give a good return. Besides, if you're making a big point of being unimpressed by Sir Wellknown the Famous, you're not likely to be impressed by The Other Guy Who Travels With Him That The Bards Never Seem To Get His Name Right. :)

2) However, you can only use one PC's Rep against him at a time. If Baron Evildude is busy spending emotional capital trying not to be Intimidated by Sir Wellknown's fame, The Other Guy might be able to slip a Bluff past him, or the like.

Conceivably, this could be switched during the scene: "My spies tell me you're known for your smooth lies, whatever your name is!" :) but that of course leaves you *without* the bonus against Sir Wellknown.

To sum up: When you spend a point of Conviction against Rep, you cannot be purchased that scene, no matter what, and in addition you get to use the Rep bonus of one character (usually the highest) against him. The latter effect can be countered with Conviction, the former cannot.

EDIT: Oh wait, I misunderstood what you wrote the first time. You're saying Baron Evildude gets Sir Wellknown's Rep against both of them, but that The Other Guy can still try to buy him, though it isn't likely to do much good. (Because TOG's Rep is low, *and* he is still suffering a penalty equal to Wellknown's Rep.) Hmmm. That has a certain appeal too.

...Having thought about it some more, I think I like your way better. It's like, The Other Guy still gets the use of his own Reputation, such as it is, but he suffers from the fact that he's seen as part of the "Sir Wellknown Mythos". :)

[barsoomcore]

The size of a group of minions -- I'm inclined to say heck with it, they're minions. My next instinct is to go to the Combat Unit template in the Bestiary and use, say the Attack Bonus modifier for unit size as a modifier to the Reputation check Difficulty.

I was going with the Combat Unit stuff too, though I'm still not sure of the details.

Well, let's try it with the combat bonus and see what we get. At this point it's really a question of flavour -- how easy should it be for heros to impress big groups?

If you're making a big point of being unimpressed by Sir Wellknown the Famous, you're not likely to be impressed by The Other Guy Who Travels With Him That The Bards Never Seem To Get His Name Right.

I think I like your way better. It's like, The Other Guy still gets the use of his own Reputation, such as it is, but he suffers from the fact that he's seen as part of the "Sir Wellknown Mythos".

Okay. I'm going to write this up and the Diplomacy rules and update the DPoNI SRD with them, as a place to store the ideas. I'll post links here and any playtest results I get.

[barsoomcore]

Reputation rules posted for review and comment:

http://dino-pirates.com/BasicsReputationNew.php

[The Shadow]

Reputation rules posted for review and comment:

http://dino-pirates.com/BasicsReputationNew.php

Some points:

1) I am still inclined to let Low Profile lower things past the minimum. I don't think anything else should be allowed to do that, though.

2) About cost penalties for groups. Intimidate already has a Mass Intimidate challenge for dealing with groups: -2 per extra person. When using Reputation to Intimidate, it seems a bit reasonable to allow the same challenge on the Reputation check - adding +2 to cost for each additional person. Or is this too complicated?

The chart you give for affecting groups strikes me as a little too generous, but I'm not sure yet what to suggest in its place.

It seems reasonable in mixed groups to use the same system as Diplomacy - use the highest level and the highest Wis in the group.

3) Does Reputation apply to Befriending checks? I don't see why not, personally.

4) On Wealth checks, you only lose Wealth if you succeed on your roll. With Reputation, though, I think you should lose Rep whether you succeed or fail.

5) Any way you can bolster your minions against Reputation? Or perhaps counter it with your own?

Baron Evildude: Ha! I have you now! Guards! Attack!

Mysterious figure, uncloaking: Ha! The game is up, Baron! For it is I, Sir Wellknown the Famous!

Guards: Gasp! *trembletrembletremble*

Baron Evildude: Yawn. <spends Conviction> So, my old enemy, we meet again - for the first time! Guards, attack, I say! The worst he can do is kill you. I can do MUCH worse, as you well know.

Guards: Gulp! *start attacking*

The Other Guy: *backstabs Baron* Damn bards'll probably give him credit for this too...

EDIT: D'oh! I just realized how to give Renown and Low Profile a permanent edge, rather than a purely ephemeral benefit:

Renown: You gain +4 Reputation. Also, every time you are awarded Reputation, you get +1 more than you otherwise would.

Low Profile: You are -4 on Reputation. Also, every time you are awarded Reputation, you can choose to forego all but 1 of it. (An award of +1 can become +0 if desired.)

With this setup, you could have both Renown and Low Profile, though it would be suboptimal. You could choose on a case-by-case basis whether an event you're involved in gets played up or hushed up. Dunno if these feats should be allowed to be taken more than once.

We could also apply this to Wealthy, letting the rich get richer.

A further question:

What about secret identities? A secret agent might have a fearsome Reputation as The Scarlet Pimpernel or whatever, but be blessedly unknown in his private life. I suppose that could be handled on an ad-hoc basis.

[barsoomcore]

All good stuff, I think.

I was also pondering impersonating someone -- you can use somebody else's Reputation IF you make a Bluff check (or a Disguise check if you're dealing with people who know the person). So you can CLAIM to be Sir Wellknown, and thereby use HIS Reputation -- and in fact even tarnish it in the process!



So a great DM trick now becomes randomly reducing PCs' Reputation. When they ask why it's because somebody out there is impersonating them, and being a doofus in the process. I think that's awesome.

As far as #5 goes, maybe we could say that a leader of minions gets a +5 or something on Reputation checks against their own minions. So if Sir Wellknown makes a Reputation check against Baron Evil's minions, and Intimidates them into retreating, the Baron can make a Reputation check with a +5 bonus to Intimidate them right back.

You think?

[The Shadow]

I was also pondering impersonating someone -- you can use somebody else's Reputation IF you make a Bluff check (or a Disguise check if you're dealing with people who know the person). So you can CLAIM to be Sir Wellknown, and thereby use HIS Reputation -- and in fact even tarnish it in the process!

Wow. That's... wow. Risky. Unless Sir Wellknown is a complete stuffed shirt.

So a great DM trick now becomes randomly reducing PCs' Reputation. When they ask why it's because somebody out there is impersonating them, and being a doofus in the process. I think that's awesome.

I'd think that'd be a rotten thing for the Narrator to do, unless he was giving a way to regain one's Reputation back by exposing the fraud.

As far as #5 goes, maybe we could say that a leader of minions gets a +5 or something on Reputation checks against their own minions. So if Sir Wellknown makes a Reputation check against Baron Evil's minions, and Intimidates them into retreating, the Baron can make a Reputation check with a +5 bonus to Intimidate them right back.

Or perhaps the Conviction to resist Reputation can also rub off on one's minions if one is present?

EDIT: To follow up on a previous point, perhaps Low Profile halves the amount of Rep you gain from a given award, if desired. Simpler that way.

[barsoomcore]

That's... wow. Risky.

And such great opportunities for FUN!

I'd think that'd be a rotten thing for the Narrator to do, unless he was giving a way to regain one's Reputation back by exposing the fraud.

Well, yes, of course. Seems like a great way to me to get the players to really HATE somebody, though.

Or perhaps the Conviction to resist Reputation can also rub off on one's minions if one is present?

I thought about that but it's a little weird because the resist rule only works when someone wants to use your reputation against you and then you resist that -- which doesn't have anything to do with commanding minions about.

To follow up on a previous point, perhaps Low Profile halves the amount of Rep you gain from a given award, if desired. Simpler that way.

I haven't missed this point, just haven't had a chance to review your thinking and comment. I'll get to it tonight, I hope.

[barsoomcore]

I am still inclined to let Low Profile lower things past the minimum. I don't think anything else should be allowed to do that, though.

My concern is that A) it makes things more complicated. Instead of a minimum, we now have a... something or other that most of the time behaves like a minimum but in certain cases doesn't...

Also B) I think heroes should have to manage a certain amount of fame. If you want to live anonymously, don't be a hero. Take levels in Ordinary, if that's what you want.

About cost penalties for groups. Intimidate already has a Mass Intimidate challenge for dealing with groups: -2 per extra person. When using Reputation to Intimidate, it seems a bit reasonable to allow the same challenge on the Reputation check - adding +2 to cost for each additional person. Or is this too complicated?

Well, I want it to be possible for Reputation to affect big shrieking crowds -- the rock star effect, you know? A character who is heavily invested in Reputation ought to be able to sway armies with it.

It seems reasonable in mixed groups to use the same system as Diplomacy - use the highest level and the highest Wis in the group.

Yup.

Renown: You gain +4 Reputation. Also, every time you are awarded Reputation, you get +1 more than you otherwise would.

Low Profile: You are -4 on Reputation. Also, every time you are awarded Reputation, you can choose to forego all but 1 of it. (An award of +1 can become +0 if desired.)

I like this.

[barsoomcore]

As far as secret identities go, this is a use of the "create an alias" use of Bluff in the Experts Handbook, no? Your alias starts with zero reputation, and gains reputation for any adventures in which the alias is supposed to be adventuring.

[The Shadow]

Also B) I think heroes should have to manage a certain amount of fame. If you want to live anonymously, don't be a hero. Take levels in Ordinary, if that's what you want.

Upon reflection, I agree.

Well, I want it to be possible for Reputation to affect big shrieking crowds -- the rock star effect, you know? A character who is heavily invested in Reputation ought to be able to sway armies with it.

Yes, I know what you mean. I'm still mulling it over.

Renown: You gain +4 Reputation. Also, every time you are awarded Reputation, you get +1 more than you otherwise would.

Low Profile: You are -4 on Reputation. Also, every time you are awarded Reputation, you can choose to forego all but 1 of it. (An award of +1 can become +0 if desired.)

I like this.

I think it works better for Low Profile to halve Reputation awards (round down). It works exactly the same, except +4 becomes +2 instead of +1, and it's easier to remember.

re: Aliases, I thought of that independently, and you're right. Since the alias starts at zero Rep, it's a great way for a high-level famous hero to avoid the burdens of fame.

EDIT: Though I wonder if having a distinct alias is really a skill-use, or if it's a Benefit feat? It has a very feat-ish feel to it.

[The Shadow]

Or perhaps the Conviction to resist Reputation can also rub off on one's minions if one is present?

I thought about that but it's a little weird because the resist rule only works when someone wants to use your reputation against you and then you resist that -- which doesn't have anything to do with commanding minions about.

Returning to this point, I don't think we're quite communicating here.

I'm saying that when Baron Evildude spends Conviction to use Sir Wellknown's Reputation against him, his minions can also use it against him as long as the Baron can communicate with them. Basically, he's warning them to be on guard against Wellknown's smooth tongue and threatening them with dire consequences if they disobey him.

Or if that's too strong, perhaps they benefit from the bonus against interaction, but don't become immune to being bought.

[barsoomcore]

I wonder if having a distinct alias is really a skill-use, or if it's a Benefit feat? It has a very feat-ish feel to it.

I would probably allow a player to go either route, actually.

[barsoomcore]

When Baron Evildude spends Conviction to use Sir Wellknown's Reputation against him, his minions can also use it against him as long as the Baron can communicate with them. Basically, he's warning them to be on guard against Wellknown's smooth tongue and threatening them with dire consequences if they disobey him.

Oooohhhhh....

Ha. Yes, that makes perfect sense. I've updated the online document.

[The Shadow]

In that case, except perhaps for improving the penalty for groups of minions...

Our work here is done. Other than playtest, of course, which may cause us to change the "pricing".