Status and PCs

[Angelalex242]

How much does it change gameplay if PCs have status with their own people to start with? Possibly Status 1, or even Status 2.

There's no reason why PCs should be viewed like homeless bums just because they travel a lot.

[Rich H]

I started a PC off with a Standing of 2 or 3 (can't remember the exact value) and it didn't 'break' anything in the game at all.

[shipwreck]

Yeah it does seem odd that player-heroes start with no standing in their home culture, especially if you choose one of the more 'important' backgrounds. I suppose it's meant to put some significance into buying/maintaining standing but it's still strange.

[Corvo]

How much does it change gameplay if PCs have status with their own people to start with? Possibly Status 1, or even Status 2.

There's no reason why PCs should be viewed like homeless bums just because they travel a lot.

I got a fellowship of barding wardens, whose campaign started before the death of Smaug. I got no problems with higher starting status.

I had them start at status 1, as they were not "adventurers", but young warriors willing to serve their thane.
I had them rise automatically at status 2 once they were adult warriors, veterans of the Battle of the Five Armies, and fighting for the king.

They travel a lot, but they aren't vagrants or beggars

PS: welcome back Angelalex

[Stormcrow]

Yeah it does seem odd that player-heroes start with no standing in their home culture

Player-heroes have left home and responsibility to go wandering in the Wild. Their native peoples see them as rootless vagabonds or as being incapable of taking their positions seriously. Standing represents the hero impressing his homelands enough for them to look past his odd and suspicious doings.

[Angelalex242]

But they don't have to. If King Bard tells his dude, "Hey, I need you to go to king Thranduil and get help about the Ringwraith making a nuisance of himself", you're not going to lose status for saying 'yes sir.' In fact, you might gain it for doing something that requires such courage.

Status 0 more assumes 'murderhobos', to use the D&D phrase, striking out for adventure cause they felt like it.

[Rich H]

I had them start at status 1, as they were not "adventurers", but young warriors willing to serve their thane.I had them rise automatically at status 2 once they were adult warriors, veterans of the Battle of the Five Armies, and fighting for the king.

They travel a lot, but they aren't vagrants or beggars

The PC I referred to in my initial reply is somewhat similar although an emissary for King Bard with no specific ongoing mission. I therefore started him off with a Standing of 3. The Dwarf and Elf PCs had a Standing of 2 each given that they fought at the Battle of Five Armies and are therefore warriors of their people and not *just* adventures. Mind you, I don't prescribe to adventures being a kind of homeless vagabond as a default setting, unless the player chooses it for them, especially as their Standard of Living often dictates they have some tie or responsibility to their people in order to maintain such a level of wealth. In addition, I do like players that create a background/history for their character and this often is at odds with a Standing of 0 so I often ignore it and give the PC an appropriate value as well as a little bit of extra XP for the player to spend as a reward for putting in the effort of creating a background. I don't have anything too defined with regard to raising initial Standing but if it makes sense I raise it and like I said it hasn't 'damaged' the game. I'd say its actually enhanced it.

[Glorelendil]

Status 0 more assumes 'murderhobos', to use the D&D phrase, striking out for adventure cause they felt like it.

That's certainly Lobelia Sackville-Baggins' opinion. And maybe even her phrasing.

[Rocmistro]

Status 0 more assumes 'murderhobos', to use the D&D phrase, striking out for adventure cause they felt like it.

That's certainly Lobelia Sackville-Baggins' opinion. And maybe even her phrasing.

This is part of the greater problem I have with Standing in the game. Standing of "0" and it's automatic assignment to all starting characters, really reflects a Hobbi-centric viewpoint of adventurers and adventuring.

[Glorelendil]

Yeah, I agree. I like the way Rich handled it: the backstory determines Standing.

But I'd like to see some kind of trade-off for starting with higher standing. Sure, it's expensive to keep up, but it has perks.

Not sure what the trade-off would be, but something that works inversely to Standing. So that players who choose backstories with 0 rating would get something good, and players who choose a backstory with higher standing get less of it.

Any ideas?