Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Capntastic]

You're also with him over not reading the thread before responding.  Nothing that's been suggested has anything to do with managing storylines or creating plot. 

You're talking about the game making certain types of plotlines more readily available/obvious depending on who your character is, ergo, the game managing storylines to better suit the character you're playing.

Right in the OP you have this:

"For instance, every time Cain wanders into a city, there's bound to be a few sick people in the city, and a few criminals.  Because Cain is a Shao Lin monk and not a wandering doctor, the system tweaks it so that he is embroiled in the criminal activity and not the sick people.  (He gets mugged, a fight breaks out in front of him, someone 'randomly' comes to him for help, the mayor lists that as the first trouble when he's asked, whatever)."

Implying that, because your character is a warrior do-gooder type, the game will use invisible hand tactics to make events play out in front of the player that would not normally happen.   That, in essence, is managing and creating plot threads.

Edit:  Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they didn't read the thread, by the way.

[Granite26]

I know that, and I'm not accusing people who disagree with me without creating strawmen out of what I'm saying.  Just the people who think that what I'm saying is 'create CRPG style plots and throw them at the player'.

There's a big difference between 'create a shadowy group of thieves that will attack the player when he walks into the next town' and 'the shadowy group of thieves in the town is more likely to try to rob the player than other NPCs when the player is around.'

If that's still too much plot manipulation, that's fine, we disagree, and I'm cool with that.  It's just not a lot of fun to suggest something and have a bunch of people pick it apart for what they think it is.

What I've not said is anything like:

realise you got mugged by a certain mugger, and then set up an instance so that you will meet him and he will kill himself.

or

the game isn't really going to say "Oh, there's no crime going on, I'd better generate 4d6 bandits to form a crew"- rather, an NPC warlord will simply raze towns to increase his own richness/notoriety.

What I AM suggesting is that a farmer in the tavern is more likely to mention getting mugged last week by that guy with the dog when the PC is in the room (Rather than his sick child or the poor harvest or the rats in his cellar or the dragon he saw flying past or any number of a hundred events that the NPC knows about), or that the little child is more likely to see the sword at the PC's hip and ask him to avenge his father's death to warlords (rather than the slightly more experienced NPC soldier that lives in town).  The events are already there.  They are random.  They'd resolve whether the PC was in town or not.  The only suggestion is that the world bend a little bit to involve the PC in what's going on in ways that are interesting to the player of that PC.

[Capntastic]

The only suggestion is that the world bend a little bit to involve the PC in what's going on in ways that are interesting to the player of that PC.

Yes, I understand that entirely.   And I'm disagreeing with it.

[Granite26]

And that's ok... But you really can't blame me for saying you didn't understand, given your hyberbolic comments?

[Capntastic]

And that's ok... But you really can't blame me for saying you didn't understand, given your hyberbolic comments?

I was making them to point out that 'invisible hand' type stuff at all doesn't really fit the game.

[Granite26]

And that's ok... But you really can't blame me for saying you didn't understand, given your hyberbolic comments?

I was making them to point out that 'invisible hand' type stuff at all doesn't really fit the game.

What about not allowing goblins to overwhelm young forts placed in their areas? 

[Sunday]

I would also probably go against the idea of 'fudging' things.

Another possible way (connected in with the idea of reputation) would be to allow lies, as was suggested earlier by Vester.  That way you could say, "Oh, I'm a great healer of men" to solicit donations, only to be dragged before the town leader whose son is sick, and have to talk/fight/run your way out of it.  Perhaps by (say), telling him that while you aren't a great healer, you are a renowned cyclops-slayer (here's a head I have!), while actually lying about that as well.

However, I think the ideal should be to attempt more of a realistic world/mission/interesting event generation.  If that doesn't work out, then I could see moving more towards something similar to what you're suggesting.  Basically, though, it seems as though you're proposing a solution to a problem that doesn't exist yet.  We don't even have lots of missions to worry about, so why worry about having to choose between them?

[Neonivek]

There will be fudging due to its nature as a game. What is important is where and how much fudging there will be.

[Capntastic]

And that's ok... But you really can't blame me for saying you didn't understand, given your hyberbolic comments?

I was making them to point out that 'invisible hand' type stuff at all doesn't really fit the game.

What about not allowing goblins to overwhelm young forts placed in their areas? 

Then why not extend that to, say, forts built in a dangerous area?  Why not make it so there's artificial limits so you flat out can't be attacked at all in the first x years? 

Because that's boring.   Losing is fun.  It's realistic that there's consequences to trying to inhabit dangerous areas. 

[Neonivek]

There is going to be some form of fudging in dangerous areas. Mostly because it is very easy for an enemy to simply attack your new fortress with an army of 200 or something like that.

Though that said the fudging should never contradict the intelligence of the player. So if you go into a dangerous area it should still be difficult-impossible, just not flat out impossible.

[Ghoulz]

I don't know if you've noticed, but real life is boring, and it's one of the staples of heroic fiction that interesting things happen to people who're at the center of a story.  A straight up reality simulator isn't going to cut it

You go into a forum meant for suggestions.

The only person who actually implements suggestions.. or anything for that matter is a man named Tarn Adams.

Tarn Adams has opposite views of you.

You still won't give up.

Zero profit.

[Capntastic]

I cannot tell who that's directed at.

[Neonivek]

I cannot tell who that's directed at.

It is so random I am half convinced he posted in the wrong location.

[Ghoulz]

I don't know if you've noticed, but real life is boring, and it's one of the staples of heroic fiction that interesting things happen to people who're at the center of a story.  A straight up reality simulator isn't going to cut it

This is what I was directly referring to.

[Capntastic]

Ah.   But Granite is right that a 'reality simulator' would be boring.   S'why DF is a fantasy world simulator.