Why don't NPC's affect rep more?

Remove all ads!

It is common knowledge that when you allow a drow like Viconia or Solafien to enter your party, that the party suffers a reputation penalty of 2. However, this is to my knowledge the only time picking up a NPC affect alignment. Why don't other NPC's do so? You would think that Keldorn, who not only is a paladin, but is a well-respected, long-standing member of the Order of the Radiant Heart would have a positive effect on reputation. Or how about Mazzy? Minister Lloyd tells you in Immesvale that "I've already hired the famous knight, Mazzy Fentan..." which shows she is well-known and well-respected as well. Yet, no reputation bonus?

 

Hmm. Good point, and I've thought a similar thing before. Evil parties hate high reputation. WHY? Artemis Entreri, for example, has quite the reputation. What vendor would charge him more??

I happened to be flipping through the collection of mods and the like yesterday, and I came across the Virtue mod. Exactly what I've been thinking about. It sort of sets a few things right regarding reputation, but I haven't tried it yet. Is it worth getting?

Reputation is not a measure of moral acts performed, it's how good one is known to be at his craft.

 

I've never been a huge fan of the way reputation is handled in the BG series. I wish they would have used a system similar to the way alignments are handled in Torment, where things you *say* can have as much, if not more, repercussion than things you *do*. For example, accepting to convince Sarles to work for the temple, but then completely forgetting about it, or keep pushing it back and taking forever to get around to it should have a HUGE negative impact on your rep. Same thing for giving your word and then breaking your promise. Than would give a whole new importance to some of the conversation options, such as "I'm interested, but I don't have time right now. Maybe later.", which would actually be better for your rep than saying "Sure, point the way and I'll save your family/daughter/keep/village/whatever" and then waiting 20 days before actually doing it. That would make the whole concept of reputation a lot more realistic IMO.

I also completely agree with Aldeth that the NPCs that join you should have more impact on reputation, based on how they are regarded by the general population.

Good impact:
-Keldorn (obviously)
-Mazzy (as Aldeth said)
-Jaheira (but only a small benefit: she's a Harper, but nobody is supposed to know about Harpers)
-Anomen (a lot less than Keldorn, but still)
-Nalia (from a noble family, known for helping out the poor)

Bad impact:
-Viconia (& Solaufein)
-Korgan (fairly well-known mercenary in Atkathla)
-Valygar (good guy, but still wanted for murder)
-Cernd (he's hated in Trademeet when he joins you - lost rep regained when you solve the Shadow Druid quest)
-Edwin (maybe - if it's really obvious he's a Red Wizard, a matter of opinion IMO)

Unless I'm forgetting anyone, the rest shouldn't have any impact on rep.

 

Jaheira's effect is sort of split. She's a Harper. Harpers are good. But everybody dislikes them anyway. Take Ribald for example.

Not accurate, but something like:
"You'll not be bringing Harper business to my doorstep Miss Jaheira"
"There is always need to worry with your kin"

What about Haer-Dalis? He's a tiefling, half demon, but he's a bard, always spouting romantic garbage.

 

I agree that the virtue mod is a great idea. Maybe there should even be fame and infamy scales, instead of normal reputation. That way, an evil party could become quite infamous, thus getting the discounts at stores and what not, but also getting the attacks by the guards. It would be cool if there were also seperate dialouge options, so that npcs would be intimidated by a really infamous party, and awestruck when meeting a really famous one. Of course, this would require too much work to be practical. . .

 

I think the problem - and many here have suggested as much, is that the way the game defines reputation is different from how most people define reputation. The game envisions reputation on a scale from 1 to 20, where the extremes have the corresponding best rewards or worst penalties. In the other hand, I view your reputation as a forked path, where an equal amount of notoriety can be achieved regardless of whether you are playing as good or evil.

In general, you should be able to garner a reputation regardless of whether you are good or evil. Sometimes the line between famous and infamous is a fine one indeed. However, the game does not implement it that way. In fact, they take an entirely different approach, in that famous and infamous are considered cataegorical opposites, and thereby mutually exclusive.

The other problem with the game's implementation of reputation is for neutral characters. Characters that truly seek balance can expect their reputations to always stay around 10 - meaning they are a virtual unknown. This too, is very much a skewed view of reality. If a person performed both villanous and heroic deeds, he would be quite famous, regardless of individual people's exact opinion of him. There's no way such things would "balance out" so that he wouldn't be well known.

 

I agree. It really depends on how you define reputation. Most people think that reputation is a measure of how well-known you are (=notoriety). However, the game considers that , whatever you do, you become renowned anyway and that "reputation" is equal to what you are renowned as - i.e. a heroic do-gooder or a sick mofo - and rewards/penalizes only the extremes. That is, IMO, a flawed view of the effects of reputation.

And Davaeorn has a really good point about Jaheira, which shows how complicated this issue really is, that is, different people have different reactions.

Indeed.

 

It's kind of funny, actually, how Jaheira herself is annoyed by the Harpers. Like in the Harper quest when you get totally used.

Aldeth and Djieff, well worded and very true. It's a serious flaw when considering the entire idea of roleplaying. I never make it past chapter 2 with an evil party because it loses it's appeal and has few benefits.

Another idea, should reputation be affected by charisma?

[ March 11, 2004, 22:51: Message edited by: Davaeorn ]

 

Yes, it should. Even the most evil, but charming and charismatic person would be treated differently than a good, but unattractive - I mean non-charismatic.

 

I think that the virtue mod is a huge step in the right direction, since a well known hero may very well have schemed and murdered out of the sight of the public, to get to where he is. I think that the most fundemental problem with our conception of fame is that the game designers clearly want you to be good, and it's difficult to really be evil properly. Star Wars KOTOR is a GREAT example of a game designed around the choice to be good or evil, and while it would be nice to fit such a framework into the much deeper and more rewarding BG2, it may very well be impossible to do it fully.

As people have said, it's crazy to think that a random shopkeeper is going to charge someone, so frightening and dangerous that the city guards attack him on sight, extra money for a potion. Instead of fame/infamy, reputation seems to really track how far you travel from the intended path the designers want you to take, with rewards for following it closely, and penalties for straying from their ideal playing style. And as said before, the world of the BG saga seems to be one in which no bards would tell tales of famous druids. . .

 

Do not confuse charisma with comeliness. Charisma and charm are the same thing and are not a measure of a persons physical appearance. Charisma is a measure of how people react and feel towards others based on conduct and behavior.

A gentleman kissing a lady's hand is a charismatic gesture. A woman who "flips" her hair while talking is also a charismatic gesture. Thanks to the movies and Harlequin romances, we automatically perceive attractive people to be charismatic.

Let's also remember that just because a person is unattractive to you doesn't mean that someone else doesn't find them attractive. While a tall, handsome male elf may find a female gully dwarf (with the longest beard in Faerun) grotesque, she would be highly sought after (and popular) amongst dwarven kind.

 

@ Beren:

Good point about Cernd. The same could apply to Nalia -- the fact that her actions might be too localized to have any real impact.

I tend to disagree regarding Anomen: even if he's just a whiny underling, he's still most likely to proudly exhibit the traditional garments of the Helmite faith, which would instantly identify him as a member of a very powerful and respected church (even more so with the eventual Radiant Heart factor later on). Imagine him wearing a long, flowing royal blue cape with a golden symbol of Helm embroided on it or something along those lines. He's bound to make heads turn wherever he goes, even if he's completely unknown personally. Of course, there's not much in the actual game to fully support this but that's how I imagine him.

As for Jaheira, as I said, it's a complicated issue. However, her reputation seems to precede her in a few instances (Ribald, Bernard), even if she would prefer it otherwise (which could even become an additional character development for her -- the fact that wherever she goes, the Harper stigma make her stand out, just like the PC but at a lesser extent).

Well, I'm slowly slipping so I'll stop here, but this whole discussion is very interesting to say the least.