Hi once again a thread about reputation/allignment. I know there have been many discussions about it yet. But i started it again because i think the reputations doesn´t show a reputation at all.
Why okay i give some reasons.
1. clerics and crusaders seems to have access to a local newpaper via miracle ability. If they use/cast it they know about the latest chit chat and know what the average humanoid is thinking about you.
2. If it`s realy a reputation why skalds don`t have this ability mentioned in point 1
3. The reputation doesn´t change if there are court cases or you are a outlaw. If the current reputation would be a reputation this should realy influence it no matter if he is guilty or not.
4. Your reputation with lightning speed if you meet with damned or holy guys even at secret rooms where noone else is able to see you
5. Your reputation change if you care about beggars since when did the average guy cared about beggars. Perhaps it should even lower your reputation if you deal with them in any case even giving them coins.
6. Your reputation doesn´t change at all if you steal somewhere and the shopkeeper see`s you.
7. Your reputation changes even if you are in disguise and doing thinks like above.
I think we can find dozens of other points why the current reputations can`t be a Reputation.
Olaf player of a char with good Reputation and one with damned Reputation
at least at the moment it changes quite fast from time to time.
reputation/allignment
Moderator: Wizards
-
chara
- Wizard
- Posts: 456
- Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 7:54 am
EDITED TO ADD: Apparently, this is all wrong. I have no idea why the things listed here don't work.
You're right, reputation isn't an actual reputation - rather, it's the reputation that you would have if the average person knew everything you did. It's basically how you would compare to the prevailing morality of the community.
It's phrased this way to avoid telling players what they think of themselves. After all, some of the RL world's most evil men (think Hitler) probably thought that they were good people who did some bad things in order to serve the greater good of their country (or family, or religion, or whatever). And while an American would probably say Osama bin Laden is evil, his own followers would strongly disagree. However, even bin Laden can probably admit that the average American thinks he is evil.
Being a theoretical reputation and not an actual reputation is why Crusaders can determine it, but Skalds can't. Crusaders don't do an instant poll of all people in the area, but rather they ask the Lord and Lady. Skalds don't have this ability.
Also, this fits as to why having a case brought against you doesn't influence reputation - it wouldn't, if people really knew what you did. With this theoretical, not actual, reputation, the rep would have dropped when you committed the crime, not when you were brought to justice for it. Same with meeting evil guys in secret, and doing stuff in disguise.
I do think that the average person thinks that someone is a good person if they see them giving charity.
And finally, I don't know about stealing and reputation - if it's covered or not, and if not, why not. I agree with you that it would make sense to me if stealing lowered reputation, although it wouldn't make a difference if a shopkeeper saw you or not.
You're right, reputation isn't an actual reputation - rather, it's the reputation that you would have if the average person knew everything you did. It's basically how you would compare to the prevailing morality of the community.
It's phrased this way to avoid telling players what they think of themselves. After all, some of the RL world's most evil men (think Hitler) probably thought that they were good people who did some bad things in order to serve the greater good of their country (or family, or religion, or whatever). And while an American would probably say Osama bin Laden is evil, his own followers would strongly disagree. However, even bin Laden can probably admit that the average American thinks he is evil.
Being a theoretical reputation and not an actual reputation is why Crusaders can determine it, but Skalds can't. Crusaders don't do an instant poll of all people in the area, but rather they ask the Lord and Lady. Skalds don't have this ability.
Also, this fits as to why having a case brought against you doesn't influence reputation - it wouldn't, if people really knew what you did. With this theoretical, not actual, reputation, the rep would have dropped when you committed the crime, not when you were brought to justice for it. Same with meeting evil guys in secret, and doing stuff in disguise.
I do think that the average person thinks that someone is a good person if they see them giving charity.
And finally, I don't know about stealing and reputation - if it's covered or not, and if not, why not. I agree with you that it would make sense to me if stealing lowered reputation, although it wouldn't make a difference if a shopkeeper saw you or not.
Last edited by chara on Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
tarlon
- Veteran
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 2:53 am
Hi,
I think if it is the
/*
You're right, reputation isn't an actual reputation - rather, it's the reputation that you would have if the average person knew everything you did. It's basically how you would compare to the prevailing morality of the community.
*/
The use of some skills abilities should influence your allignment as well
stealing from shops and using pick pocket. Backstabbing your enemies.Brewing poisons not sure if it´s possible, learning evil spells or using them, for example.
The use of some miracles that are obviously evil or obviously good. Okay might make it a little to easy for clerics to gain the rep they like/need.
This thread is ment as suggestion or brainstorming. The current System works and i think it works quite well in some points but it has some great flaws in it.
Having fun playing Geas and see you in the game.
Olaf
I think if it is the
/*
You're right, reputation isn't an actual reputation - rather, it's the reputation that you would have if the average person knew everything you did. It's basically how you would compare to the prevailing morality of the community.
*/
The use of some skills abilities should influence your allignment as well
stealing from shops and using pick pocket. Backstabbing your enemies.Brewing poisons not sure if it´s possible, learning evil spells or using them, for example.
The use of some miracles that are obviously evil or obviously good. Okay might make it a little to easy for clerics to gain the rep they like/need.
This thread is ment as suggestion or brainstorming. The current System works and i think it works quite well in some points but it has some great flaws in it.
Having fun playing Geas and see you in the game.
Olaf
-
Blizt
- Hero
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 12:14 pm
- Location: Tennessee
well, a bit late on this post, but I will add my opinion anyways.
I think reputation as it is, is too easy to change, and if an alternative to the reputation system could be found, I would gladly support it .
Tarlon mentioned that we have access to know everyones reputation, via a miracle, and he is correct, a crusader can easily walk into a room and know everyones reputation by simply touching his cross. Walla! a few seconds later, the Crusader and everyone else in the room knows everyones reputation.
So you know what that character has been up too. The only thing that bugs me about the reputation system though, is that there have been many incidents in which people with a really bad reputation have ran out of the room while someone tries to check them, and return a few minutes later with a cheesy grin on their faces, and are like "check me now". What did they go do? they simply went and unloaded a heap of coins onto Volog or any other begger.
Walla! a good reputation after they just went and murdered a bunch of faeries or whatever they did. Another thing that bothers me about the reputation system is that, as far as I know (I could be wrong) if someone gets caught stealing, or seen committing a crime, their reputation among the people doesnt drop, unless the NPC that attacks them, has a high reputation. The last whinning argument that I will make about this , is that alot of characters will go attack NPC guards, or any other good NPCs and simply go change their reputation as quickly as possible. When the good character finds out what the other character did, and tries to attack/stun or whatever to the character that has committed the crime, WALLA! the good characters reputation drops, because the other character simply unloaded coins onto a begger or whatever. I know last night I spent hours in Eal-Deliah with other crusaders, and we got our reps up high, only to run into a player that recently killed the elvandar stablekeeper to steal a horse, and when we attacked, we were back to neutral. I dont see why our reputation should drop to neutral for attacking someone that has committed murder and theft, especially after spending all that time in ED to get ours up.
I think reputation as it is, is too easy to change, and if an alternative to the reputation system could be found, I would gladly support it .
Tarlon mentioned that we have access to know everyones reputation, via a miracle, and he is correct, a crusader can easily walk into a room and know everyones reputation by simply touching his cross. Walla! a few seconds later, the Crusader and everyone else in the room knows everyones reputation.
So you know what that character has been up too. The only thing that bugs me about the reputation system though, is that there have been many incidents in which people with a really bad reputation have ran out of the room while someone tries to check them, and return a few minutes later with a cheesy grin on their faces, and are like "check me now". What did they go do? they simply went and unloaded a heap of coins onto Volog or any other begger.
Walla! a good reputation after they just went and murdered a bunch of faeries or whatever they did. Another thing that bothers me about the reputation system is that, as far as I know (I could be wrong) if someone gets caught stealing, or seen committing a crime, their reputation among the people doesnt drop, unless the NPC that attacks them, has a high reputation. The last whinning argument that I will make about this , is that alot of characters will go attack NPC guards, or any other good NPCs and simply go change their reputation as quickly as possible. When the good character finds out what the other character did, and tries to attack/stun or whatever to the character that has committed the crime, WALLA! the good characters reputation drops, because the other character simply unloaded coins onto a begger or whatever. I know last night I spent hours in Eal-Deliah with other crusaders, and we got our reps up high, only to run into a player that recently killed the elvandar stablekeeper to steal a horse, and when we attacked, we were back to neutral. I dont see why our reputation should drop to neutral for attacking someone that has committed murder and theft, especially after spending all that time in ED to get ours up.
-
tarlon
- Veteran
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 2:53 am
You spended a whole night to get it up?
Usualy it wents up incredible fast. I spent i team with 2 guys that had good alignement for 1 hour or 2 and my alignement went from nasty to saintly or something like that. Especialy because it is a reputation killing of someone getting caught stealing and stuff like that should not be forgotten by simply spending a few coins. Becomming realy holy should get a little bit more difficult than becomming damned. He it is easier to get a bad reputation allignment. Good guys would have to take much more care. Yeah i know this would give some balance problems with the clerics but something that could get fixed in some way. The normal allignment of persons should be neutral. As long as they doesn´t make things that especialy give them a good reputation or especialy give them an evil repuation. Getting caught stealing should defintly change the reputation. This would also prevent stuff like he i am a good guy but hmmm oh lets steal the coins from the gnotts because i need the money and who cares i am holy anyway i don´t need to fear the good side.
Oh and another point. If you kill a follower of the god it seems you loose alot of favour into him. But why should a priest loose favour if that guy deserved to die. And another point if you kill a beliver of your deity and loose the favour you might get into serious problems with your god even if he encourage or preaches war or death and the time to please him again is fairly low for none clerics. It would be nice if the time could be increased
As the effects are quite hard.
Usualy it wents up incredible fast. I spent i team with 2 guys that had good alignement for 1 hour or 2 and my alignement went from nasty to saintly or something like that. Especialy because it is a reputation killing of someone getting caught stealing and stuff like that should not be forgotten by simply spending a few coins. Becomming realy holy should get a little bit more difficult than becomming damned. He it is easier to get a bad reputation allignment. Good guys would have to take much more care. Yeah i know this would give some balance problems with the clerics but something that could get fixed in some way. The normal allignment of persons should be neutral. As long as they doesn´t make things that especialy give them a good reputation or especialy give them an evil repuation. Getting caught stealing should defintly change the reputation. This would also prevent stuff like he i am a good guy but hmmm oh lets steal the coins from the gnotts because i need the money and who cares i am holy anyway i don´t need to fear the good side.
Oh and another point. If you kill a follower of the god it seems you loose alot of favour into him. But why should a priest loose favour if that guy deserved to die. And another point if you kill a beliver of your deity and loose the favour you might get into serious problems with your god even if he encourage or preaches war or death and the time to please him again is fairly low for none clerics. It would be nice if the time could be increased
As the effects are quite hard.
-
Blizt
- Hero
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 12:14 pm
- Location: Tennessee
Yeah, I totally agree with Tarlon on most points he stated, if not all 
Also, yeah, we were in Eal Deliah for a while trying to raise our reps to holy, only to attack someone right after and dropped to neutral. This could raise issues such as "why are crusaders attacking people who are good anyways"
Well, we attacked the person for killing the stablekeeper and trying to steal a horse. I dont really see a way around this though, unless its just significantly harder to change your rep. I guess people are always going to do something evil and try to cover it up somehow
It is a good diversion to keep us from attacking them, although it can be quite annoying to the good characters who must attack those people who committed the bad deeds only to have a good rep.
Also, yeah, we were in Eal Deliah for a while trying to raise our reps to holy, only to attack someone right after and dropped to neutral. This could raise issues such as "why are crusaders attacking people who are good anyways"
Well, we attacked the person for killing the stablekeeper and trying to steal a horse. I dont really see a way around this though, unless its just significantly harder to change your rep. I guess people are always going to do something evil and try to cover it up somehow
It is a good diversion to keep us from attacking them, although it can be quite annoying to the good characters who must attack those people who committed the bad deeds only to have a good rep.-
Devi
- Hero
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:58 am
I agree that stealing should lower reputation, but I don't think backstabbing should.
I also think there should be *more* ways to raise reputation, and that every quest should affect it somehow. As a citydweller, I strongly dislike the beggar system. I pass by dozens of real-life Vologs every day without giving them anything (except a smile). I don't think this makes me a bad person. (I donate to shelters)
I think that, given the fact that killing faeries lowers your reputation, killing darklings should raise it (even if it's very insignificant). It'd be nice if killing evil orcs and the like also raised it, and killing guards and townspeople lowered it.
I guess the best system would be one without the "kill vittra, be good" or "kill faerie, be bad" stuff. I don't know how it'd work, though. Maybe there should be homeless shelters.[/i]
I also think there should be *more* ways to raise reputation, and that every quest should affect it somehow. As a citydweller, I strongly dislike the beggar system. I pass by dozens of real-life Vologs every day without giving them anything (except a smile). I don't think this makes me a bad person. (I donate to shelters
)I think that, given the fact that killing faeries lowers your reputation, killing darklings should raise it (even if it's very insignificant). It'd be nice if killing evil orcs and the like also raised it, and killing guards and townspeople lowered it.
I guess the best system would be one without the "kill vittra, be good" or "kill faerie, be bad" stuff. I don't know how it'd work, though. Maybe there should be homeless shelters.
[/i]-
chara
- Wizard
- Posts: 456
- Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 7:54 am
Some good ideas, but...
It is intentional that killing things doesn't usually raise your reputation. A person who kills good and bad things equally isn't neutral, he's psychotic. And remember that if you stare too long into the void, the void will stare back.
Quests that have more possibilities for good and evil changes to reputation are definitely desirable, and in some cases, being worked on.
I think a deity punishing people who kill His followers, even if He is a god of war or death, makes perfect sense, since followers literally give more power to the gods. Killing a follower weakens the god. Even the god of war or death would rather the war was waged or the death was meted on a non-follower. Of course, there are exceptions when a follower must die, but that still has consequences.
Balancing reputation is a tricky subject. Saying "I know this would make things unbalanced, but that could be fixed... erm... somehow" doesn't work all that well in practice
It is intentional that killing things doesn't usually raise your reputation. A person who kills good and bad things equally isn't neutral, he's psychotic. And remember that if you stare too long into the void, the void will stare back.
Quests that have more possibilities for good and evil changes to reputation are definitely desirable, and in some cases, being worked on.
I think a deity punishing people who kill His followers, even if He is a god of war or death, makes perfect sense, since followers literally give more power to the gods. Killing a follower weakens the god. Even the god of war or death would rather the war was waged or the death was meted on a non-follower. Of course, there are exceptions when a follower must die, but that still has consequences.
Balancing reputation is a tricky subject. Saying "I know this would make things unbalanced, but that could be fixed... erm... somehow" doesn't work all that well in practice
-
Vargrahim
- Master
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 5:47 am
- Location: VALHALL
I think getting caught stealing does affect your reputation. Not getting caught does not affect reputation.
I also think that it's only possible to get a certain amount of reputation raise from giving coins to beggars.. there's a limit in time and amount.. so, there's no quick route to holyness... in that sense. I also think that passing by them with a lot of coins and giving nothing lowers the rep.
I also think that it's only possible to get a certain amount of reputation raise from giving coins to beggars.. there's a limit in time and amount.. so, there's no quick route to holyness... in that sense. I also think that passing by them with a lot of coins and giving nothing lowers the rep.
-
Vargrahim
- Master
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 5:47 am
- Location: VALHALL
It changes slowly.
But actually, if the "reputation reflects what people think if they knew everything you did"-thing should be consistent, then it would drop also when not getting caught. Even an attempt is a concrete try. But well, there's a fine line between "the intention" and "the result". I think Geas in all aspects so far focused on the result, and well.. tough one.
In general, I think the focus on "the result" instead of "the intention" explains much of the systems behaviour..
But actually, if the "reputation reflects what people think if they knew everything you did"-thing should be consistent, then it would drop also when not getting caught. Even an attempt is a concrete try. But well, there's a fine line between "the intention" and "the result". I think Geas in all aspects so far focused on the result, and well.. tough one.
In general, I think the focus on "the result" instead of "the intention" explains much of the systems behaviour..
-
Blizt
- Hero
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 12:14 pm
- Location: Tennessee
Well, I think that if you dont get caught stealing, it shouldnt affect your reputation, because well......no one knows you stole anything, but I do think that if you get caught stealing, it should drop it a very signifigant amount. People caught you stealing, duh....you are going to be known in that area as a thief. That alone should give it a signifigant drop.
-
anglachel
- Site Admin
- Posts: 823
- Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 12:42 pm
- Location: somethere
- Contact:
In my oppion even if you are not caugth, your reputation should be drop a bit.
Something is missed and you was around! If this happend severel time is it very suspect.
Ok, the shopkeeper with have not proof, but it will be not good for your reputation!
May be shiuld think about to drop the reputation of all persons a little bit around after a scuessfull theft.
Something was stole, so one of persons around must be a thief!
Something is missed and you was around! If this happend severel time is it very suspect.
Ok, the shopkeeper with have not proof, but it will be not good for your reputation!
May be shiuld think about to drop the reputation of all persons a little bit around after a scuessfull theft.
Something was stole, so one of persons around must be a thief!
-
Alamar
- Master
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:39 am
- Location: North Carolina, USA
I think that reputation should not drop for stealing without getting caught. For whatever that is worth. This would help a good thief stay under the Crusader radar, which is powerful and ever-present.
Getting caught, however, should be a significant decrease because, as others have said, this is "reputation" not alignment. If a shopkeeper knows that someone is a thief, that'll get spread around quick. This would reward thieves who successfully hide their capers and punish thieves who get caught. In other words... if you get caught stealing you better lay low for awhile until you can convince people (by giving money to the poor, etc.) that you are not really an evil person, just a good soul with a tiny problem with kleptomania.
If a person is know IC as a thief to other players it won't matter what his reputation is. Gen could have the reputation of an angel sent by god and everyone would still know he is a thief and he is still on a number of hit lists. OOC reputation and IC reputation work very differently and are often at odds with one another.
-Alamar
Getting caught, however, should be a significant decrease because, as others have said, this is "reputation" not alignment. If a shopkeeper knows that someone is a thief, that'll get spread around quick. This would reward thieves who successfully hide their capers and punish thieves who get caught. In other words... if you get caught stealing you better lay low for awhile until you can convince people (by giving money to the poor, etc.) that you are not really an evil person, just a good soul with a tiny problem with kleptomania.
If a person is know IC as a thief to other players it won't matter what his reputation is. Gen could have the reputation of an angel sent by god and everyone would still know he is a thief and he is still on a number of hit lists. OOC reputation and IC reputation work very differently and are often at odds with one another.
-Alamar
-
Drake
- Wizard
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 5:31 am
- Location: In the land down under
- Contact:
-
Devi
- Hero
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:58 am
Based on Chara's comments, I don't think it matters whether or not a thief is caught or not. After all, the reputation in stats is based on all of a character's actions, seen or not. Gods see all and all that.
I don't understand the distinction between "OOC and IC reputation." As far as I know, poGen has a stellar ooc reputation. poGen is always honest, kind, helpful, etc. Gen is a little dirtball, but that's different.
I think you're speaking about the distinction between reputation and ... alignment? I don't know if alignment is the right word. I guess "divine reputation" would work for "OOC reputation" and "word-of-mouth reputation" would work for "IC reputation."
I think people are getting hung up on the word, since it's a bit counter-intuitive.
If you'd like the word-of-mouth reputation, ask a Skald. (they're good at gossip)
If you'd like the divine reputation (what the gods think), ask a Crusader. (they're good at lighting things up)
In Geas, I don't think Taniel would like Robin Hood, so the system would work just fine.
I don't understand the distinction between "OOC and IC reputation." As far as I know, poGen has a stellar ooc reputation. poGen is always honest, kind, helpful, etc. Gen is a little dirtball, but that's different.
I think you're speaking about the distinction between reputation and ... alignment? I don't know if alignment is the right word. I guess "divine reputation" would work for "OOC reputation" and "word-of-mouth reputation" would work for "IC reputation."
I think people are getting hung up on the word, since it's a bit counter-intuitive.
If you'd like the word-of-mouth reputation, ask a Skald. (they're good at gossip)
If you'd like the divine reputation (what the gods think), ask a Crusader. (they're good at lighting things up)
In Geas, I don't think Taniel would like Robin Hood, so the system would work just fine.
-
Blizt
- Hero
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 12:14 pm
- Location: Tennessee
Well, my toughts on the issue.....once again
Like Drake said "good thief"? Yeah, how the hell can you have a good thief, besides the robin hood thing, and even then, thats just a misconception, they are still doing wrong Also Alamar mentioned that it shouldnt matter the thieves reputation if everyone knows they are a thief, another problem with this, is that it is a BIG problem for the Crusaders if someone has a reputation above neutral, even if they are a thief. It gets pretty annoying playing a Crusader and having to live in ED, and when you come out, meet a thief with a good reputation and attack him because, well hes a thief and he stole from you, then have to go right back to ED and live there some more, only to come out and get stolen from again by a "good" thief and have to go right back.
I like the way the reputation system works now honestly, except I really dont think thieves reps drop when they get caught stealing. Also, the only way I see to make the rep system better is to divide it into 3 catogories only, good, evil and neutral. I mean, to most people/guilds whatever on the mud, they dont look at people as nice or devout, they see 3 things, good evil and neutral.
Just my redundant thoughts on an already over-exhausted topic.
Like Drake said "good thief"? Yeah, how the hell can you have a good thief, besides the robin hood thing, and even then, thats just a misconception, they are still doing wrong
Also Alamar mentioned that it shouldnt matter the thieves reputation if everyone knows they are a thief, another problem with this, is that it is a BIG problem for the Crusaders if someone has a reputation above neutral, even if they are a thief. It gets pretty annoying playing a Crusader and having to live in ED, and when you come out, meet a thief with a good reputation and attack him because, well hes a thief and he stole from you, then have to go right back to ED and live there some more, only to come out and get stolen from again by a "good" thief and have to go right back.I like the way the reputation system works now honestly, except I really dont think thieves reps drop when they get caught stealing. Also, the only way I see to make the rep system better is to divide it into 3 catogories only, good, evil and neutral. I mean, to most people/guilds whatever on the mud, they dont look at people as nice or devout, they see 3 things, good evil and neutral.
Just my redundant thoughts on an already over-exhausted topic.
-
Alamar
- Master
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:39 am
- Location: North Carolina, USA
That's my point Blizt. I guess I phrased it badly. The question of reputation vs. alignment is an interesting one. And don't worry, Alamar is not planning on going Robin Hood. I was merely illustrating the possibility of a person who does wrong by political standards and yet is good by moral standards.
Just adding a shade of grey to what otherwise might be black and white.
If stealing does not cause a great deal of reputation loss, then murder certainly should. And no amount of coins should be able to repair that for a LONG time.
P.S. An attack on the guards in Naarved is not the same thing as murder. Hell, those seaside salt dogs probably get into brawls every few minutes down there. A brawl with them should not count for anything close to an attack on say the guards of the thilden valley or the gate guards of Arbroea.
Just a couple of thoughts. It's not so much a question of code as how we roleplay dealing with various kinds of crimes IC.
-Alamar
Just adding a shade of grey to what otherwise might be black and white.
If stealing does not cause a great deal of reputation loss, then murder certainly should. And no amount of coins should be able to repair that for a LONG time.
P.S. An attack on the guards in Naarved is not the same thing as murder. Hell, those seaside salt dogs probably get into brawls every few minutes down there. A brawl with them should not count for anything close to an attack on say the guards of the thilden valley or the gate guards of Arbroea.
Just a couple of thoughts. It's not so much a question of code as how we roleplay dealing with various kinds of crimes IC.
-Alamar
-
Blizt
- Hero
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 12:14 pm
- Location: Tennessee
This is coming from the perspective of someone who usually one plays a Crusader, and not really anything else, so I dont know if its a good idea or not.
Couldnt we just do away with the levels of the reputation system, and just go for Good/Neutral/Evil ? I am probably wrong when I say this, but I dont know of anytime when those levels actually mattered to anyone. You good, you see evil, and you see neutral. Just because somone is Holy, and someone is blessed, I dont see the Holy person getting noticed any differant than the other. Also, a wizard asked me what I thought about not being able to see your reputation, I thought it was a good idea, but I thought about this, leave those levels of the reputation, but make it impossible for the players to see, they just know if they are good or evil or neutral. Also, when they do a good/evil deed, a loooong delay on the change. So a person can be damned, and really evil, and keep having to do good deeds to be good again, would add to the roleplay aspect of actually turning good when one was evil. Also if someone does nothing at all , they could slowly drop or raise to neutral.
Couldnt we just do away with the levels of the reputation system, and just go for Good/Neutral/Evil ? I am probably wrong when I say this, but I dont know of anytime when those levels actually mattered to anyone. You good, you see evil, and you see neutral. Just because somone is Holy, and someone is blessed, I dont see the Holy person getting noticed any differant than the other. Also, a wizard asked me what I thought about not being able to see your reputation, I thought it was a good idea, but I thought about this, leave those levels of the reputation, but make it impossible for the players to see, they just know if they are good or evil or neutral. Also, when they do a good/evil deed, a loooong delay on the change. So a person can be damned, and really evil, and keep having to do good deeds to be good again, would add to the roleplay aspect of actually turning good when one was evil. Also if someone does nothing at all , they could slowly drop or raise to neutral.