12-06-2016, 03:59 PM | #31 |
Join Date: Jul 2012
|
Re: [Basic] Reputations for bad people
It's a good reason for the Intimidation check to fail, due to the penalty a negative reputation causes. Being scary is not always the same thing as scaring them into doing what you want - that fear can lead to other reactions, such as desperately attempting to kill you at all costs (because you have them convinced that any scenario in which you survive will lead to you coming after them).
|
12-06-2016, 04:13 PM | #32 | |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: [Basic] Reputations for bad people
Quote:
|
|
12-07-2016, 02:50 AM | #33 | |
Join Date: Jul 2012
|
Re: [Basic] Reputations for bad people
Quote:
I could see your suggestion about the attack roll making sense as one possible interpretation for the “Influencing the PCs” rules (Page 359 Basic Set, also 32 Social Engineering) – an interpretation I'd find very reasonable if suggested during play, but I'm not familiar with anything that sets out Intimidate inducing an attack penalty as an established rule. Obviously I'd treat that use of Intimidation to induce a penalty differently to using Intimidation to get a “Good” NPC reaction (in the case of applying penalties, then yes, I'd apply the negative rep as a bonus). Honestly I'm basing my views on experiencing violence and intimidation, which is why I believe there is a “pushed too far” state when using Intimidation, when during the process of them threatening me I came to the conclusion “there's no way I'm going to be able to avoid a fight here” and changed my focus from trying to appease or avoid them to trying to stall until I could find something to fight them off with – and I specifically didn't start off the situation thinking that, and it wasn't a pre-set reaction. In GURPS terms, that could be the result of penalties from bad tactics (they tried too hard to corner me, they continued the aggression after I showed signs of backing down) but I could also see someone going too far when using the Intimidation skill as being the result of a bad roll, and someone who routinely makes that mistake as having a poor effective Intimidation skill (perhaps as a result of penalties from Bully or Sadism or a negative reputation which makes the process more delicate). |
|
12-07-2016, 08:41 AM | #34 | |
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Snoopy's basement
|
Re: [Basic] Reputations for bad people
Quote:
But what I was really thinking about is how one constructs those outcomes in terms of buying a positive or negative Reputation. On that list, which are + and which are - ? |
|
12-07-2016, 12:52 PM | #35 |
Join Date: Feb 2014
|
Re: [Basic] Reputations for bad people
I like the Unwilling/Grudging modifier idea.
Here's another idea (which unfortunately I have no idea how to cost): give a bonus to Influence rolls using fear-based tactics, but also increase the threshold for critical failures (e.g., 16+ is an automatic critical failure). On a critical failure, the subject responds with a Disastrous reaction. I have no idea how to cost it or how to determine the critical failure threshold, but it captures the volatility of the reputation. |
12-07-2016, 03:04 PM | #36 | |
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Snoopy's basement
|
Re: [Basic] Reputations for bad people
Quote:
Still the question remains which type of modifier biases which result. |
|
12-07-2016, 05:41 PM | #37 |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: [Basic] Reputations for bad people
"You tortured all those people to catch the killer, I suppose your methods get results" sounds like it would elicit the reaction of despised-but-useful.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison |
12-07-2016, 06:43 PM | #38 |
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Snoopy's basement
|
Re: [Basic] Reputations for bad people
|
Tags |
rules |
|
|