Status and Resources

[septembervirgin]

Might we have a "social status" trait that can be influenced by how much money we put into appearance? Status is often supported by capital: the wealthy have a constant source of wealth and so their status can be reinforced by their wealth -- a name for oneself isn't secondary, but someone without a reputation can fall back on their apparent status and hopefully their social graces.

 

Say, if I buy a resource of "fragrant soap" it should be assumed my character uses said soap to wash, but must rest in a civilized urban area to use that resource. Still, when in that civilized urban area, I'd have "fragrant soap" as a resource which might boost my status. If status is seen as an objective trait, wealthy criminals would use fragrant soap and so would barbarian kings, so we don't have to worry about sixteen types of status. Of course type of fragrant soap might differ. An elven prince would use one kind of soap, a human merchant lord might use another sort. We don't have to quibble except as to who gets the money for this resource, something which might come into play should a wealthy soap merchant be robbed (and the soap resource vanishes temporarily).

 

Expensive clothing is a bit more important to determine which culture it comes from. While elven aristocrats might wear finery of one sort (elfin muslin), human aristocrats and dwarven aristocrats might wear something else entirely. Reaction based on foreign culture should be applied to exotic clothing. So if my human noble is wearing (elfin muslin) around humans who hate elves, while the status would be worthwhile, the reaction would be modified by (elf sympathizer) or (elven). This might be complex if organizations (and individuals) can change reaction modifiers on the fly, outside the static story plot, especially if NPC adventurers and monsters roam on their own. I doubt that will happen though and it's likely that if a group likes or dislikes a certain group, they'll not change their mind unless plotted story conditions are met. Hence, complexity can be avoided while keeping a concept such as status resources and cultural reaction to the exotic. To be simple, reaction to an elven sympathizer might be equivalent to reaction to a half-elf (although not always).

 

But if you're making this game for mature considerations, we all know there's a few modifiers to reaction that I've noticed. Social status is one modifier -- if I look rich and smell rich, strangers treat me with at least mild respect. However, if I treat them well, they are more friendly in a personal way regardless of my apparent social standing because I seem an upright fellow to them. If I look poor and smell like unwashed sweat, maybe kindly people ("good alignment") will treat me with gentleness and civility, but to most they'd wish I'd get a home and stop begging for cigarettes in the streets; there's another modifier. Also, if they already know me, there's a standard reaction they fall back on, a reaction which can change due to startling news or new observations. If I'm suddenly bedecked in wealth, of course acquaintances are gladdened and this improves their feelings to a degree.

 

So we have essentially an "NPC reaction" based on NPC outlook and social paradigm, a reaction which can be modified by behavior and status. Once that NPC has become acquainted with a person, they will have a standard reaction (which is only adjusted by a high modifier either positive or negative).

 

Of course, we must assume that common NPC will not frivolously throw punches at unwashed strangers who stumble into a tavern looking for news and a place to wash. Also, the reaction of common NPC might be of negligible value to an adventuring party and hence little use to the designers of this game. If there are only a few adventurers in the world, why bother judging the reactions of non-adventurers who aren't merchants -- and wouldn't merchants be sensible enough to charge a flat rate in most cases? One might as well just have a "XYZ City citizen faction" reaction.

 

I'll argue that should it be that numerous NPC might see fit to adventure, the reaction roll could be a useful concept for hirelings and henchmen, but the value of such NPC should be apparent in their inexperienced manner ("why should I latch on to a poor bumbling wretch like myself?"). If they're not strong story-based NPC, they are most useful as porters, potion-testers, and cannon-fodder OR for their minimalist appeal should they also seem charming. Some people might not want a huge story with each NPC. Some people might just prefer a spare body to put into the fray. Icewind Dale fans might be made just as happy as Baldur's Gate fans. And there's always Temple of Elemental Evil fans, like myself. No need for an expansive background for each character but it is interesting to delve into the guarded moods and memories of ones hired help. And it is telling what an NPC says to a person whom one is to fight for and fight beside, trench-buddy conversations grow in detail. Once the battle has begun, status means little in the trenches except a faintly noticed tale of foreign living.

 

Status comes to fore in other ways though. Surely a noble will not grant quests to unknown scoundrels, especially armed and avaricious scoundrels, unless these scoundrels are known and accepted or the need is so great that help from wandering adventurers is being sought widely. Even so, the clean and virtuous person might be seen as more useful (and better rewarded) than some upstart rogue who isn't of a recognized family. Why make potential rivals wealthy?

 

All this could be too much to consider in each NPC if each NPC is an intricate portion of an intricate story, but should behavior be generalized and hence emergent to some degree, it might not be too much at all. It depends on how many NPC you permit to have complex relations with the PCs, other than "hey, let's fight bad guys" with an assumed mutal agreement on what bad guys are defined as.

[eimatshya]

I like this idea. It reminds me slightly of the diplomacy system in Daggerfall where you had different skills for interacting with nobles, commoners, and criminals (or something like that; I haven't played it in close to a decade).

[Troller]

Maybe they should give us the option to be poor characters, like in the D&D you could get vow of poverty, then you couldnt use any items, but you had some bonuses in CA and all...

[septembervirgin]

It sounds like they're using Reputation as a sole regulator, but perhaps a person could have a stronger reputation among the rich of a city through adornments and accouterments, aromatic oils and many friends.