Talk:Repute

From BattleMaster Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I like, but I think good/bad marks should only get +/- 1 repute, since they're incredibly easy to give out. House Olik 19:50, 12 April 2007 (CEST)

True, but you can only have a very small number of them - 1 or 2. Also the entire society is (theoretically) based around a character fulfilling his duty to his lord. Any "repute" lost from a bad mark can be recovered by working hard to get back in your lord's good graces... and whatever the Lord requires for that to happen can generate some very good roleplay. -- Murakama 20:09, 12 April 2007 (CEST)

Perhaps you should gain honor if your realm conquers or loses a neighboring region also, to make sure this doesn't blunt warfare. Malitia 20:15, 12 April 2007 (CEST)

I've found that having loyalties to your region and liege works very well: It makes you powerful friends when you need it. Yet again, if you want to progress in the realm's hiearchy, it's better not to tell everyone you'd rather see them whole realm rot than having your region occupied. ;) -Chénier 22:36, 12 April 2007 (CEST)

I love the idea and I really hope it adds the lord/vassal dynamic we've been looking for. That being said, will the new "Repute" stat be worth anything in-game (as the amount of honor and prestige you possess confer tangible benefits right now) or will it be more for show? Elenar 04:40, 13 April 2007 (CEST)

Elenar: "Probably a new stat, at least during experimental status - let's call it Repute" --RubyDragon 22:38, 13 April 2007 (CEST)
Perhaps also gain repute slowly over time for just having region stats remain at or over... say... 95%, and lose repute if you go under 75% on anything. Also, I think repute ought to effect honor somehow. Perhaps repute can gradually add or detract from honor? It might be worth it to start repute at 0, and each time you gain 10 repute (or maybe 15 or 20) you gain a point of honor, and each time you lose a certain amount of repute, you lose a point, and each time you gain/lose a point it resets? Just brainstorming here...
I think it would be interesting if, at least for the lord, such a stat would translate to how well his courts work, how easily he can draft recruits, etc. Really high repute could even occasionally boost region stats over 100% for short periods of time while he's in his region as his mere presence inspires his peasants to work better to further please him. Wanderingypsydog 19:21, 13 April 2007 (CEST)

I hope using Survey Administration helps your repute, as does civil and police work? -Chénier 23:19, 13 April 2007 (CEST)

I'll assume that's what is meant by "etc.". -Chénier 02:32, 14 April 2007 (CEST)

There should be rewards for doing good things in one's duchy as well as one's region (maybe somewhat lessened, think of police work). Then you can substitute "duchy" for "neighboring regions." -- Mcglynn 03:26, 14 April 2007 (CEST)

More thoughts: I imagine a system where repute is on a scale from 0 to 100, and it gets harder to gain repute as it gets closer to 100 (and harder to lose it as it approaches 0). The number would be scaled in proportion to all members of the realm, so that the average repute of all troop leaders would be 50. Then it will be clear who is loyal to their liege, and who didn't really mean it when they swore their oath. On the other hand, this could penalize people who are less active, as they'll have less opportunity to do good stuff for their region. - Mcglynn 03:32, 14 April 2007 (CEST)

Can anyone else see your repute? Crazylozda 03:41, 14 April 2007 (CEST)

Not yet. I would assume that if Repute is kept as a stat, that it will be made visible in some way or other. --Indirik 04:07, 14 April 2007 (CEST)
Repute can now been seen by my characters in Beluaterra and Far East. Foreign Curs 08:15, 14 April 2007 (CEST)
I don't expect Tom to bite on this, but it might be cool if your repute was displayed to others as part of your title, i.e. Bob the Champion, George the Good, Ted the Corrupt, Dan the Tyrant... Malitia 05:42, 14 April 2007 (CEST)

"# selling food to the region (if it is in need of food) - maybe, but possible abuse potential (lord sending food away...)", simple solution to this, gain repute for selling food to region that consumes more than it produces, ie cities. If it doesnt matter whether the city has stores, then a lord sending food away would have an effect. If rurals are hit so badly that it drops their food production so they no longer have a surplus, then selling food to them would yield repute as well. A threshold number could also be added so theres no abuse by selling 10 bushels at a time just to gain repute.--Aralaiquendi 22:28, 14 April 2007 (CEST)


Where would priests fall in under this stat? I've noticed that my priest on BT has repute now too, but there's no real mention of priests part in this. I'm especially curious, as my priest is a knight of a region, and so he is within the feudal system on the level detailed here, but he is unable to do anything as far as the military goes. -Distorted

Priests can raise morale in the region by calming people. They can help loyalty. Those should probably be counted as helping the region stats. - LilWolf 18:28, 16 April 2007 (CEST)

Holding Court for Lords and Judges/Rulers should increase their repute in the regions perhaps, though maybe a loss of repute for holding a Harsh Court is appropriate, since the commoners are not likely to favour a harsh Lord. Phellan 00:43, 16 April 2007 (CEST)

One of my Realm mates brought up a concern about being wounded in battle and losing repute due to being "absent". Would it be possible to ensure that nobles who are wounded/captured don't lose repute due to their injury/jail time? Or to offset such loss could being wounded/captured in battle gain a noble repute? Since their absence is directly related to attempting to protect the Realm and region. Phellan 06:13, 17 April 2007 (CEST)

Hmm... interesting point. However, I would be in favor of the noble losing repute no matter the circumstances. It doesn't matter to the commoners why their lord wasn't there to defend them. After all, what was the lord doing getting captured way over in Foo when his home region of Bar needed him? The noble wasn't there, and should suffer the effects of his inadequacy, regardless of the underlying reason. Once you start putting exceptions on the gain/loss you are getting into the slippery slope principle: "I couldn't be there, I was in prison" turns into "I couldn't be there, I was on garrison duty defending the capital" and then "I couldn't be there, I was at a tournament." --Indirik 15:51, 17 April 2007 (CEST)
However, I believe that becoming wounded/imprisoned when in one's own region (or maybe the neighboring region?) should entail no penalties--the peasants know you were there, but neither should it gain repute--what's the use of a knight who can't defend his people? --RubyDragon 16:34, 17 April 2007 (CEST)
That was the main concern, he lost 3 points of repute because he was wounded in the first battle within his own region. Part of the point is also not to punish players for things they can't control which may diminish fun -- going to the Tournement or some such is a choice. Getting wounded or captured is considerably more out of our hands. Especially if you consider that a noble could be held for 7 days, that's a lot of Repute lost if they are looting and fighting over the region for several days especially if you can't even try to throw the enemy out. Phellan 19:46, 17 April 2007 (CEST)
Well getting captured in battle would have been embarrassing to a knight. They'd have to deal with having everyone know they got knocked off their horse and stuffed in a sack while their comrades fought and died. Though I do think getting wounded in your region should give you repute with seriously wounded giving even more. Not so much to offset the losses as to simply represent them being able to show off their battle scars to their friends with pride and saying "I lost this eye defending the region Blah from the evil armies of Someland." The earlier idea of getting honor from repute is good. Maybe 1 honor point per every hundred repute and maybe 1 prestige per every 300 or 500 repute. But I'm not sure how to do the loss of honor maybe it could be if you have repute of under 10 or 15 for a certain amount of time it will start taking off an honor point every certain period of time. Or maybe it can automatically give you bad marks from your liege.--Ceowulf 23:22, 27 April 2007 (CEST)


Me thinks this can be solved thusly... each creature whos loyal to a region has a mannor, then when he expands his mannor to some level, he could asign (create) some action-stick lets call him a stewart or something (like a troop has a captain) to manage his/her lands while he is absant. Well he isnt mutch usefull and dosnt have mutch authority but will replase the lord in the most common activitees, preventing his repute from falling, but neither gaining repute on his own, cause he is a replasement to the lord. (if sutch a thing already dosnt exist, the stewart thing i mean, most my caracters are pilgrims, vagabonds or bush knight - "bush knight/warrior is a term describeing a knight who has no lord or owns loyaltees to no man, berhaps a realm, and wanders around woodlands and near roads,villages and towns, 'jumping out of bushes' to help someone or to assault some one")--Metsamees 08:13, 28 May 2007 (CEST)

No longer in testing?

It seems that Repute is now in all the islands, not just testing. --V2Blast 22:49, 26 April 2007 (CEST)

War Islands -ve Repute?

Being on the receiving end of a 2 on 1 (how does that happen on a war island with no diplomacy!! ;) I can see the players in the realms repute taking a nosedive. If I move my char to another island and I have a really low repute, it's going to reflect badly on me, no?

I must say that at first I liked the repute idea, but I don't think it's working pretty well. I mean it doesn't take into account all the actions that really help your realm or region. One example that is bugging me is: If my char is fighting an invading army (with other TLs from my realm of course) and we win all is fine (naturally). But if we lose, then I probably need to go back to my capital and recruit. While I am doing that the invasion force swoops in, loots or even TO my region, and I couldn't do anything to prevent it. I mean I fought and lost me entire unit and did ALL I could, and still failed, trough no fault of my own. So what, are the peasants going to say: "Yeah I know that knight, he didn't fight hard enough, the lazy bum. We don't like him anymore. He ran to the capital at first sigh of trouble..."? And lets face it, nobody cared what the peasants were saying in the middle ages, as long as they worked and payed taxes. This is kinda annoying to me, so I'd like to hear, is this fine with you, and if it is, why ?--Leto 14:24, 28 May 2007 (CEST)

Isnt that what repute is? - How pesants see you.
Nobles indeed didnt care what pesants thought or sayd (mostly), but pesants did, for a good lord pesants worked with content or berhaps eaven joy - thus produced more quantity/quality. Perhaps eaven helped the lord out (in warfare i mean).
For a "evil" lord, pesants cut corners, stole from him and eaven seldomly rose up against him and tried to kill him.
The more evil or good a lord was the furder and the more amplyfied(the bad/good qualitees) the rumors spreaded abaut him.--Metsamees 06:52, 29 May 2007 (CEST)
I agree with that concept, throughly. About heading back to recruit, this really should be rethought, as peasants would certainly like to see their knight coming back with a new unit. Lose the battle can give bad repute, but refit time shouldn't, as there are places way further from the capital than others. Or at least this could be made in such way that great or hard battles, even when lost, gives positive repute, because of the bravery of the knight. Or maybe, to compensate the regular loss from refit time, each followed action by the knight could give more repute. As in: one day you arrive and do civil work, if you work again the next day, you get a bit more than the first day, if the third day holds a battle, you earn more than with a regular battle (as you spent a long time preparing, showing you were aware and taking necessary measures). Or something.-- Bluelake 00:58, 14 July 2007 (CEST)

Bureaucrats and Repute

I think it's far to easy for Bureaucrats to gain repute. In Riombara on Beluterra, my bureaucrat is the most "reputable" person in the realm with a margin of around 40 to the next highest non-bureaucrat. (There are 5 people in between these spots, all Bureaucrats). Simply, it doesn't seem to matter what region I'm doing work in. I work in my region, I gain 1 repute per turn. I work in another region of my duchy, I gain 1 repute per turn. I work in a region that is not part of the duchy, I gain 1 repute per turn. And since we're a relatively peaceful realm, and my region is one of the centrally located ones, there are rarely if ever attackers in the region to lower my repute.

Unfair towards Heroes

I've just noticed an interesting trend. In Norland, out of the 10 TLs at the bottom of the repute ranking, 9 are Heroes, and I can only assume that it will be the same in most other realms barring those of the war islands. As heroes are unable to perform civil or police work, it is very difficult for them to regain lost repute. It's basically the exact opposite of buros, who have a real easy time gaining it as said above. I think the repute system needs a massive overhaul, maybe add more class-specific ways to gain repute (i.e. telling a tale as a Hero, maybe 1 point of repute per % of morale added since it is a rare opportunity). I find it really unfair that heroes, who risk their life in battle (which should give them a glorious reputation) are being seen as schmucks whereas pencil pushers who barely ever fight battles are seen as heroes. Just my 2 cents. -Andrasta 05:47, 8 August 2007 (CEST)

Perhaps it's because Heroes can't do civil/police work that they have lower reputes, Andrasta? Van Peteghem 09:48, 8 August 2007 (CEST)

  • Yep, that's what I said, Mr Smartypants ;) -Andrasta 13:43, 8 August 2007 (CEST)
Heroes have honor and prestige to sing their praises. Why do you need yet another stat to brag about? :p Seriously, though, Repute is all about your reputation amongst the commoners. Of course bureaucrats are going to have a high Repute. They are the ones in the region day in and day out, keeping things moving smoothly, facilitating the people getting work done. Whereas heroes and knights are off somewhere else trying to win glory in battle in some region the peasants have probably never heard of, much less care about.
Also, why should it even be possible for everyone to be able to have high stats in everything? Why shouldn't you have to choose which stat or group of stats you want to increase? Making it very difficult to raise all of your stats should be very difficult. Make people choose which path they want to follow, and not just follow all paths at the same time. --Indirik 14:47, 8 August 2007 (CEST)
Then why even bother with the repute stat in the first place? Nobles couldn't care less how the peasants and commonfolk regarded them. Besides, I can hardly imagine the commonfolk cheering on a bureucrat as he cuts through miles and miles of red tape, as opposed to a hero in shining armor who regales them with stories and is so popular he can convince peasants to join his unit.-Andrasta 15:28, 8 August 2007 (CEST)

Overhaul

Yes, I plan to re-work the repute system. I already have some things on paper. It will be a while before you see these things in-game, however. --Tom 11:57, 8 August 2007 (CEST)

How about a repute system in which every region rates you differently and your overall repute is the average of your reputes in all the regions of your realm? Van Peteghem 17:31, 8 August 2007 (CEST)