PC Personality

[DocClox]

Folowing from the discussion here: http://pinkpetal.org/index.php?topic=281.msg5374#msg5374

I thought it might be nice to run a poll on this one:

[altereggo]

The standard h-game trope of the faceless character makes games easier to write without sacrificing playability.
Any other option could be an improvement--particularly profiles--but could restrict player preference or be more work than everything else put together.

The current options the PC is given allow us to play him in many different ways (forgiving customers vs. selling their daughters, mercy to adversaries vs. cutting their throats for revenge). Making the alignment system show up more in the game could reflect your past choices and build your character depending on them: if you're evil, your dialogue with the goons changes to reflect the fact that you attract a retinue of bastards, for example.
EvenI could add a feature like that, and there are enough opportunities for it to give all of us junior contributors appropriate jobs to do, without loading more work on the devs.

[Midnight_Amratha]

often choices in games fall into a category i refer to as "when did you stop beating your wife" questions. its a bit blurry to explain but i'll give it a try.
in order to impose a linear or branching direction on a game you normally have to limit options to one, two or more choices. these choices have to be defined in advance and may give results that has a short term effect but in the long run doesn't do more than cut off some options later in the game, they rarely ADD options. to put it in other words: damned if you do and damned if you don't. the same mechanism applies to personality of the game. you can go for the pre-defined personality or you can go for the "consequences"-personality. but most times it leaves a feeling of being "not entirely you". If you want to give players the freedom to play the game the way they want you need to be able to remove a "game-personality" entirely and just play the basic game without any labels on the player (labels like "evil vs good" and such things).
i prefer to NOT have a pc personality because sometimes i go all evil and other times i go all good but i don't want to lock myself away from some options because i adopt one type of personality.

[fires_flair]

well I don't really mind what we have now, though it would be cool (add a challenge to the game) if we could have the option of locking our selves into a disposition. though I do assume that this game is more geared towards the evil dictatorship/ruling style rule then a righteous dictatorship/ruling style.
personally I'm more interested in knowing/choosing the traits we can pass to our kids.

[Mehzerz]

The config setting option sounds like a headache. At least with the other two options, the pre-determined PC will either be blank slate or a specific personality, with the config one, we have two locked character types. Instead of a general one... I would say for now the first two would be the best options.


I'd rather give the coders as little work as possible in fear the project may be abandoned if it gets too crazy.

[LordJerle]

I'd say an evolutionary personality based on actions taken in game would be the best idea. 

[Bloodly]

But then we run the problem of having to do certain things to 'grind' alignment quickly, which itself could have consequences depending on how alignment affects things. 

It has to be accepted that people are going to do what what's effective over what applies to personality/roleplay unless roleplay does not hinder effectiveness or for challenge play.

Maybe a selection of fixed traits you can put together....

[Samu]

my idea would be that PC personality would NOT affect gameplay, only the flavor text.

[DocClox]

my idea would be that PC personality would NOT affect gameplay, only the flavor text.

Absolutely. It's not what the player is allowed to do - that would be the same in all cases. It's the difference between the player character having a bit of banter with his NPC during events, or else never saying a word, and leaving it to the NPCs to carry the dialogue. A good example of a PC with a character would be Geralt from The Witcher. On the other hand, Morrowind and Oblivion are good examples of a "characterless" PC.

Either approach will work. It's hard to write complex encounters if the player has no lines (or at least I find it so) but on the other hand, it's easier to immerse yourself in the character if you don't have the PC constantly saying things you wouldn't say given the choice of actions.

A profile choice would mean to have two or more sets of interaction files: one with no dialogue, one where the PC has his own lines in every encounter, and then potentially others where the PC still speaks, but where his dialogue gives him a differnt personality.

[letmein]

[cracks knuckles, unlimbers keyboard, readies to post]...

It's been a while, slow... season... and all, but here's my vitally important two cents:  bland is better.  Not from a gameplay standpoint, but from a game making one.  Someone has to type all that stuff for the different PC types, and since we're already to the point where our update has gotten stranded in Whothefuckknows, Kentucky, I think it's safe to say that simpler is better.

Although the other option is to create one type of detailed PC, which might actually lend itself to making the writing simpler (think Rance, for example).  I actually wouldn't mind that, but trying to retcon that sort of thing at this point is probably more difficult than it's worth.

[DocClox]

I was thinking more "write one specific type" and let anyone who feels strongly enough about it write and release their own dialog.

[exodia91]

Bland all the way baby. Having my quiet neutral PC start spouting off oneliners and dialogue he'd never say would make me wanna puke. Besides, this is being developed as a gameplay game, not a story oriented game, if you're gonna have a story based game you have to start building it with that in mind, trying to throw in some personality and story now would just feel wrong and out of place.

[zodiac44]

I'm not certain there is much point to having this discussion.  Dialogue in the base game is limited anyway, so there isn't much of an opportunity to develop a personality even if we wanted to.  I envision the vast majority of dialogue coming from user-submitted content, in which case the authors should have full freedom to write whatever they want to, rather than be forced to stick to some preconceived "consensus" achieved here and now (assuming such a thing is even possible).  If you don't like the personality an author gives the PC in a script, don't use the script.  It's as simple as that.

[DocClox]

Dialogue in the base game is limited anyway,

Currently, yes.

authors should have full freedom to write whatever they want to,   

Well, I wasn't planning on putting a gun to anyone's head. On the other hand, if you have half a dozen basically good mods but where the PC talks with jarringly different speech patterns, it can spoil the effect. So it might be nice to see if there is a possible consensus. Also, there's a fair chance I'll end up adding some interactions at some point, and I'd sooner not do that in a style that irritated 90% of the players

rather than be forced to stick to some preconceived "consensus" achieved here and now (assuming such a thing is even possible).

Well, that's the idea of having a profile setting. If we can't agree, it might still be possible to support multiple parallel implementations. Granted, most would  rely on a user taking a script and editing to read the way they like it. That would probably happen anyway. Having a profile setting would just let players distribute the changes in a sensible way. So if there's a bunch of players who like their PC to call his girls bitches and slap them around for punctuation, some could write that. Or of a bunch of folk might decide they want him to sound like a camp old hairdresser fussing and flapping over his girls.

I'm not interested in forcing anyone to do anything.

[Vanreis]

I would prefer bland, no-talking PC over the predefined one. Why? Well, one of my reasons is the fact that I like to do what I want with my char and if it has certain personal traits I hate I can't do shit about it. Just take a look at Rance - I hate this guy but if I want to play the game I have to accept his rape extravaganza. Now think about Link, Crono, Oblivion/Morrowind or Golden Sun PC whose characters are defined only by their actions (like the possible outcomes of trial scene in Chrono Trigger, when you could end up as a typical criminal or as unfairly convicted "good boy" which was defined by your behaviour at the beginning of the game). They have no other ways of expressing themselves (except for Yes and No for Golden Sun main characters) and it actually feels better like that than if they had some stupid lines. Besides, slave training game doesn't really need a complicated story. Also, considering how easy it is to include your own material into the game people who want storyline could as well make it themselves instead of bugging devs and turning their attention from more important stuff xP