D&D 5E Salior Variant: Bad Reputation

[Teflon Billy]

Unless the central challenges of the campaign include the acquiring of daily meals and figuring out how to commit petty quality-of-life crimes, I see no need for action here.

(unless I'm missing something...)

I was wondering the same thing. Why lessen this at all if you are allowing it?

It reminds me of the days before most RPG's quantified the Intimidation Skill/ability and you'd get DM's pretty routinely using it to say "Ok, you've intimidated him the guard, and he's scared, but he still won't let you in"

It was aggravating and ridiculous then, and this seems the same. If you don't want your PC's acting as if they've been told their Bad Reputations make them immune to the repercussions of poor behaviour...then don't tell them that

 

[Derren]

Because the first thing average citizens do when encountering famous criminals with fearsome reputations is form up into mobs and attack them!

A background as pirate hardly means that kind of infamy. And if it does then you have even more problems with "non average citizens". Bounties are posted and guards will attack you on sight if they recognize you.

 

[Mallus]

A background as pirate hardly means that kind of infamy.

Then why did you just suggest it would?

I find this a rather strange perk as to me this is a big disadvantage.
Unless you are in a pirate friendly town the only thing this known bad reputation will lead to is you getting jumped by a mob and strung up on the nearest tree.

I'm confused!

You could just use the perk as it's pretty clearly written and allow PCs with it to get away with minor crimes and assorted badassery.

 

[Derren]

Then why did you just suggest it would?

I didn't. Read again.
There is a difference between "known pirate" (my take) and "famous pirate" (yours).
And sorry that I try to make a setting in a role playing game make sense, even a fantasy one.

 

[Mallus]

And sorry that I try to make a setting in a role playing game make sense, even a fantasy one.

How does arguing against the plainly-worded text of the Bad Reputation perk make a setting more sensible?

I'm more confused!

(it's like you're arguing 'the Intimidate skill is illogical because it should always make the target want to punch you in the face', ie you're arbitrarily deciding one possible outcome is the only logical one --for reasons-- which, coincidentally, contradict what the rules text explicitly says).

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Well, in BECMI and in 2E (aka AD&D) at least [emoji6]

In AD&D, becoming a 20th level anything is an order of magnitude harder than in 5E... so no, it's actually less likely that your barkeep is a 20 level fighter, in AD&D.

 

[MasterTrancer]

In AD&D, becoming a 20th level anything is an order of magnitude harder than in 5E... so no, it's actually less likely that your barkeep is a 20 level fighter, in AD&D.

Was meant as a take on a cheesy troupe. Sorry of it didn't come across.

 

[Lillian White]

Since it says most of the time, maybe leave it to a dice roll of they get tattled on or not, that way the player can't complain becasue its not up to the dm, the random number god has judged them. Id probably make a chart like this,
1) no one saw it happen
2) people saw but no one tells / NPCs are now suspicious
3) someone gets upset / fist fight
4) someone told the guards afterwards / you have bounty
5) the head guard saw it and is headed over
6) a fanatical lawful good paladin saw you and is unreasonably upset
6.5) either apologize quickly and make things right

 

[S'mon]

Because the first thing average citizens do when encountering famous criminals with fearsome reputations is form up into mobs and attack them!

Kinda depends if you're in New Jersey or Tennessee...

 

[S'mon]

Was meant as a take on a cheesy troupe. Sorry of it didn't come across.

The average Wilderlands bartender is closer to 7th level Fighter than 20th. Completely different.