Reputation and Intimidation

Langy · 07-13-2011, 09:23 PM

Quick question about Reputation and Intimidation. A character of mine has a reputation as being an enemy of sky pirates, having killed several of them and burned 'em down, etc. This is a -3 reputation. My question is, should this serve as a bonus on intimidation checks, or a penalty? If it's a penalty, why?

Similarly, if a guy has a reputation as being a spiritual master who doesn't touch violence (a positive reputation, since people will generally react favorably to him), should this serve as a bonus or a penalty to intimidation?

The RAW seems to imply that in the first situation, the character gets a penalty, and in the second a bonus, but that makes no sense. I'd reverse the two if I were GMing. Someone who is known to be a spiritual wiseman who won't hurt a fly shouldn't be able to intimidate anyone, while someone who is known to have killed a bunch of your cohorts should be very intimidating, while they should have general reaction modifiers of the opposite sign at pretty much all other times.

I originally read the RAW to say the first guy would get a bonus to intimidation attempts against sky pirates, but I have no idea why I read it that way. Anyway, that's the question.

Genesis · 07-13-2011, 09:36 PM

Well, I would rule that it depends on the situation. If the holy man is threatening your soul with damnation through excommunication, or threatening to blacken your name in the community, or some other credible threat, then yeah, I'd say it can be a bonus. That said, for a positive reputation, I'd let the player take a penalty if he really wanted to threaten violence specifically. I don't know why he would, by why not. If you pay for hte positive reputation either is fine with me.

The negative reputation, on the other hand, is only negative. So you've killed a few pirates - so what? Who hasn't? That just means they hate your guts. If you want to buy a specific reputation as being a fearsome opponent in combat that's a separate, positive-type reputation that I'd make you pay points for. Without the positive reputation, you're just a loathed enemy. With it, you're a loathed, feared enemy.

David Johnston2 · 07-13-2011, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Langy

Quick question about Reputation and Intimidation. A character of mine has a reputation as being an enemy of sky pirates, having killed several of them and burned 'em down, etc. This is a -3 reputation. .

Is it? With whom?

ericbsmith · 07-13-2011, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Is it? With whom?

To Sky Pirates, I presume. Which would probably be a rather small group. It would also probably be a positive reputation amongst average folk.

jason taylor · 07-13-2011, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genesis

Well, I would rule that it depends on the situation. If the holy man is threatening your soul with damnation through excommunication, or threatening to blacken your name in the community, or some other credible threat, then yeah, I'd say it can be a bonus. That said, for a positive reputation, I'd let the player take a penalty if he really wanted to threaten violence specifically. I don't know why he would, by why not. If you pay for hte positive reputation either is fine with me.

What about threatening you with guilt?

Dunadin777 · 07-13-2011, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Langy

My question is, should this serve as a bonus on intimidation checks, or a penalty? If it's a penalty, why?

I think it depends on the situation, but I could definitely envision a situation where having a bad reputation would make successful intimidation more difficult. For instance, if you think someone is an intolerant killer of your people, you might figure there's no point cooperating with his threats since he will probably kill you anyways.

cosmicfish · 07-13-2011, 11:16 PM

I think finding a time and place where you can actually use your reputation is simply good roleplaying, and should be permitted so long as it is not unbalancing. If someone has a reputation for violence, I see no reason why it would not be a bonus to intimidating someone who is aware of that reputation. Reputations are always a little fluid - there are always going to be situations where a positive reputation should be treated as a negative, and vice versa. That's just good roleplaying.

All of this depends of course on the individual in question being aware of the reputation - if your reputation is only among sky pirates, then John Q Toughguy is probably not going to be impressed by your claims of savagery.

lexington · 07-13-2011, 11:37 PM

I would say that any time you use it to just scare Sky Pirates (make them run away or second guess themselves) it would provide a bonus, any time you try to use it as an influence skill it would provide a penalty (because they hate you and thus aren't likely to cooperate). Ultimately the effects of Reputation have to be taken on a case by case basis.

Agemegos · 07-13-2011, 11:52 PM

Given the wide range of different things that a positive GURPS reaction modifier may represent (including Pitiable and a commanding presence), and the large number of different types of reaction that a good reaction roll may produce (including being afraid and being reassured of safety), the whole system cries out to be handled with great care and considerable latitude. There is a year's supply of Monday Murphies in the reaction system if you take it literally and follow the rules. I dare say that no positive reaction modifier (except the mysterious Charisma) makes sense in every use of reaction modifiers provided by the rules.

I hope the new GURPS Social Engineering will have guidelines for dealing with this.

Langy · 07-13-2011, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

To Sky Pirates, I presume. Which would probably be a rather small group. It would also probably be a positive reputation amongst average folk.

Specifically, he's got a +3 positive reputation with everyone but Martians (due to being a famous adventurer and explorer - he's seriously famous in this universe, and is basically a real-life Indiana Jones, but without (most) of the archaeology stuff), along with a +2 reputation with Martians (from saving them from sky pirates) and the -3 rep with Sky Pirates (due to famously taking down one of their ships with the use of a T-Rex while they were slaving Martians). His rep is kinda complicated, but I only highlighted the important bit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lexington

I would say that any time you use it to just scare Sky Pirates (make them run away or second guess themselves) it would provide a bonus, any time you try to use it as an influence skill it would provide a penalty (because they hate you and thus aren't likely to cooperate). Ultimately the effects of Reputation have to be taken on a case by case basis.

This is pretty much how I saw it going. I certainly don't think that it should provide any kind of intimidation penalty just because they don't like him.

Also: The bonus to intimidation with a negative reputation is also consistent with the bonus to intimidation from low appearance. Since they're priced in the same way (at base), I think it makes sense.

07-13-2011, 09:23 PM	#1
Langy Join Date: May 2008 Location: CA	Reputation and Intimidation Quick question about Reputation and Intimidation. A character of mine has a reputation as being an enemy of sky pirates, having killed several of them and burned 'em down, etc. This is a -3 reputation. My question is, should this serve as a bonus on intimidation checks, or a penalty? If it's a penalty, why? Similarly, if a guy has a reputation as being a spiritual master who doesn't touch violence (a positive reputation, since people will generally react favorably to him), should this serve as a bonus or a penalty to intimidation? The RAW seems to imply that in the first situation, the character gets a penalty, and in the second a bonus, but that makes no sense. I'd reverse the two if I were GMing. Someone who is known to be a spiritual wiseman who won't hurt a fly shouldn't be able to intimidate anyone, while someone who is known to have killed a bunch of your cohorts should be very intimidating, while they should have general reaction modifiers of the opposite sign at pretty much all other times. I originally read the RAW to say the first guy would get a bonus to intimidation attempts against sky pirates, but I have no idea why I read it that way. Anyway, that's the question.

07-13-2011, 09:36 PM	#2
Genesis Join Date: Dec 2010	Re: Reputation and Intimidation Well, I would rule that it depends on the situation. If the holy man is threatening your soul with damnation through excommunication, or threatening to blacken your name in the community, or some other credible threat, then yeah, I'd say it can be a bonus. That said, for a positive reputation, I'd let the player take a penalty if he really wanted to threaten violence specifically. I don't know why he would, by why not. If you pay for hte positive reputation either is fine with me. The negative reputation, on the other hand, is only negative. So you've killed a few pirates - so what? Who hasn't? That just means they hate your guts. If you want to buy a specific reputation as being a fearsome opponent in combat that's a separate, positive-type reputation that I'd make you pay points for. Without the positive reputation, you're just a loathed enemy. With it, you're a loathed, feared enemy.

07-13-2011, 11:16 PM	#7
cosmicfish Join Date: Mar 2010	Re: Reputation and Intimidation I think finding a time and place where you can actually use your reputation is simply good roleplaying, and should be permitted so long as it is not unbalancing. If someone has a reputation for violence, I see no reason why it would not be a bonus to intimidating someone who is aware of that reputation. Reputations are always a little fluid - there are always going to be situations where a positive reputation should be treated as a negative, and vice versa. That's just good roleplaying. All of this depends of course on the individual in question being aware of the reputation - if your reputation is only among sky pirates, then John Q Toughguy is probably not going to be impressed by your claims of savagery.

07-13-2011, 11:37 PM	#8
lexington Join Date: Jan 2010	Re: Reputation and Intimidation I would say that any time you use it to just scare Sky Pirates (make them run away or second guess themselves) it would provide a bonus, any time you try to use it as an influence skill it would provide a penalty (because they hate you and thus aren't likely to cooperate). Ultimately the effects of Reputation have to be taken on a case by case basis.

07-13-2011, 11:52 PM	#9
Agemegos Join Date: May 2005 Location: Oz	Re: Reputation and Intimidation Given the wide range of different things that a positive *GURPS* reaction modifier may represent (including Pitiable and a commanding presence), and the large number of different types of reaction that a good reaction roll may produce (including being afraid and being reassured of safety), the whole system cries out to be handled with great care and considerable latitude. There is a year's supply of Monday Murphies in the reaction system if you take it literally and follow the rules. I dare say that no positive reaction modifier (except the mysterious Charisma) makes sense in every use of reaction modifiers provided by the rules. I hope the new *GURPS Social Engineering* will have guidelines for dealing with this. __________________ Decay is inherent in all composite things. Nod head. Get treat.