In Oblivion only good reputation give you bonus quest

I hope with skyrim have different quest bonus with reputation

For exemple :
You enter in a slaves city
- You have good reputation : slave ask to help them to escape
- You have bad reputation : merchant ask you to capture slaves for him
- You have neutral reputation : merchant ask you to escort him for travel

All reputation must have their quest and history and not just bonus ques if you are good man

Sounds interesting.

The replay value is going to be epic!

I hope so too, I found it so frustrating you have to be a goody good guy In Oblivion, sure I don′t think there should be a full good/evil main quest

but at least give me the freedom to play a good hero, a dark anti-hero or anything in between.

I'd like to see the PC's fame/infamy play a bigger part in quests. In Oblivion they just seemed like a stat, the only thing that happened was if your infamy was hogher than your fame, the Nine wouldn't bless you, but you couldn't get that unless you were really trying for it.

IMO, it would work better if I could just find and do any one of the quests (to the exclusion of the others), not have it offered to me based on how the game sees me playing. If I'm playing a guy with a bad reputation, have some kind of life-altering moment and devote myself to right the wrongs I've caused, then walk into that town, I'd want to be able to free the slaves. Or the reverse can happen, a good character switching to be a bad character, may want to help capture slaves despite still having a good reputation.

I like the reputation system in Fallout New Vegas, it was neat.

I never played NV, what was the reputation system like?

Epic, hopefully Radiant Story will orevent me from cheating with the UESP, like Daggerfall did

basicly each major group and most towns each tracked individually how they thought about you, so it′s fully possible to be seen as the knight in shining armour in one town, and then in a different town you could be seen as a grade A [censored].

Sounds exactly the same as Daggerfalls system

I'd like something similar to the system in New Vegas, or Daggerfall.

G vs E vs N.. GEN is only the start it's basic RPG fluff that has been simplified to the point it's not even in most crpg's now.
I'd rather have depth, choice, shades of each, ethical as well as moral choices, NPC's reacting to your past choices.
NPC's reacting to how honourable and lawfull you've been in general, how crazy and chaotic you've been, how good, how bad, how callous and caring.
How unflinching...

GEN is a start, but seen it, done it, seen more than it, done more than it, about time a game evolved this aspect of RPG's rather than caught up with games 10 years old.

What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality? :stare:

well that or being someone whom value themself above others, and act only what is best for them, whether it be good or bad in the eyes of others.

I'm neutral in outlook.... what you're posting is a callous outlook, neutral evil in general.


Not true, the acting of a self centered man is generally evil.
A true neutral keeps things even and in balance, if they act too badly they'd make up for it with an act of kindness of equal proportion.
That's only in extreme however, most acts won't raise to evil, good or anything.
Not harming anyone, but not helping is one metheod, keeping two opposing groups from coming to blows.
A mercenary that fights for anyone, but switches sides if he sees an act of evil, would be neutral.
A Druid that stops a Baron from harvesting the forest, but shields him from assault by goblins would be neutral.
A man who disagrees with you on one point and then switches and agrees with you on another is neutral.

A millitant neutral is one that believes all others should follow the same path, that any extreme is bad, whether good or evil.
They'd have no guilt on wiping out nations as long as the act stopped others from gaining power, and making future trouble.

'deed it is!

eh not what I meant, I say someone who focus on what is best in there eyes, not what is best for the people around him/her


a neutral person is someone whom help someone because they like them, or kill them because they hate them, not because the people around him/her say the person should be saved/killed

I really like this idea and believe it is the only thing that Elder Scrolls is lacking in. Now, I haven't played much Arena (about an hour) or Daggerfall (about 2 hours) but Morrowind I've played for about 700+ hours and Oblivion 200+ and I think they really needed more good/bad choices. Just don't give us a meter telling us how good or bad we are.

were did you get this from?

everyone is good, just some seem to prefer doing good to oneself significantly over others, or aren't intelligent enough to distinguish

*chuckles* eh no...everyone is neutral, Society simply promotes being "good", but we are all born neutral.

I agree this would be great, though I would wanna rename them to something like Empathy ect.

I see where you're coming from, the act of in their eyes would be a big thing though.
Simple impulse is not a neutral thing it's a random, chaotic, wild, impulsive act, one that even a good man would do.
However not an act a Lawfull, honourable or civic minded one would commit.

A good man would kill a villian for the sake of his acts, whether the people agreed to it or not, a lawfull good one a paladin would not unless he had the authority to do so.
A neutral man would kill him without hesitation if there was a way to do so quitely and the act went against what he believed in.
A lawfull neutral would not act aganist him at all unless the courts or laws allowed it.
A evil man would kill anyone that opposed him without hesitation unless it would place his own life directly at risk.
A lawfull evil man would use bribes, subtle means and contacts to commit the act within the law.

It's a deep subject, and holds many various spins and twists to every action and reaction.
Going back to to the topic, the examples everyone's posted Ralos, Target3, myself and others, are what need to be worked on.
Not shades of black and white and grey, rather a rubiks cube, a rainbow puzzle.
Depth detail and every choice having an effect rather than GEN.. ( Good, Evil, Neutral. )

Morrowind and Oblivion also have faction reputation; remember how everybody saw you as dirt in the beginning of Morrowind, and how that changed. In oblivion everybody started pretty neutral to you but you can still see differences but it has little impact in the game.
It was important in Daggerfall as you had to improve it to rise to higher guild levels, and in none of the game did joining one guild or doing quests for them damage your reputation in other in a noticeable degree.

Yeah, a better moral system would be great.
I mean, I always found it strange that me, an assassin of Dark Brotherhood, had high infamy even though no one ever saw me kill anyone or do anything bad.
I mean, what the heck?
If no one didn't see me do it, then there should be no crime!
Maybe they could make good/neutral/bad scale of your personal moral witch will show how good/neutral/bad you are, but will not affect other people (ie, they will get scared of you or something since only you know what you did and how good/neutral/bad you are) and have fame and infamy for how public sees you.
So, for example, you can kill someone and if no one sees you you will get one bad point, but if someone sees you (even when you pay the fine or serve in jail) you will get also one infamy point.