Character Creation W/ Humanizing Stories

[paultakeda]

Indeed, and whilst it is simple, that doesn't mean you can't have complex mixes.

To get quest XYZ you must have completed the following.

Have a Stat of Y

A skill of X

Spoken to Z in the past.

Their are literally endless possibilities. It does take a little bit of work to ensure that the conversation etc is smooth and not disjointed, but so does any interaction like this.

Sure, but I'd say the quests should still be available in a neutral fashion for those that don't want to deal with any of it. For PCs the player wants to leave blank for background, they can just pick "Unknown" for any requested metric (maybe even gender!) and leave the PC personality and history in their head.

[Woolfe]

Indeed, and whilst it is simple, that doesn't mean you can't have complex mixes.

To get quest XYZ you must have completed the following.

Have a Stat of Y

A skill of X

Spoken to Z in the past.

Their are literally endless possibilities. It does take a little bit of work to ensure that the conversation etc is smooth and not disjointed, but so does any interaction like this.

Sure, but I'd say the quests should still be available in a neutral fashion for those that don't want to deal with any of it. For PCs the player wants to leave blank for background, they can just pick "Unknown" for any requested metric (maybe even gender!) and leave the PC personality and history in their head.

If you want. I am sure there would be something worthwhile in the choice. Most of my characters would have histories that you would expect to find in a Wasteland style environment.

[heartz]

I would love to see the option to choose different backgrounds(Arcanum) and traits(fallout) to make your character more unique for every new game.

Also different game options to make every new game more interesting. hardcore mode, ammo is scarce, etc.

[stonetoes]

Great first post, hope the devs are reading.

Pen and paper rpgs are great for this sort of thing. My friends and I would have great fun just rolling up characters in Cyberpunk 2020, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and the various Travellers.

For those people who like to make it up themselves, one thing that we found the most interesting was coming up with ways to link the pre-set aspects together. So your rangers are a mutant doctor, a vat-grown scout and a mechanic with a missing leg. How did these three meet? Did they go through basic together? Did they know eachother before signing up? Is one of them a new recruit who the others don't quite trust yet?

Having pre-set lifepaths at character generation and making your own stories don't have to be mutually exclusive.

Edit: I also think this is one area where modding could be most useful. Custom backgrounds to fill every conceivable niche will probably spring up quickly. Hopefully we'll also be able to alter quest dialogue account for new additions.

[UniversalWolf]

...I am a lot more partial to a solution like the one in Arcanum.

+1

Good idea. Arcanum is a perfect example to use. It's simple, optional, and it actually affects the game.

[Utxyle]

Choosing a background and/or perks or traits during character creation = thumbs up. I like fleshing out the characters and making them unique or a bit more "role-play". If it's just on the character sheet, that's fine. If they have the time to include quests or dialogs or NPC reactions to these backgrounds/traits/perks, even better.

The convoluted stuff as described under "Implementation" I could do without. Go with the old school method of getting a couple points in skills or attributes based on which background/trait/perk you choose. Born under a bad sign? Minus luck. Spent time as a field medic? Plus Medicine skill. Simple, easy and effective.

[Woolfe]

I just had a thought. I think the OP's idea was too much, I didn't really like it. But I can see why others do.

Rather than have "Archetypes" as such, what if certain backgrounds simply put your skill points somewhere

So you start with XX number of skill points. You can essentially just sit there and pump away and stick them all into a variety of different skills.

Or you can select some "backgrounds" which predetermine some of the skill point allocation.

So if I want a medic, I can just pump points into the "Medic" skill, and thus have that affect various things in game.

OR

I select medic in my background. This gives me a little blurb of some form about medical training, (perhaps even allowing several differing options. Ranger Training, Parents were Doctors, Fascinated by flesh wounds etc) but in addition it automatically pumps X number of points into the medic skill. You can still modify it, by adding or removing some points from it, if you don't feel it was the right amount, altho I would expect there to be a minimum point use.

Benefits - You get a bit of background, this could be used to expand on stories, so in the situation where you need a medic, the one with Medic skill might actually get some minor conversation changes (not game changing) that are based on the history. "Oh yeah my Mum told me about what that rash means, you've been places you shouldn't" as compared to "You know what that Rash means, you've been places you shouldn't" (I would expect better writing )
- The points get allocated automatically, so then rather than clicking on something or sliding a bar or whatever until you are at the exact point you want, you get what the devs think is a reasonable amount of skill.
- Its not be all and end all, you can then make modifications up and down to show better or worse level of skill (a smart dev could even factor that in. IF below X then points then player was lazy in class).
- Its optional, you could just pump the points into Medic, and not worry about the background.

Another example
Boxing
Background - The player was teased a lot as a child, so her Dad taught her to box. The player tended to get into fights, one day Bob the Boxer, prevented her from getting beaten by a group of other kids, so he gave her some training. Etc
Skill - Pumps X points into Hand to Hand(boxing).

So essentially the "backgrounds" would simply be a way of creating a bit of background histroy and allocating the skill points that you could have allocated manually anyway.

I would also suggest that the backgrounds be a bit changeable. Perhaps if a hometown(other than Ranger HQ) is mentioned, it gives you a choice of several. Other things, like names and that sort of thing could be somewhat customisable, using variables in the game to provide context.

You could even put bad stuff in there.
So in the boxing example, you could have a Background of "Child was prostituted out by their (Choice of Parent,Adopted Parent, Kidnapper). They fled one day offering themselves as payment for training in boxing, the trainer (accepted and, refused but) trained the player. Once the player was old and good enough they hunted the (original abuser) down and proceeded to (beat them to death, Beat them nearly to death, find them dead already, forgive them, spit on them and walk away).

This could then allow you to build conversations in the internal party or with NPC's using some of the above information as keys to conversations.
You could also then combine it with other backgrounds.

It might require the backgrounds to have an order of precedence perhaps. So maybe your character thinks that the bad boxing example is pretty much the defining moment of their life. Or maybe they just want to forget it and get on with their lives. So you give the background a simple "importance" factor. 1 for lifechanging, 5 for it happened, I am done with that. This could then be used to further modify the conversation.

I think something like that would work really well.
The only problems I see with it, you would need a lot of playtesting to make sure it works smoothly, and it may well be quite intensive writing like that.

The beauty of it of course, is that it is optional. If you want to just pump points into your skills and be done, then thats all you gotta do.

I rambled a bit here, so I apologise if it is confusing. What do you think?

[paultakeda]

/snip

I think we all want there to be some way to implement an origin or background that provides more depth to a created character. Like you and others the archetype idea kinda got shot down halfway through the thread in favor of picking "events" or "situations" that yield a stat/metric that can be used to affect the skill/attribute allocation and perhaps even open/enhance side quests.
The exact details on how to implement something like this is a topic we can sit around and armchair for the next eighteen months.

[Woolfe]

/snip

I think we all want there to be some way to implement an origin or background that provides more depth to a created character. Like you and others the archetype idea kinda got shot down halfway through the thread in favor of picking "events" or "situations" that yield a stat/metric that can be used to affect the skill/attribute allocation and perhaps even open/enhance side quests.
The exact details on how to implement something like this is a topic we can sit around and armchair for the next eighteen months.

I was one of the ones to shoot down the Archetype.

I don't want anything that modifies the stats/skills. I am just talking about an allocation method.

Something that gives background that allows people to have "interaction" but that doesn't have any other gameplay effect.

So picking "Boxer" won't increase your strength or endurance, it would just allocate the points and give you a background as well. So you could get the exact same effect gamewise by simply choosing to pump the points in manually. Excpet where it comes ot some dialogue specifics.

I am still all for stat/skill based communication. IE if you have a boxing skill of X then These other dialogue options become available. I am just trying to find a way to appease the majority without screwing over any particular group too much. Well except for the filthly solo players... Away with thee I say

[Lucius]

My doctor will hopefully be an ex-mortician from Juarez, Mexico. He self trained working the morgue and eventually decided he needed live patients to practice on. He quickly became a wanted a serial killer and fled to the north. Due to his advanced medical skills he found a home with the desert rangers. They agreed to protect him from the Mexican cartels on the condition he behaves himself. Will this archetype be in the game?

Archetypes force people to pick stories for their characters. If quests are linked to these archetypes than those that want to write their own stories are punished with less content than those that picked the cookie cutter character backgrounds. I think the trait idea works great though. I could pick things like medic and antisocial for my doctor example above. There would have to be enough variety of traits so the player doesn't feel like he is being shoehorned. Honestly 20 or so traits can cover personalities of hundreds of background stories.

They could even go old school and present questions for you to choose these traits. An example:

You see a girl, alone with a broken leg. You...
a)Set the leg and fashion a brace. You then fashion a makeshift crutch and send her on her way.
b)You seek help from a qualified professional for the girl.
c)You avoid the girl and ignore her cries for help.
d)You assault the girl and flee the scene.

Ultimately I do not want premade stories. If there are premade stories, do not link quests or any other content to these optional stories. I do think quests linked to personality traits you pick during character creation are less limiting and I won't have to shoehorn my characters into what the game tells me my character's stories should be.

[paultakeda]

I think the discussion pretty much shot down archetypes halfway through the thread, Lucius.

We're just thinking about how we'd like to have the pick lists (perks, traits, metrics like gender, ethnicity, nationality, birth place, etc.) and what they could possibly do to alter/affect skill/attribute allocation and possibilities on altering quests, opening exclusive quests, and even affecting local demeanor (being born in Needles and saying the character were a murderer would make him a marked man there so the team will walk into a mistrustful and antagonistic town).

[Leif]

I really like the ideas put forward by the OP. There should be some gameplay changes if I make a band of characters raised out in the wastes by raiders or by officers in ranger central.

[Klim]

tl;dr
Have anyone offered Arcanum approach already?

[Mort2]

There is one option missing, use "companions". During party creation screen, you should have an option to fill your party with:
1. User created characters as described above.
2. pick a companion* ranger.

by companion, I dont mean a premade i.e. just a stat list that someone else punched in for me but your usual "NPC" only that you controll everything about it him.
I prefer this option because no matter how much you go about making a long list of (perks, traits, metrics like gender, ethnicity, nationality, birth place, etc.) that you can pick from, this will be always a sub par system, that provide you with generic experience.

So that now every "BLACK" "USA" "MALE" will say XYZ... just think about how much work does it takes to create a system that will work for everyone and what worse you will get the modern game treatment, short one liner "humor" to fit everything.

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.

The more slots for NPC we have (controllable and non controable) the better.

[paultakeda]

by companion, I dont mean a premade i.e. just a stat list that someone else punched in for me but your usual "NPC" only that you controll everything about it him.

I think we'll have to call it something else, Mort2. Not a companion. Just call it a pre-gen character (the WL2 concept art just released really alludes to the four pre-gen characters in Wasteland 1). As long as we enhance character creation to have background then the devs can create some fairly sophisticated pre-gens that would behave much like a DA:O Companion character. The only difference is that they can die, unscripted, just like your created character can.

I prefer this option because no matter how much you go about making a long list of (perks, traits, metrics like gender, ethnicity, nationality, birth place, etc.) that you can pick from, this will be always a sub par system, that provide you with generic experience.

This depends on what that list does. If that stat list is tied to in-game mechanics such that they effect party dynamics, interactions with NPCs and color/open quests, then that makes it a far more powerful system. A Companion from modern RPGs always had just the one storyline tailored to that character. That's great, cinematically, especially when you are focusing on a solo created character storyline. But here, you could have any number of different unique interactions that come about due to the use of these statistics.

There's a practical reason it should be implemented this way: characters are not essential to the game plot. Rangers die. Recruited NPCs die. They die unscripted. Locking down a storyline per Companion is impossible. Instead you have rangers and recruits and the mix of stats open/lock storylines.

The idea is that many stories can be written. Certain stories will have unique pathing that is dependent on particular traits, origins and demographics. Maybe one quest won't open at all unless all members in the party are female!

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.

[Woolfe]

Also, one major thing to remember here is that technology has moved on a lot since the days of WL and BG etc.

I look at the lack character elements in the days of WL as purely a technical issue. There is a lot of programing and variation to be created in the language and similar that back in those days took up serious space.

And Baldur's Gate/Planescape torment etc, had specific stories to tell. With a hero/champion/chosen one as the lead.
In those days they had a lot better technology, but were still limited by it to a degree, and added to that, no one had really been doing the indepth dialogue as much until these games, that was part of why they were such hits.

Today, party dialogue has come a long way, with choices made affecting interparty banter and similar. Now admittedly the banter is always between the hero/champion/chosen one and the NPC companions(that really is an annoying term, can we please decide on an acronym to distinguish between a created, a pre generated, and a Companion).
But in all of those cases you could break down the personalities of the NPC Companions, into a series of stats + personality traits.

Using Mass effect as an example(purely because it is fresh in my mind) Ashley is a "Soldier" from a "military family" who "believes in the alliance". Add to that the "Family Shame" element, and you pretty much have her character.

I don't see any reason, other than "Laziness" or "Lack of Budget" as to why similar sorts of background information couldn't be included on the player created characters.

As I suggested earlier, having "backgrounds" (not archetypes) which are simply a way to provide a backstory to the character, combined with the stats and skills the player has taken, and some personality traits, would allow you to build fairly indepth praty banter, between both the individual party members, and any NPC's that get picked up.

You could even make them relatively customiseable. By allowing some of the specifics to be modified by the player creating the character. Using the rules of english to fit a sentance. A lesser example of that would be in one of the Civ games (4 I think) where you could select your racename, and in so doing had the option to select the various tenses of it. The Game would provide sentance examples of how it would be used, so that you could fit in properly.

So to break it down.

Player creation
Names - inlcuding nicknames etc. Maybe have an option to choose "doesn't use this name" or Prefers Nickname or something( I would also include details like Portrait, height, weight, colour, ethnicity etc in this first section.
Stats - Str, End, Int, etc etc. These are the building blocks of the character. These provide the clay that is molded into the character.
Personality traits - These are the little elements. Angry, Innocent, Quiet, Sarcastic, Joker, Calm, rude etc etc
Background - These are the larger elements, the history. "Family shame", "Ashamed of Family", "Orphaned", "Raised by Giant mutant carrots", "Medical interest", "Loves Guns" etc
Skills - The final element, what the character knows. Some of these may have been pre selected by the Backgrounds.

Now as part of the above, you should be able to create from scratch, or randomise and then modify if you wish, each of the sections seperately.

This would then allow the devs to build story elements and interaction based on the specific details you have selected.

And before you say it is like Jagged Alliance2. Remember I haven't seen that game, but perhaps that character creation was actually the right way of doing it, but because that game was focussed more on the Tactical combat side, than the RPG side, they never expanded on the interaction elements. However with the talent available in WL, and the fact it is an RPG first, I don't see any reason why some element of this couldn't be done.

[Prometheus]

First, thanks to alexlovesinxile for starting this discussion.

I'd also like to back the previous comment from Woolfe.

I'm strongly in favor of some system that allows those of us who want to, to play the game with a party that has personality or something else going for them.

Earlier paultakeda mentioned that a Q&A system could be used to pick the history or 'persona' of party members, and someone else mentioned Jagged Alliance 2 here.

I just wanted to voice my backing of a JA2-style system: you could make your own mercenary from scratch with a personality by taking a quiz (and you'd not be burdened by any backstory with long lost family or enemies that you didn't know about or care about).

I donno if this is the right thread for this or not, but maybe instead of auto-generating stories for player-created party members, maybe there could be recruitable (and tweakable) party members from the start instead.

I made another thread in a different forum before I saw this thread, and I posted the following in it:

[...] Another possibility is to have "both" blank-slate characters where you pick your own character portrait (ala Fallout Tactics), or pre-made tweakable characters that are supplied by the developers. (e.g., Jack the Cowboy can have his rifle skill tweaked between 33% and 80% at start)

If there's serious demand for this, and if the developers can't commit to the extra writing, maybe they can crowd-source some of the work to the community to come up with the most interesting and compelling NPC recruits?

Anyways, I think that following along some of the other discussions -- since there's a diverse group of backers and community members (and future purchasers) -- I think the ideal situation should allow people to play Wasteland as they want it (e.g., give someone an achievement for just using auto-saves rather than saving whenever they want to).

If someone wants to play blank-slate no-personality party members, they can. And if someone else (like say, most of us in this thread) want to play party members with a personality or backstory etc.. -- we can do that too.

[Mort2]

@paultakeda, I avoid calling it pre made, because it seem to imply that the same result can be achieved by using the character creation yourself, which is not what I want.

I explained why I prefer my way and have most of the great RPGs as examples of why it works. You think that you can achieve such level with generic triats, using some special in-game mechanics, can you name a great RPG that does it right?

A Companion from modern RPGs always had just the one storyline tailored to that character. That's great, cinematically, especially when you are focusing on a solo created character storyline. But here, you could have any number of different unique interactions that come about due to the use of these statistics.

My argument didnt included number of story-lines or has anything todo with cinematics, since you can attach dialogue trees to any number of quests and or statistics, it was about generic vs unique characters.
Btw, not only that I think that the perk list system limits your interaction, by making them generic, but It also limits the character types you can have, as everyone have to fit into that list.

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.

Maybe and maybe one day, such phrasing engines would write unique and memorable characters for us, from the looks of it bioware might already have something like this working, but In the meantime I would really prefer if the guys who made all those great old school RPGs, that were about quality text and had all those wonderful memorable characters, do what they do best.

[abdiel420]

Just my two cents: I think the idea of multiple origin stories that are optionally assigned by the player to his created characters is a good idea. This can help some players assign specializations to their characters by making one have a sniping background, one have a criminal background, etc. Different skills would be automatically selected based on the origin but can still be manually tweaked by the player. However, after creation is complete these origins should not intrude on the story, or any side stories. They should simply be to flesh out the character for the player, as a catalyst for their imagination. There should of course be an option to have no origin, and the player can choose all skills from scratch. The occasional bit of dialogue such as "Watch that one, he has shifty eyes" for your thief character is amusing, but unnecessary. And somewhat unrealistic. Unless the character is known Wasteland wide for being a criminal, why would anyone suspect he was one? And if they did, why would they say it out loud unless they saw him steal something? Anyway, I like the idea of humanizing the player characters, I don't like the idea of quests or dialogue based on the characters past. If something from the beginning of the game comes back to haunt the player characters, that is something else entirely. Just my opinion.

[paultakeda]

I explained why I prefer my way and have most of the great RPGs as examples of why it works. You think that you can achieve such level with generic triats, using some special in-game mechanics, can you name a great RPG that does it right?

Frankly, that's hard to say because the last time there was a decent party-based CRPG was over ten years ago. What we want to do here is create an actual revolution in the CRPG genre. I want the classic party-based CRPG to return but I want it modernized. What could possibly be more revolutionary than to use all that dual/quad core goodness to use create a fantastic character creation engine that can generate truly unique characters?

Here is what is lacking in party-based RPGs: back when popular, there wasn't enough technology to truly invest in character creation, party interaction and quest integration; however, your characters were widely variable and you could roleplay them in a way that is unique to the party-based genre.
Here is the problem with solo-created party RPGs: all Companions are scripted; they have a set personality and a linear story (typically with two outcomes but all on the same storyline); you cannot roleplay beyond what the game designer has scripted, it will always end up a certain way.

Here is what we can do in Wasteland 2: with the revival of the party-based CRPG genre we can bring it into the 21st century. While you could roleplay your party the individuality of your party was in your head and never significantly affected game play. Now, with today's computers, you can program a far more interactive and immersive character from a set of die rolls and picklists. Each variable contributes to a character history that can then be fleshed out by the engine. Storylines now branch out into interesting and unpredictable ways.

I do not want more of the same. I want a party-based RPG where death can be permanent, where the party is important and an unscripted character death makes you care a whole heck of a lot more than some scripted cut scene that feels forced. When your favorite character or NPC dies in some random combat in the desert, you will feel more about it because these characters mean something to you more than some pre-gen. You shaped them. You nurtured them. Then they died!

Maybe and maybe one day, such phrasing engines would write unique and memorable characters for us, from the looks of it bioware might already have something like this working, but In the meantime I would really prefer if the guys who made all those great old school RPGs, that were about quality text and had all those wonderful memorable characters, do what they do best.

They did already in Wasteland. They were the NPCs, which are still recruitable. You're just harping on the created PCs and seem to think they'll just be stat sheets.

No idea why you think that. I have far more emotional resonance with my "stat sheets" than the Companions I recruit in modern games. Those guys are like the NPCs: they're someone else's idea of companions. Me? I like having my party and defining who they are. I infuse them with character, and I truly weep when they die.