Character Creation W/ Humanizing Stories

[Mort2]

I wasnt talking about Followers, I was talking about the RANGERS, your fully controllable characters, that I want to start the game with this.

You must have some kind of disability, that you cant get the concept.

Here I'll just repost it for you read again:

I already answered you,let the devs write unique and memorable characters and explained why what you suggest that never worked in JA2, would be crap and make new bioware writing seem as pinnacles of RPG:

viewtopic.php?p=23923#p23923
viewtopic.php?p=24102#p24102
viewtopic.php?p=24218#p24218

DO IT LIKE IN THE GOOD OLD RPGs, do it like in planescape, this way:

You’ve mentioned that you want this to be a resurrection of old-school Black Isle RPGs in general. So how do you cater to Wasteland fans and Fallout fans while also touching on games like Planescape: Torment, Baldur’s Gate, etc? There’s so much expectation in terms of what people want this game to be. How do you deal with all of that?

There are common threads that work their way across all those games that we are keeping a keen eye on. Having true cause and effect is a big one. A deep and interesting world is also key and there need to be surprises coming at you throughout. And yes Wasteland is party based game and that is one of the big differences from Fallout. Also there is a strong literary vibe to those games that is especially highlighted with Torment that we will continue on. We are reading every comment on our forums and setting up polls to make sure we have the broad strokes covered. Once we finalize those things we will go off and do what we do best.

I mean really!? your idea of unique and memorable character is write a list of one liners and push it through phraser, WTF do I even bother answering you?!

[paultakeda]

You must have some kind of disability, that you cant get the concept.

Sorry, man. You're the only one no one is understanding. Across all the threads you've had guys like Drool, Wolfe and even Brother None try to comprehend what you are trying to say. I do have a disability: I can't help but keep trying to get you to see it.

Let's try again, because apparently I'm a moron :
You want a premade character with a unique history written by the devs. You're going to get it if the character creation system as being discussed here is made to allow for character and quest interaction. You just don't accept that this is the case. Ever. You don't realize that if the creation system is in-depth then a premade character can be created using the same system to develop a unique history in much the same way a player can develop a unique history.

Instead, you want to be told that a dev will come hold your hand and give you a GI Joe, complete with accessories and a biography in the back of the box, because clearly, making your own character from scratch will just result in a stats sheet. Clearly.

I'll give you a definitive answer: what you want? Not going to happen. You're going to have to provide a bit of brain power to make your characters come alive. You know... role play.

[Prometheus]

If I might "mediate", I'm getting the impression that what Mort2 (and.. I think myself?) are looking for is this:

At the game start:

• Select the number of fully-player created blank-slate rangers (1 - 4). We'll call them "Player Characters" or PCs.
• If there is room (e.g., < 4 PCs), the player can recruit the difference (max 3) of pre-made Rangers. Let's call them Companions.
• The game starts. During the game you can recruit an additional 1 - 3 followers (depending on the limits)

That way you can play the game with interesting Companions (if you so choose) that might have their own quests/backstory/conversations etc..., and you can also do your own thing with 1 - 4 PCs that have your own story/imagination to back them.

So if you wanted to play a Wasteland 2 game with two brothers as PCs and recruit 2 more companions to go through the game with, you could. You could play Wasteland 2 ala Wasteland 1 with no companions, or you could go 'solo' with 1 PC and 3 companions. Or you could go *really* solo with just 1 PC and no companions.

[Mort2]

I understand Wolfe we just dont agree on the implementation.

The funny thing that you propose the exact same thing, only with a different implementation

I also suggested what being discussed here a long time ago in the party thread. What you suggested is the same system that there is in JA2, (I also posted a video for) that not only you pick in stats, you also pick perks and various other characteristic that tie in, through the story, here:

On the other hand companions, allow the writers to write character specific, unique dialogues for various situation, group composition and add quest to your characters, so you can be attached to your squad members. It's one thing to have that "black" "usa" "male" who said XXXX die, it's another to loose Minsc, Morte, HK47 or execute myron because he annoys you.

This is perfectly possible using stats provided a sufficiently intelligent phrasing engine is implemented. Now sure, you might see a lot of repeated dialog, but then again most of the conversations you have in your life with companions is repeated dialog.

To which I answered: (skipped few post, for your convinece, less to read, after all I know you like ME3 )

No, all you do is generalize every male medic with Energy weapons and X personality, while I want to personalize it. What you suggest that instead of the writers writing uniqe and memorable characters, that their dialogue will change and progress, like with all those we love and remember from the good old RPGs that they will write a list of catch phrases for every stat that would be randomly shown...

let me role play the character I create, the way I want and let my "companions" be unique...

Let me repeat that again, I dont want the devs to write a list of generic one liners that fits some specific stat/stereotype and phrase it to me, I want them to write complete dialogue for a unique and memorable characters and humor that builds with time and familiarity etc.


EDIT:
@Prometheus, yes!

[paultakeda]

@Prometheus
Yes, exactly the way WL1's party mechanic worked. Except the difference is he wants the PCs to have their own unique dialog (like the NPCs) as well as fully control them (unlike the NPCs).

So, no, Mort2, it's not Yes! to Prometheus. What you want is not going to "exactly" happen. Player characters will never be as fully fleshed out as NPCs simply because player characters are meant to be role played. Fully controlling them is to let you role play them. This thread is about establishing some background mechanic to integrate them into the game world but their complete unique personality is up to the player. That's the point of this genre of CRPG.

You will have to live with recruiting the NPCs and not be able to fully control them but get a fully realized (by the devs) personality. NPCs can certainly include rangers, no one said an NPC is not a ranger. It's just not a PC, premade or otherwise.

[Mort2]

I love when people say that this is exactly the way It works BUT... XYZ, when XYZ is exactly the whole point. And yes Prometheus got it perfectly right, he even noted the benefits.(the differences described after the list, where he expanded on the companions part)

Also, unless you are secretly a dev, please refrain from saying what would or wouldn't be in the game, or tell us how we should be role playing and what the point of CRPG genre or what we will have to live with. ( Because, your comment here shows you understand exactly what I want, thus as I suspected you was intentionally trolling before.)

Sum up, the advantage of our suggestions, are:
1. You can still play Wasteland like you played Wastland1 i.e. create 4 stat list.
2. Tho who love a story with a main protagonist, can pretend do so.
3. Those who want more unique companions in the group, can mix of 1 and 2.

So we are coming back to the same quesions I asked you few days ago, when I though you got this... What is your problem with adding additional option, when your options stay the same and only makes others happy? with no balance issues.

[Prometheus]

@Prometheus
Yes, exactly the way WL1's party mechanic worked. Except the difference is he wants the PCs to have their own unique dialog (like the NPCs) as well as fully control them (unlike the NPCs).

So, no, Mort2, it's not Yes! to Prometheus. What you want is not going to "exactly" happen. Player characters will never be as fully fleshed out as NPCs simply because player characters are meant to be role played. Fully controlling them is to let you role play them. This thread is about establishing some background mechanic to integrate them into the game world but their complete unique personality is up to the player. That's the point of this genre of CRPG.

You will have to live with recruiting the NPCs and not be able to fully control them but get a fully realized (by the devs) personality. NPCs can certainly include rangers, no one said an NPC is not a ranger. It's just not a PC, premade or otherwise.

If I understand correctly... you mean... "Yes!" to me? (Thanks! )

After watching the latest Q&A/Kickstarter update from Brian Fargo though, I'd like to add in the following suggestion:

Up to 6 other recruitable NPCs (depending on the number of starting rangers!)

Maybe there can be poll for this? I mean, if we can't recruit other NPCs at the start... I'd like to see the maximum number of NPC party members increased!

[paultakeda]

If I understand correctly... you mean... "Yes!" to me? (Thanks! )

Well, yes in that you described the WL party mechanic. Mort2 said Yes! to you as well, but that's because he's still not getting that you have to role play your PCs and therefore they can't be as fully developed as he would like.

Up to 6 other recruitable NPCs (depending on the number of starting rangers!)

Maybe there can be poll for this? I mean, if we can't recruit other NPCs at the start... I'd like to see the maximum number of NPC party members increased!

Interesting idea. It might be a problem with story. If it begins with a ranger squad airdrop then you need four rangers. Maybe you could make it so you can fill up a PC slot with a ranger NPC?

[Mort2]

Mort2 said Yes! to you as well, but that's because he's still not getting that you have to role play your PCs and therefore they can't be as fully developed as he would like.

That because you dont understand that I am going to play with them like I played in Baulder gates or planescape torment, i.e. controlled NPC. Just like before you didnt understand how come some people have one "main"character, who the like and identify with the most.

Regardless of your understanding, the bottom line is the same. This option keeps your options, adds option to all who concerned about group mechanics, allowing them to slip into it and dont change game balance. Thus other than educating us how we should be playing our games or just say NO I dont want to, do you have any reason why not?

[SadDragon]

Gonna keep this short as I have a deadline coming up and I shouldn't really be spending time typing on a forum -- but can't really stay away either

I am a strange beast, I did back the project -- and not just the 15$ pledge either -- but I was 80% sure that I would HATE the game. Now that must sound crazy so let me explain.

I love partybased-tactical-combat. I hate party-based-roleplaying.

What I mean with this is simply that I want one viewpoint character or clearly identified avatar, rather then being the whole party. Making decisions for the whole party is find, but roleplaying every character in the party just isn't compelling to me. I am 1 person IRL -- no matter what the voices tell me -- and that's just how I attach myself to roleplaying games.
If I play a P&P game I don't play all partymembers, even if I'm in a party with 4 characters and I'm the only player in the game. Normally the DM fills the role of the other 3 characters.

I would say that DA:O came close to what I would want from a party-based-RPG except that I would have wanted to see more focus on tactics and have it clearly turnbased.

The moment someone says party-based-RPG however it seems to be you have to roleplay all characters, not just control them which saddens me as that's a game I would love to play. This thread does however throw around some interesting ideas at was I would imagine being as close to a compromise that there will sadly ever be, but I feel I would like to add my voice to the discussion as well.

As I have seen that it can be confusing I will define some definition that I will use below.

PC = The Player Character, the avatar of the player, the viewpoint character.
PCC = Player Controlled Character. This is not an avatar of the player nor a viewpoint character but is still controlled in the same way -- to some extent -- as the Player Character.
NPC = None Player Character. Not controlled by the Player at all.


Ideally I would love to see that the core of 4 rangers would have been made up of 1 PC and 3 PCCs up to 4PCs.
The different PCCs could be archetypes that you could modify, within reason, or completely locked to their archetypes. They would ideally have their own personalties, but would follow the PCs directions.

Now I do not suspect that this will happen but that is my dream scenario. I'm not picky either, their personalities might be downplayed with maybe just some none-interactable banter and some predefined responses for some dialogues, just to show that they are their own characters rather than another PC. NPCs on the other hand should be fleshed out characters, but I'm ok if the PCCs aren't that fleshed out.

I feel I should also say, just to give some reference of where I'm coming from, that I have never played the original Wasteland. The closest I got to the party-based-gameplay was the NWN2 expansion Storm of Zehir -- which I never could get into due to the party-dialogue-mechanic. Though from what I have read here I think I could recommend it to those who want a more modern Party-based-game.
The closest I have gotten to party-based-gameplay, that I liked however would be DA:O or KOTOR (not sure if Arcanum let you control your companions).


Sorry for the long post, seems I failed at keeping this short

-TSD

EDIT: Fixed some typos -- probably still a lot left :/

[Prometheus]

(Emphasis mine)

Up to 6 other recruitable NPCs (depending on the number of starting rangers!)

Maybe there can be poll for this? I mean, if we can't recruit other NPCs at the start... I'd like to see the maximum number of NPC party members increased!

Interesting idea. It might be a problem with story. If it begins with a ranger squad airdrop then you need four rangers. Maybe you could make it so you can fill up a PC slot with a ranger NPC?

Yes!!

That's exactly what I'd like!

I'd argue that maybe it also makes some sense from a story POV too -- maybe you can get a more 'veteran' Ranger too. etc..etc.. (lots of options here) -- but really, the bottom line is that I'd like to be able to fill my starting party with some NPCs too -- and not be punished for only having 1 or 2 PC characters at start.

[Mort2]

Maybe you could make it so you can fill up a PC slot with a ranger NPC?

But this is exactly what I suggest, with only one but major difference, you take away control from me over my ranger party.

OFF TOPIC: Do you recall how much times I wrote controllable "npc" and you didnt get it?! if you spent less time being anti we might have come to understanding sooner... I also suggested your version as last resort i.e. party of seven and up to 4 rangers.

However, unlike what I suggest, this is likely to hurt game balance. I assume that the game is designed (encounters and locations) for minimum of 4 controlled Rangers, thus taking away control from you because you prefer to have more interaction with your party sounds like a bad idea...

[paultakeda]

Maybe you could make it so you can fill up a PC slot with a ranger NPC?

But this is exactly what I suggest, with only one but major difference, you take away control from me over my ranger party.

OFF TOPIC: Do you recall how much times I wrote controllable "npc" and you didnt get it?! if you spent less time being anti we might have come to understanding sooner... I also suggested your version as last resort i.e. party of seven and up to 4 rangers.

However, unlike what I suggest, this is likely to hurt game balance. I assume that the game is designed (encounters and locations) for minimum of 4 controlled Rangers, thus taking away control from you because you prefer to have more interaction with your party sounds like a bad idea...

No, I got it. I got it a long time ago. I'm saying you're only gonna get it with a better PC creation system because the NPCs are not going to be fully controllable. They will disobey you. They will sometimes confront you. They will even steal from you. And none of it will be scripted. So accept that and move on to figuring out how to make PCs more interactive and immersive.

I got it back when I pointed you to this thread to get you to do that and instead you continue this crusade for something that isn't going to happen.

So, yeah, I get it. I got it. Now. Do you get it?

[SadDragon]

No, I got it. I got it a long time ago. I'm saying you're only gonna get it with a better PC creation system because the NPCs are not going to be fully controllable. They will disobey you. They will sometimes confront you. They will even steal from you. And none of it will be scripted. So accept that and move on to figuring out how to make PCs more interactive and immersive.

I got it back when I pointed you to this thread to get you to do that and instead you continue this crusade for something that isn't going to happen.

So, yeah, I get it. I got it. Now. Do you get it?

Underlined the part I'm referring to.

Not sure why you cant have NPCs or PCCs that you cant control, somewhere there is going to be a boolean for it most likely anyway. As for behaviour not being scripted just sounds odd to me, that would mean that NPCs would just act at random without any triggers what so ever, though I am assuming they will use triggers of some kind. Triggers to me is a basic form of scripting and as with the controllable part I'm not sure why they have to do all those things, you can just not have a trigger set for disobeying, stealing or confronting.

From a technical standpoint I don't see why this would be impossible. I cant even see it being much, if any, extra work -- depending on how they design the character classes.

Not saying it will be implemented or should -- though I would like it to be -- just that it should be fully possible without any added dev time.

-TSD

EDIT: Changed the bold parts of the quote to underlined instead for easy viewing.

[Mort2]

You "cant have it", because he decided that this not how we should RP and this not what CRPG is all about

[paultakeda]

Not sure why you cant have NPCs or PCCs that you cant control, somewhere there is going to be a boolean for it most likely anyway.

Yes, and in some other game (see Shadowrun Returns; I've pledged, you should, too) this is more than likely a core mechanic. This is Fargo's game and Fargo LIKES this type of NPC behavior. This is done. Let's move on to the topic of this thread: how do we make PCs more immersed in the game world?

As for behaviour not being scripted just sounds odd to me,

What I mean is that they are not scripted to steal from you at a specified time. They can die unscripted. NPCs in modern BioWare games never die unless scripted to do so. They never behave based on a personality set tied to metrics but rather to a script.

[Mort2]

I dont have speakers here(damn job) but I seen many of those vids, iirc what he says that he liked how the mechanic works for the NPCs(the followers, those who you didn't have control over them in the begin with) and like to improve upon their party interaction. (I think it is a great idea)

However, we are not talking about the followers, we talk about your party rangers, who you already control and nothing changed in that regard. only in how we pick the character a stat list or something more complex like *afraid to say it* an NPC(btw companions in Fallout are like NPCs but without AI and those are ~like doors but without a personalities, lets try to less play with definitions and go with the spirit of things.)

[Prometheus]

What about having NPC recruits from the game start? (and max NPC limit of 6 [party size 7])

Should I make a new thread for that or something? (Because really, that would address all my concerns -- I am assuming I have partial control over them)

[paultakeda]

We arent talking about them, we talk about your party rangers, those you already control and nothing changed in that regard, only how we pick the character stat list or something more complex (like *afraid to say it* an NPC)

Yes. Welcome to the thread. Now how do you propose to do something more complex?

What about having NPC recruits from the game start? (and max NPC limit of 6 [party size 7])

Should I make a new thread for that or something? (Because really, that would address all my concerns -- I am assuming I have partial control over them)

Hm. The thing about party size and makeup you may want to take to the party size poll thread, as that talks about makeup of the party. Or petition Brother None to make a new poll (which he mentioned somewhere he was thinking about doing), where we can have options on how to fill up the slots.

I take it you want 7 slots, min 1 PC, max 4 PC, max 6 NPC?

[SadDragon]

We arent talking about them, we talk about your party rangers, those you already control and nothing changed in that regard, only how we pick the character stat list or something more complex (like *afraid to say it* an NPC)

Yes. Welcome to the thread. Now how do you propose to do something more complex?

Just watched the vid, and he didn't state anything that would make it impossible, but I think we might have run into the PC, GPC/PCC and NPC problem there ^^;
Though I would like to add that the NPC interaction he talks to is not something I would see go away cause I too like it.

As for how it could be done, it could be quite simple depending on how the code is designed. Hell, if they use a superclass for the PCs and NPCs it could even be just a 5 min code job. It could also take a few hours if they have split the two up very far from one another in the engine -- though I think that some of the backers contribution would be enough to add the little fix.

In my first post, a few post above, i made an example of how you could make this work without having to add 5h of dialogue to the characters, but you could also just make the Ranger NPCs a special type that mixes NPC scripting in terms of a personality and some dialogue with the PCs controllability making a GPC or PCC if you will -- and as said, this shouldn't be that big of a dev task depending on how they have planned the character structure.

-TSD

EDIT: PS. If you want I can throw in some ideas how this could be functionally made, though sleep is calling and writing deadline tomorrow evening so might have to wait until Friday ^^;