I like the granularity of players earning a reputation point without directly ranking up to the next tier.
D&D 5E Reputation System 5e
Oofta
Legend
Which is fine, but I relay that with the RP; people don't have a numerical adjustment factor in real life, I don't see a need for one in the game. If you just burned the thieve's guild headquarters to the ground, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that some of the thieves may not be happy with you.
On the other hand, motivations are complex. A different member of the guild might secretly be incredibly thankful because it gives them an opportunity to take over since the old leader obviously failed.
But I just keep track of that with notes and relay it with RP and potentially insight checks. If a system helps you and if it works better for your group go for it.
toucanbuzz
No rule is inviolate
Pathfinder came out with a "Reputation and Fame" set of rules in its advanced guide that also has kingdom building rules, rules for making a guild or running a tavern. Because it's all a mini-game that largely doesn't rely on the rules system, it's easily transferrable to 5E.
matskralc
Explorer
Have you asked them? If I proposed this to my group, they would probably look at me funny and roll their eyes over having another thing to track on their character sheets. Yours might be different, but you should probably make sure that you don't waste your time developing a system that your players don't want to use.
How the world responds to the players' actions is explicitly the purview of the DM. If your players don't care that every time they enter the tavern, everybody else leaves, you probably need to have an out-of-game discussion with them about it rather than try to fix it with fiddly new mechanics.
dave2008
Legend
Well, that is the most extreme situation and with expertise even that extreme can be overcome by level 13.
Sure, but it would mean no one but a rogue or maybe a bard would even have a hope of talking a hostile person around, unless they rolled a natural 20. Which is harsh enough that it might discourage players from even trying, and I think that's probably counterproductive to what the OP wants to achieve with this system.
Maybe just give it five steps--Disadvantage, -2, 0, +2, Advantage?
I think a one-size-fits-all reputation system oversimplifies the concept and reduces immersion in the game world. Your example focuses on the shopkeeper's hate, but omits fear. What if the shopkeeper hates the party, but is too terrified to overcharge them because he knows they will murder him at the slightest perceived affront?
Personally I prefer to keep it as an abstract concept and apply it on an NPC by NPC basis. A party of cutthroats will get a better reaction from people that admire a 'might is right' approach, for example - possibly a better reaction than would be given to a party of righteous paladins. So even the -5 Reputation party in your example might get a discount in the shop of retired bully "Bob the B*stard's Fiendish Flails"...
Personally I prefer to keep it as an abstract concept and apply it on an NPC by NPC basis. A party of cutthroats will get a better reaction from people that admire a 'might is right' approach, for example - possibly a better reaction than would be given to a party of righteous paladins. So even the -5 Reputation party in your example might get a discount in the shop of retired bully "Bob the B*stard's Fiendish Flails"...
It really depends on the original DC of the task. +/- 10 means you up or lower the challenge of the task by 2 tiers.
Very Easy <-> Moderate
Easy <-> Hard
Moderate <-> Very Hard
Hard <-> Almost Impossible
Convincing an outnumbered and cornered goblin to surrender: Usually a very Easy DC 5, Moderate DC 15 since he is hostile and doesn't trust you at all.
So if you outnumbered and cornered someone who did like and trust you it would just be DC 5?
That technically would mean that you became hostile towards them, instantly dropping your reputation to that level.
Similar Threads
