I'm working on a fantasy city based rpg featuring several competing factions. While developing the game, I came up with the idea of having players gain reputation instead of experience points. Each quest or would have reputation increases and decreases associated with it, and so would each action towards an NPC. Reputation with an NPC could then be spent in different ways depending on the NPC.

Example:

David is a member of the merchant's guild and he sells weapons. Silas is a member of the thieves guild, and wants to steal the weapons. Two quests could be noted as such:

Quest Name - Person or Group (Reputation change)
Stop Thief - David (+500), Silas (-500), Merchant's Guild (+50), Thieves Guild (-50)
Steal Sword - Silas (+500), David (-500), Thieves Guild (+50), Merchant's Guild (-50)

If you complete the stop thief quest, you could trade it in for a weapon at cost, or gain an amount of gold. This could be limited at 1gp per 10 reputation points, with possibly a maximum amount to be gained. On the other hand, if you steal the sword, then you could spend the reputation with Silas to learn a new thief ability or to gain entry to the guild (Possibly with high costs, as a training might cost 500 reputation, and guild membership may cost even more).

As an additional limitation, reputation shouldn't be too stackable, so that a character would eventually have to do larger quests for certain benefits. For example a character could steal 5 weapons or 1 diamond to gain entrance to the thieves guild, but can't steal 1000 loaves of bread. I'm still working on a scale that feels right however.

Also this could be extended so that a player could save reputation, for possible permanent bonuses, such as market down prices with certain merchants. This would then be locked, and couldn't be spent again in the future, but could be lost due to other quests.

I was wondering if anyone has any thoughts as to what problems such a system might have, and if anyone has used such a system?

Hi and welcome to the Forge, Silas. I'm Christian :)

I've thought about a reputation system. As a quick first question: if you don't give experience points for quests, do you still have experience points at all? Do the characters' abilities change? I saw that you said there could be training exchanged for reputation points. That would make them quasi-experience points, I guess.

In any case, I wouldn't worry about the loaves of bread thing. If I can gain 500 experience points with a quest in an hour of play time, or 25 in an hour, I'm going to pick the 500. As long as my character is reasonably competent, that is, and I don't risk his life with the big quest but not with the loaf of bread.

If that's not enough incentive, you can certainly assign ranks to the reputation that scale point gains of quests like experience point gains scale with levels in D&D, for example. If you want to rise from rank 4 to rank 5 in the thieves' guild, stealing bread no longer gives you reputation points, and stealing a sword only gives you 100 instead of 500 at rank 1.

One thing to watch out for: how you balance the gains and losses. If it's a zero-sum game like in your example, you're soon going to be far in the negatives with some people because you're spending the positive points. On the other hand, if you gain more than you lose, you could see-saw between different factions and gain influence with each of them over time. So that'll have a big impact on how things play out in your game.

This suggestion is more of a replacement for experience points. I'd imagine it would be more useful in a point buy system than classical d&d.

The scaling down of rewards would also work for the losses, so if you do steal a thousand loaves of bread, the merchant is gonna be pissed off with you, and might put a bounty on your head, but wouldn't go so far as to declare a blood oath and set off to track you down and kill you. Although he might if you killed two of his brothers.

I like the idea of ranks, so it'd probably rank the current reputation, and the rank of the reputation being gained. So 500 would be rank 1, and 1000 might be rank 2, and 1500 being rank 3. That way you could have the difference in rank being 125% rep for a higher rank task, 100% for the same rank, and 50% for a lower rank task. If that makes sense.

Also not every task would be a zero sum game. Sometimes you could do something for someone that doesn't harm anyone else, and sometimes you can do something that would harm lots of people.

The advantages of this system as I see it, would be that you could allow players to develop their characters in a way that feels natural, you could limit certain abilities by making them hard to obtain, you take the focus away from combat (as reputation would be gained from interacting with the npcs, rather than directly from kills) and you also make players think more about how npcs would feel about something.

P.S. Thanks for the welcome :D

Is there no edit button on this forum or am I being super dense?

It's a nice idea, but I'm not sure exactly how the points will remain "reputation" as such; you don't "lose" reputation by spending it for example, calling in favours may release some minor debts, but generally if someone provides something because of their reputation, it's not something they'll cut out after a certain point but something that they'll carry on providing based on the person's reputation.  Once they're "spent" they are out of such equations, making the representation of such a situation impossible.

Unless you perhaps keep tabs on reputation spent as well as your current "pool" to draw from for certain things (like gaining access to the thieves' guild, in your example), with certain characters/services being influenced by the amount of reputation spent or the total reputation of a person (which in this case would be being offered membership, or at least treated as a de facto member).  Such a system would be difficult to codify beyond the get-out clause of "GM discretion", however.

The losing reputation for spending it problem should be resolved through the concept of permanently banking reputation. Initially I thought that a player could just chose to spend some tempory reputation on making it permanent,  but now I'm leaning towards having a permanent reputation be half the maximum reached, minus any losses. Players would then get certain benefits for having a high permanent reputation with an NPC.

Example:
Your reputation with David is 1000tr, 500pr (tr = temporary rep, pr = permanent rep).
This shows you did him a large favor and didn't ask for anything in return.
You do a quest that has a reputation change of David (+500)
You then get the rank of the reputation change (500 / 500 = 1) and the rank that his reputation would be at (1500/500 = 3) and see that they are 3 ranks different. We could then subtract the rank difference * 100 (300) from the reputation increase (Or any other modifier for scale).
His reputation with you would then be 1200tr, 600pr. If you then spent 600tr to gain some money, equipment or skills, then it would then be 600tr, 600pr.

This way there's a trade off between taking instant rewards and encouraging people to nurture relationships.

So, you'll have:

• Reputation with factions
• Reputation with individuals

And it's used to:

• Train abilities
• Gain rank (presumably some form of resource or quest access)
• Gain favors from factions
• Gain favors from individuals

Hmmm... how's that much different from currency (money)? I mean, why not just get *paid* for quests and then *pay* for what you need or want? Do you just like the idea of gaining Rep instead of currency--does that evoke the setting of your game more than currency? For example, courtesans vying for favor with the regent won't generally bandy about money--they rarely HAVE any to toss around, anyway--but will work for "Rep" and "Favors." Or, as another example, the people of London Below in Neverwhere rarely had any access to real cash, so they exchanged favors and made unusual barters.

Regarding ranking quests, that could easily be done with simple division: a given quest is worth X/Y "rep" ("gold", whatever), where X is a base value and Y is the character's current rank or level (as appropriate). So, if I am Rank 3 with the Guild and want to get Rank 4, I could do "steal bread" quests... for, like, 10 Rep / 3 rank each... or do the "steal diamonds" quests for 1000 Rep / 3 Rank. Further, the Rep value of a quest also becomes a "difficulty level" or gauge of how tough and long the quest might be.

HTH;
David

Hi!
  The other problem I have with "reputation" is that it assumes someone knows you did it. I mean, if you were "really" good at stealing swords, couldn't you do it without anyone finding out? And then how do you get a rep? I mean some of the most brilliant political maneuvering is done without anyone's knowledge, no?
  I am not saying its a bad idea, in fact, I think its neat. I just think you have to decide what kind of characters are being played that are going to want to take credit for everything they do (good or bad). And make sure your setting and char gen supports making those kind of characters, no?

The way I'd see it, is that if you wanted an npc to train you, you'd have to help them out or show them that you're worthy. Also, unlike experience and gold, you'd have to prove that you did something. This may include some lying and a bit of exagerating but that's something to think about later. I'd assume that there would either be some sort of proof or someone to validate it, such as an eye witness.

If you were a really good thief, why would you get a reputation as one? The benefit of being a good thief is that you have lots of items that you can sell, not that everyone knows you're a thief. If  you stole something unique and showed it to the thieves guild on the other hand, you'd gain lots of reputation with them, but nobody else would know you're a thief.

I really like this idea. Really like.

I agree that there are some bugs to work out. Mayhaps you'll have to find a way to use Rep and Experience together, but not have one replace the other entirely?

The character Shadow is a good thief. He steals things on a pretty regular basis, but, as someone pointed out, couldn't afford to brag to just *anybody* about his exploits, because the town guard (or whomever) might hear about it and come knocking.

So, I see that Shadow is still gaining experience when no one but him knows he's the one doing the stealing. So XP exists outside of Rep.

On the other hand, Shadow can gain Rep with various groups. So perhaps the Thieving Guild knows he's doing these things. He gains Rep each time he "lets on" that he was the one who broke into the Count's Tower. If he didn't report it, and if the Guild didn't suspect it, then Shadow *would not* gain the Rep with them. Of course, Shadow could simply be lying to the Guild and taking credit for someone else's work. He'd still gain the Rep, until, of course, he got found out to be a liar (with the resulting crashing of his Rep).

I don't think that Rep should have any "permanent" levels. I can think of people who at one time had a decent Rep, then messed up so bad they effectively ended up worse than no Rep at all (effectively gaining a low level of Hated, or maybe just Despised).

On the other hand, Rep certainly can be spend like a currency. I see this in the club I work in all the time. People show up as total strangers. They have no Rep with the scene, so they aren't afforded any breaks by the bouncers. After a while, they keep on showing up and generally being decent folks, so they gain a little Rep. Then, maybe, they end up helping out here or there, or become friends with the staff, or what have you. They gain even more Rep.

Then comes the day when they come in with a friend, but the friend doesn't have any ID, and looks young enough that the door bouncer wouldn't otherwise let them in. But our trusted regular is with them, and vouches for the possible underager. They spend in some Rep. The bouncer accepts this (or not, but for  the example they accept it) and the two of them are let in.

If the regular does this kind of thing too much, or maybe gets completely blitzed a few too many times within a month or so, they end up burning through their Rep and enter a strange zone where they don't have any more Rep to spend, but we all know who the person is. Basically, at that point, the guy has to work to get back into good graces with the scene, in order to keep getting their bonuses (they have to earn more Rep to have it to spend).

Back to the game mechanics, I think you could get all of this done with having Rep pools for various groups. These can be spent for favors (such as training, letting certain transgressions be "forgotten," and the like). Also, having your Rep at a certain size could simply give a bonus to social interactions with that group, like having levels of status.

Going back to my nightclub analogy, I have a pretty good pile of Rep with the place. I hung out there pretty regularly for 3 years, then got a job as a bouncer and did that for 3 years, then became a bartender and have been for 2 years. I can pretty much get away with anything, because I have plenty of bonuses from my Rep pool. I can get the bouncers to do what I want. I have seniority on a lot of bartenders. The regulars all know who I am, and would do small favors for me if I asked. And for those things that I can't get with my Rep's +3 to Charm rolls (or whatever), I can simply spend some of my Rep that I'm not using. If I spend too much, I might see my Rep bonus fall to +2 for a bit, but that's the way it goes.

Anyway, I'm digging the idea. Keep working on it!

-a-

Thanks for the encouragment :)

I don't think that Rep should have any "permanent" levels. I can think of people who at one time had a decent Rep, then messed up so bad they effectively ended up worse than no Rep at all (effectively gaining a low level of Hated, or maybe just Despised).

Hi!
  My game has a Rep system. Its used as a mod for interpersonal skills, here is a snippet:
  In order to gain reputation, all you have to do is help others. To maintain it, all you have to do is not harm others (or more accurately, not get caught).
Gaining Reputation requirements Table
Reputation--Witness--Witness Involved--Effected Not Involved--No Reward
-10 to 2-----------Y----------------Y/N-----------------------Y/N-------------------Y/N
3 to 5--------------Y------------------Y------------------------Y/N-------------------Y/N
6 to 8--------------Y------------------Y-------------------------Y---------------------Y/N
9 to 10------------Y------------------Y-------------------------Y-----------------------Y
Witness – The minimum way to gain positive Reputation is to have a witness that can recall the helpful deed.
Witness Involved – If there are witnesses that had a stake in the aid provided, the word will be spread further and wider, and higher Reputation Stats are possible.
Affected Not Involved – If the character was able to help and prevent the affected witnesses from having to exert any effort, the gain in Reputation will be even better.
No Reward – The only way to gain the ultimate levels of Reputation are to help without any desire for apparent reward.
  It effects interpersonal skills. It moves slowly, so micromanaging is not required. But it does effect the game world. And being in and around 0 (so called neutral) has no benefits.

  There is a similar table for building up negative reputation (which helps with intimidation, etc). There's a little more to it than that, but this is a good overview (the pdf is free to download if you find it interesting at all). But, as you can see, the key component is that someone was there to tell others you did something (in this case something helpful). Maybe you need to think about something like this for your system?

  I made another game that is more faction oriented and allows you to use your faction as a way to win/lose conflicts, maybe this might inspire you in ma new direction? PM me if you want a copy...

  Hope this helps...

Playing devil's advocate for a moment:

Why should I, Mr. Faceless Lazy GM, keep track of all those factions and how much each quest is worth?  It sounds like an awful lot of work.  What advantage do I gain from factional reputation that I couldn't gain from a reputation statistic attached to the character, or even several different kinds of reputation stats to keep the system interesting, but without nearly as much paperwork?

</devil's advocate>

That said, I could see this doing interesting things in a political game with a finite list of very well defined groups.  The higher your reputation with any given faction the more special favors you can get, perhaps according to charts that are made up before game.  Everyone would try to curry favor with various factions without annoying the others (should be a difficult task!) in order to get the 'cool powers' associated with the increased reputation.  It's like experience in that it's a mechanism for character advancement, but unlike experience in that it consists of a whole bunch of scales that may come into opposition now and again.

If you're already calculating the reputation statistic (or several) and then calculating experience point gains there's still quite a bit of work there. The way I'd see it is that the GM would be able to state what the rewards for the action are and then the players would calculate the rep changes on their character sheets after the reward. The GM would probably maintain a secret rep list for each player, but just for the odd surprise. It's not really more work, it's just changing the work you're doing already. Also the major advantage is shifting the focus away from mindless killing, and back to helping people and focus on why the players are doing things. At least I consider that an advantage.

Devin wrote:
It's like experience in that it's a mechanism for character advancement, but unlike experience in that it consists of a whole bunch of scales that may come into opposition now and again.