Maybe reputation system is better choice

[bronzepoem]

I have said moral system isn's a good stuff for RPG in another thread. Without it, to make game design more easily and NPC behavior more credible, we could use reputation system instead. It could be disparted into good reputation, bad reputation, smart reputation, stupid reputation, stereotyped reputation, chick bagging reputation. In such system, if you act like a playboy, it will influence young women most obvious. If you act like a saint, hippies will disdain you. All of this depend on designer like. But, the most important thing is that: A secret behavior won

Edited April 23, 2008 by bronzepoem

[SilentScope001]

Eh.

 

1) The average citizen will know jack about Jack. Hack, ask an average citizen about Alpha Protocol, and they'd think it's an new RPG made by Obisidan. Jack may be a newbie, but he should know that spies shouldn't walk around and get noticed by the average plebian, because an 'average pleb' may be another spy.

 

2) A repuation system would be nice, only if you organize it by Faction, like how GTAII and Merc1 handled it. You got 4 factions, and they want you to accomplish missions. If you accomplish a mission succesfully, then you get 'increased repuation', and being friendly with the factions can gain you special beniefts. For example, if you are friendly with the Mafia, they'd give you a discount in their military warehouse.

 

If you get caught blowing up Faction B's HQ for Faction A, however, your repuation with Faction B goes down to zero, and Faction B is going to respond by trying to murder you. The only way to increase your rep (and stop Faction B from killing you) would be to go and kill Faction A's HQ, so as to prove Faction B that you are on their side.

 

3) However, I don't think it's going to be that complex for Obz. I think it's going to be a plain old battle between Jack and 'UBER EVIL CONSPIRACY', which is where the morality system comes into being. How will you take down the Conspiracy? Will you follow the Geneva Convention within the letter (and risk looking like an idiot), or do whatever you want to do?

Edited April 23, 2008 by SilentScope001

[bronzepoem]

Eh.

 

1) The average citizen will know jack about Jack. Hack, ask an average citizen about Alpha Protocol, and they'd think it's an new RPG made by Obisidan. Jack may be a newbie, but he should know that spies shouldn't walk around and get noticed by the average plebian, because an 'average pleb' may be another spy.

 

2) A repuation system would be nice, only if you organize it by Faction, like how GTAII and Merc1 handled it. You got 4 factions, and they want you to accomplish missions. If you accomplish a mission succesfully, then you get 'increased repuation', and being friendly with the factions can gain you special beniefts. For example, if you are friendly with the Mafia, they'd give you a discount in their military warehouse.

 

If you get caught blowing up Faction B's HQ for Faction A, however, your repuation with Faction B goes down to zero, and Faction B is going to respond by trying to murder you. The only way to increase your rep (and stop Faction B from killing you) would be to go and kill Faction A's HQ, so as to prove Faction B that you are on their side.

 

3) However, I don't think it's going to be that complex for Obz. I think it's going to be a plain old battle between Jack and 'UBER EVIL CONSPIRACY', which is where the morality system comes into being. How will you take down the Conspiracy? Will you follow the Geneva Convention within the letter (and risk looking like an idiot), or do whatever you want to do?

 

 

 

Yes, it's necessary to organize NPC by faction. But I think the type you metioned is too simple. In my opinion, the faction could be old man, young man, businessman, politician, gentleman, hippie, scholar,hooligan...and so on.

Also, the concequences shouldn't be so boring as a discount in their military warehouse. About this, Tigranes give us a very sweet example:"you decide to extort a shopkeeper; due to the shock, injury or extortion he has to close shop. Not only does htis mean closed doors and inconvenience for you, other shopkeepers are pissed off at you, or just talk about how it's a pity that has happened; passers-by gather in front in curiosity; you run into that shopkeeper somewhere else drinking away his sorrows; etc. "

[Humodour]

When I was going to bed last night, I thought of a cool idea.

 

It'd be nice if there was a game world with a 'memory'. You'd have two systems: karma and reputation. Reputation would be about what people thought of you. Karma would be whether you did good or bad stuff. The problem with Fallout or BG's system is that neither differentiates between good and respected and all consequences are fairly predictable. If you divided the two systems as such, you could then work with a world that also rewards/punishes/whatever the player in unpredictable ways depending on their actions; a world that's reactive to the actions and attitude of the player. A world that truly revolves around you (but not in the stereotypically trite way of 'here comes the hero to save the day').

 

Probably better for a world like Planescape or Star Wars, with their living Belief and living Force philosophies... indeed Torment was kind of reactionary like this to a certain extent.

Edited May 9, 2008 by Krezack

[Tale]

A reputation like system would be better. I don't think a morality system makes sense in context in the least. There's no magical spells with modifiers based on alignment. Besides, the concept of character development (in a non-stat building sense) is offensive to players, so the option to change alignments when that is valid is wasted.

[Humodour]

A reputation like system would be better. I don't think a morality system makes sense in context in the least. There's no magical spells with modifiers based on alignment. Besides, the concept of character development (in a non-stat building sense) is offensive to players, so the option to change alignments when that is valid is wasted.

 

That's a lot of assumptions. "Character development is offensive to players"? HUH?

 

Also, Fallout and Torment both had a 'morality' system. Did you play them? Deus Ex went free-style instead, which I think worked well.

[Tale]

That's a lot of assumptions. "Character development is offensive to players"? HUH?

Yes. Players are generally offended by the notion of their character changing from the pre-set design they have in mind. It doesn't matter how many members of your family are raped and gutted before the PC's Paladins eyes, the player still wants to play his character the same as when he was dancing across a field of posies. If the player does by chance happen to change his actions and morality as a result of the sequence of events, he'll delightfully come up with an excuse for why he hasn't really changed at all, then get pissy when the game disagrees.

 

If the player decides in advance that he wants to play his character as a Paladin, no amount of adversity, horror, or even greed on his own part will prevent him from wanting to ride off into the sunset on a white horse.

 

Also, Fallout and Torment both had a 'morality' system. Did you play them? Deus Ex went free-style instead, which I think worked well.

I don't recall a morality system in those games, but I have played them. I don't recall much. Torment had probably nearly no use for one as all the important things that would be relevant were managed in other ways, but hey, it was still D&D. I can't even fathom what the point of it would have been in Fallout. Edited May 9, 2008 by Tale

[Humodour]

You logic is sound, but I think it's not complete; I maintain there are ways to integrate character development into an RPG which the player perceives as enlightening rather than disempowering. I'll have a bit of a think about it, but I think any game which raises moral questions can trigger character development by triggering real personal development. Forcing the player to make even basic moral and philosophical decisions is perhaps the best form of this, and I believe it's one of the reasons Torment was so successful (likewise for Deus Ex).

 

Anyway, I'm not really talking about morality systems as a means of character development, rather as a means of shaping the game universe in response to player actions - actions breed consequences and reactivity in the game-world, ideally in shades of grey and in partially unpredictable ways. The actual morality score and/or mechanics could be entirely invisible to the player.

[Tale]

I'd like to point out there's a world of difference between having a complex system of cause and effect and having a "morality system" akin to D&D's alignment and KOTORs light/dark side meter.

[TsangYinPok]

I understand that

"Meter System",like those in KOTOR series, is too general as suggested

While "Individual System" is too complex for both players and designers

So we do need a system which is both not so general but also not too complex

My idea is that

Why not use multiple meters system?

I know DnD has used it for long

but I'm not going to say the old Good/Evil and Chaotic/Lawful

We should make it more modern-styled

For example,a cold-war-styled Tri-meter:

Communist/Capitalist

Good/Evil(I must admit it is old-fashioned)

Famous/Infamous(also old-fashioned but

unlike most games, you can be infamous in time, for example

you are a famous communist hero who fights the tyrannical capitalist government,

but one day you are caught and sent to a secret lab as a sample of a super soldier project

after many operations, you remember that you are the guardian of the working class,

you breach out the lab with your newly gained power,

However, most men do not recognize you as long time passed or

the working class is having such a hard time that they can't spend time to cry for and remember you

the result is that you are not famous now)

Famous is also special that it works as a "effectiveness meter" for the other two meters

Although "fame meter" will make some fractions hostile to you, it brings you benefits from friendly fractions

Another idea is that

Even generally the three bars are parallel

They may work in two or three on some statements

Hippies welcome you if you are neither a famous commy or cappy or good guy or bad guy

so if you are a neutral guy or a not so famous one of any fractions, they will welcome you

[bronzepoem]

When I was going to bed last night, I thought of a cool idea.

 

It'd be nice if there was a game world with a 'memory'. You'd have two systems: karma and reputation. Reputation would be about what people thought of you. Karma would be whether you did good or bad stuff. The problem with Fallout or BG's system is that neither differentiates between good and respected and all consequences are fairly predictable. If you divided the two systems as such, you could then work with a world that also rewards/punishes/whatever the player in unpredictable ways depending on their actions; a world that's reactive to the actions and attitude of the player. A world that truly revolves around you (but not in the stereotypically trite way of 'here comes the hero to save the day').

 

Probably better for a world like Planescape or Star Wars, with their living Belief and living Force philosophies... indeed Torment was kind of reactionary like this to a certain extent.

Sorry I haven't catch your point, how could the world reactive to player's attitude?

As we know if attitude don't become action, there won't be consequences,right?