Skip to content

Reputation/Alignment suggestions (if BG3 comes about).

To preface this, I'm just going to try to include my own issues and arguments regarding the current reputations system. (also I'm a math teacher so forgive things like Cartesian plane, quadrants to refer to the alignments etc. Also being a teacher means i'll try to at least have some comedy in here since we all know sitting in front of a wall of text is the most rewarding experience on earth!) Also forgive the fact I don't know how to underline to make it look prettier and more organized.

I have always considered the reputation system in BG to be not only lacking, but detrimental to the roleplaying experience that BG represents. The primary reason for this is the dual alignment system used in D&D (chaotic/lawful + good/evil) combined with the singular alignment system used in BG (reputation). You can actually trace the line that reputation uses by just going from Chaotic Evil -> True Neutral -> Lawful Good. There was the slightest attempt to tie the other alignments to reputation by using party happiness, but as all the meta/power gamers would inform you, that does not accomplish the goal that was intended.

Also, alignment is RP gold when implemented correctly. What your character does in a given situation should be determined by the way you want your character perceived. Or your character should be perceived based on what actions they take. Chicken, egg, and all that.

More than that though, comes the question "does it make sense?" So lets look at a few scenarios:
1) Right now I can take a rep20 lawful good paladin into a thieve's den and get a massive discount on goods. Does it make sense? Aww these guys just love me. (no)
2) I can walk through the game doing all sorts of lawful and good acts and my chaotic neutral friend here will have no complaints. Does it make sense? um... guess his alignment cares more about his friends than his selfishness. (still no)
3) My evil party gets mad at me and leaves if I max out my reputation. Does it make sense? Wait where are you guys going, I thought I was metagaming! (yes!)
4) My actions have limited affect on my alignment (none in bg1). Does it make sense? Really? (no)
5) Haer'dalas and Anomen never fight despite being diametrically opposed on the alignment scale. Does it makes sense? Shocking if you ask me (they must have a secret love affair)!
6) Is it recorded and does something happen if I commit an "evil or good" action? Why yes! My rep goes up or down and I get a discount (free gold) or attacked by "flaming" fist guys, (free xp). Sucks to be neutral.
7) Is it recorded and does something happen if I commit a "chaotic or lawful" action? Uh..... sometimes? I think? but its weird because sometimes the chaotic choice makes my rep go up and sometimes it goes down... ITS LIKE CHAOS. . . oh wait the lawful one does the same thing.... I DON'T GET IT.

Are some things functional? yes. Is it perfect? far from it. Can it be fixed? it certainly can be improved.

Where to start?:
D&D has a dual alignment system, why does BG not? Heck, keep the current system but make it two that work at the same time, chaotic - lawful and the other evil - good. I would rather see alignment as a (cartesian plane)grid system with one axis being chaotic - lawful and the other evil - good because I like visuals (and clearly my opinion is the only one that matters). Have your alignment be a clickable button that shows where you are on the plane. Have each quest choice have effects on 1, both, or neither axis/scale. Either way would create the feeling of there being more than just I R GOOD or I R EBIL.

Introducing this idea between lawful - chaotic just adds that second dimension of character depth that is currently missing. (ever notice how the forums only talk about my "good/evil/neutral" run, yet never anything else. The only time I've ever seen lawful/chaotic come into play is how awesome I want familiar to be. Have fun with that meta gamers.

Next: How can we start to make sense out of this mess? (attached scenarios it might fix at the end):

Lets start with character development. After all, we are supposed to be telling a story, and once again, the perception of our characters should probably have some tie to what we are doing with it. If there are two meters that measure exactly how good/evil or lawful/chaotic we've been, then our characters should be held accountable to that. Let us choose our starting alignment, then after that, have that alignment be determined by the system. If you want to be really strict, limit choices that can be taken by alignment. Since that would probably be a coding nightmare, just have alignment shift as you take certain actions and let the rewards/consequences police where a player would want to be. (scenarios 4, 6, and 7)

So now lets talk about the rewards/consequences:

Section I: Discounts - Big Discounts given for having the same alignment as the merchant. Smaller discounts for being within "one" alignment of the merchant. RP bonus - have some merchants not sell to certain alignments (what do you mean that priest of Talos won't un-petrify my LG paladin!? What a storming fool! Or even funnier have them sell cursed items wakka wakka.) Would that make sense? I think so. Obviously an evil thief isn't going to discount junk to a law abiding goodie too shoes, but he might to that neutral evil assassin. (scenario 1)

Section II: Party members - Party members should group with people they wouldn't mind being around. Somewhere out there is a 2nd edition alignment chart that shows which alignments someone would group with.

Basically True neutral is just about anyone but have issues with the "extreme 4". (maybe this could be done through a time limit the NPC is willing to spend at an extreme).

The Neutral 4 group (Lawful Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Neutral Evil, Neutral Good) will not group with people who are of the opposite group. Ex. Lawful Neutral will not group with anyone of chaotic alignment regardless of good/evil/neutral).

The same holds true for the 4 extremes except there are two groups they will not group with. Ex a lawful good paladin will not group with anyone of chaotic or evil alignments.

If the public reputation of a group is known to be of a certain alignment that is not compatible, then an NPC will not join that group. If the alignment drops to an area they are not satisfied with, then the NPC will give the PC an ultimatum and maybe some time to fix it before leaving. (scenarios 2 and 3).

Also NPC reactions towards EACHOTHER should be governed by this too. For some reason it is never glossed over if you have someone evil and good in the same party, they will eventually have words. But lawful vs. chaotic is often ignored. I wanna see that Rule Nazi and the "all about me" guy throw down. (scenario 5)

Section III: Quest rewards - Right now Quest rewards are governed by NPC which is only reputation and charisma. Tie rewards to alignment like discounts orrrrrr RP bonus what they expect the outcome to look like. (examples: A lawful magistrate might like a criminal brought in alive for trial instead of killed resulting in a greater reward. A rogue guild wanting an informant to "disappear" might not like the idea of someone leaving town because they could eventually come back resulting in a lesser reward.) This gives the opportunity of varying items through out the game so there are reasons to be evil and good (the meta gamers will all go neutral to get it all anyways), or varying who you can turn quests into based on your desired alignment with the same rewards.

Closing - I know some of this might not be achievable due to time/coding constraints, but I hope the core of some of these ideas might be able to enter the game. Second edition is still my favorite D&D edition, and Baldur's Gate despite any flaws is still one of my favorite games. I'd just like to see
Sign In or Register to comment.