Question About Reputations

If you're willing to do the work, I'm more than willing to have fun experiencing it. :yes:

*edit*
Just a thought here. Wouldn't reputations sorta be in sync with alignments? I mean, wouldn't a paladin fall if he does the brothel quest or really any other ones that are morally questionable? Or if a good party lets the orcs, tulk and pulk free, or they accept scorpp and/or oolgrist into the party or if they do the temple high priest quests?

 

I wouldn't mind a little more feedback. But how important is reputation in the actual flow of consequences in the game?

 

After playing the game dozens of times, I'd love to have a little more flavor. Count me as a big yes.

 

Sounds good to me! Count me in favor of this.

 

Personally I love to look through the journal and see the stats.

Especially stuff like who missed the most times in a row.

 

I'm for it. Nice to be recognized for good deeds or feared for evil deeds, etc.

 

Funny enough you bring this up.

For example, say you are evil and have the "Butcher of Hommlet" rep. Does it not stand to reason that Verbobonc would send out parties of Good noble knights to hunt you down, ever stronger as you disposed of them? Seems logical to me. Hommlet folk would know you are no match for them..... and this would provide more challange and obvious conclusion to one's actions. And since the combat would be on the world map, you would have no choice to fight and there would be real risk.... no saves, run aways or backing down. They would be HUNTING you and would strike when it hurts.

Just an idea. Creating parties to attack the PC's seems reasonable to do, and would provide a whole scenario of combat and risk for an evil party bent on distruction.

 

Very cool.

I have always played a party that can take a Paladin (well, at least seriously played .. I've started a couple different groups just to see the various opening vignettes) ... but this gives more incentive to try other alignments for a different challenge, and indeed playing experience.

As others have pointed out, what's the big deal playing different alignments, making specific different choices ... if there are no serious changes or repercussions?

Thanks Gaear, I look forward to trying a new party build to see this ...

 

Yep, that was what i was thinking exactly.

 

I think it's a fantastic idea to have enforcement squads out "on the hunt" when you travel the world map.

Or, maybe an evil adventuring party that heard about the successful exploits of a certain good party and had some ideas about relieving them of their gold and equipment.

 

I suppose it works either way.

My thinking is that a random encounter does not need a map, only a generated party to fight. However, it must be a challenge WHATEVER the party level. If the party is all level 5 it makes no sense to have the "challengers" be level 10. But certainly tough, enough to REALLY tax the ability of the party. This does not take into account if they encounter your PC's if they are crippled, out of spells, struggling back to civilization. A shrewd party would pick the ripe time..........

I hope this pans out for the future. It would be something unknown, unforseen and unlike a set encounter, you may KNOW it is going to happen but WHEN. Regardless of how many times you play through you never know what is around the next corner....

 

Arcanum has something similar with bounty hunters on your trail you can sometimes bluff them if you have high charisma.
It's great the first few times it happens but can be a bit samey so you would probably only want 3 or 4 diferent encounters like that.
I suppose you could also have drow show up if you off Lareth and he has time to call for help.
May be once the Darkstorm project is done there could be a cut down version where people could design and submit their own random encounters.