Neverwinter Nights 2: Storm of Zehir

[Walsingham]

I've decided that I want playable Kobolds. I actually decided that a long time ago, but I've remembered the decision.

 

I want high Elves you can actually torture when they get supercilious.

[Jorian Drake]

I've decided that I want playable Kobolds. I actually decided that a long time ago, but I've remembered the decision.

 

I want high Elves you can actually torture when they get supercilious.

you just need to summon Xzar's ghost and bound it to the elf's weapon

[funcroc]

Anthony Davis on NX2's Party Conversation System

 

I've been busy so I didn't have time to check this thread.

 

I am still implementing and tuning the Party Conversation System so all of this is subject to change depending on how the gameplay works or technical limitation we encounter.

 

Here is the example though.

 

Here is my party:

 

When I start the game, I select (or create) what the Aurora/Electron engine refers to as the Player Created Character. This operates exactly like NWN1, NWN2, and NX1.

 

Player Created Character is NOT functionally the same thing as the Party Leader, though they are frequently the same creature.

 

I select Grubs, my half-orc monk.

 

Once in NX2, we have access to the Party Creation Screen.

 

To complete my party, I select a cleric , a smarty pants mage, and a rogue to cover everything else.

 

So my party now looks like this:

 

Grubs the Monk (PCC and also currently the leader has a BLUFF of 5)

Oswyn the Cleric (has DIPLOMACY of 10)

Karak the Mage (has LORE of 10)

Reylene the Rogue (has BLUFF of 10)

 

 

I'm going to get a little bit more technical here, but it has to be done.

 

Every conversation node has a series or replies. Each reply has or can have conditional scripts that fire that determine if the reply node should appear. It worked this way for NWN1, NWN2, and NX1.

 

For example, if I put a conditional on a reply node that says APPRAISE > 5, that reply node will ONLY appear if the player character talking to the NPC has an APPRAISE skill greater than 5.

 

Conditionals can be ANY script out there as long as it returns a TRUE or a FALSE.

 

Got it?

 

Moving on...

 

Let's pretend we talk to some dude, and his conversation tree looks like this:

 

>Sup, what can I do for you guys?

1. Hey, nothing.

2. (If BLUFF less 10) Gimme your money. !Failure!

3. (If BLUFF greater than or equal 10) Gimme your money. !Success!

4. (If DIPLOMACY greater 5) We come in peace!

5. (If LORE greater I have heard of you!

 

(The words between the !'s represent comments that would not be shown in game)

 

Whatever, you get the idea. Talking to this guy will bring up the new Party Conversation System.

 

The new Party Conversation System looks similar to the Quickchat Screen from NWN2, except for a series of tabs that allow you to switch between current party members.

 

In our case, it is Grubs, Oswyn, Karak, and Reylene. Grubs is currently the active/highlighted tab because he is the party leader.

 

Grubs has the following dialog options:

1. Hey, nothing.

2. (If BLUFF less 10) Gimme your money.!Failure!

 

If I click on Oswyn's tab, I am in effect allowing Oswyn to talk for the party. I will then see Oswyn's dialog options:

 

1. Hey, nothing.

4. (If DIPLOMACY greater 5) We come in peace!

 

Karak:

1. Hey, nothing.

5. (If LORE greater I have heard of you!

 

And finally, Reylene:

1. Hey, nothing.

3. (If BLUFF greater than or equal 10) Gimme your money. !Success!

 

 

Flipping through the tabs will allow you to see what options each character might have if you chose to allow them to speak for the party.

 

Remember, my example is weak sauce compared to what the real designers do, afterall, I'm a programmer.

[Jaesun]

Yea I just read that on the codex. AWESOME <3

[Pidesco]

That's pretty awesome.

[Xard]

woah

[Zoma]

I just noticed the parry skill is still not working as intended. Several patches and one expansion later, its still screwed up.

 

Obsidian, could you please fix it finally once and for all?

[Magister Lajciak]

That conversation system sounds great!

[Tigranes]

Conv system sounds very cool. Of course, that littles nippet brings up more things to think about:

 

1/ I wonder if you need to have any sort of consistency, or you can just keep switching guys in every reply to maximise your options? Then most parties can probably have access to nearly every conversation option in every dialogue. Maybe that's not necessarily a bad thing? I don't know.

 

2/ Wonder if it also works negatively or unexpectedly - i.e. might we perhaps see party members be more outspoken about what you should be saying, if they start talking for the party. But then, it's hard to do that if you don't have premade NPCs.

[Atreides]

If it's just a single if/check on a single skill then it's open to abuse. However if the check's X diplomacy AND Y bluff then it may be more balanced and keep some options closed. Would still encourage players to increase more than one skill/int/wis stat in a character.

[samm]

1/ I wonder if you need to have any sort of consistency, or you can just keep switching guys in every reply to maximise your options? Then most parties can probably have access to nearly every conversation option in every dialogue. Maybe that's not necessarily a bad thing? I don't know.

Yeah, I was wondering that too. In the IE games you could (in most situations) chose who to use to talk to an npc, but not switch during the dialogue, you had to decide beforehand. Would probably be wiser to do it that way, otherwise one can really switch between high int / high cha / high intimidate-skill / high bluff-skill etc. which is kind of lame.

Checking for multiple skills would solve that too to a certain extent, agreed.

Edited June 28, 2008 by samm

[Humodour]

1/ I wonder if you need to have any sort of consistency, or you can just keep switching guys in every reply to maximise your options? Then most parties can probably have access to nearly every conversation option in every dialogue. Maybe that's not necessarily a bad thing? I don't know.

Yeah, I was wondering that too. In the IE games you could (in most situations) chose who to use to talk to an npc, but not switch during the dialogue, you had to decide beforehand. Would probably be wiser to do it that way, otherwise one can really switch between high int / high cha / high intimidate-skill / high bluff-skill etc. which is kind of lame.

Checking for multiple skills would solve that too to a certain extent, agreed.

 

Why? I think it makes sense that you offer the full range of options based on the entire party, not just arbitrarily due to whoever is speaking at the time.

 

More like Torment, where even if there were extra possibly 'better' options, the lower/worse ones still showed; so you show all the options that any party member could unlock, and half the time the person will still pick based on roleplaying.

Edited June 28, 2008 by Krezack

[samm]

Probably are not talking about the same thing In no game could you switch through your partymembers to check possible responses while the dialogue was already started. If that is now possible, it's only natural to boost one social skill for each character and pick the best possible response. PGing reaching dialogues is not cool, imo.

Torment suffers from the same problem to a lesser extent. If a n00b on a forum asks for the best build, people recommend boosting WIS to 17 (+-) because you can get +1 wis here and there and tattoos and blablabla to get the "best" experience from the game. No one asking is let playing a dumb fighter anymore, or a skilled rogue. It's just PGing, with different stats than usual. Here it's even worse, because you can still neglect Int, Wis and/or Cha for each character, as long as there's another who has enough.

Edited June 28, 2008 by samm

[Tigranes]

I think it really does need to be a start-of-conv thing. In terms of realism switching every node *does* work, yes (i.e. Gimli intimidates the guy, before Gandalf speaks up with wise persuasion) - but in terms of gameplay it really is very munchkiny, as I say, unless this means that party members interject a lot more as well (i.e. it's a lot harder than before to bluff that you will agree to kill the dwarves with a dwarf in the party). If that's happening, all good: but I think with usermade NPCs in the mix as well that might not be the case, and there really has to be a provisional concern about dialogue just being a switch-switch game, until we know more.

[funcroc]

 

 

 

RPS-ish At-ish E3: Day 2, Part 2 - Atari

 

Otherwise, Atari also had Neverwinter Nights 2: Storm of Zehir on show. Now, I have absolutely no experience with NWN2, so my impression of the expansion pack

[newc0253]

I'm looking forward to Neverwinter Nights 2: Don't Mess with the Zehir

[Kelverin]

"Expect NN2:SoZ to be available within the next few months."

 

Or even NWN2:SoZ

[Starwars]

Swashbuckler confirmed in a tiny blurb here: http://www.gamingnexus.com/FullNews/E3-200...i/Item9321.aspx

 

Domguide of Kelemvor was confirmed before I think.

 

EDIT: Whoops, missed it in funrocs post.

Edited July 16, 2008 by Starwars

[Monte Carlo]

Hey, any game with swashbuckling pirate (sic) classes can only be a good thing. The dude in red in the top screenie looks a bit piratical, although I hope they introduce a non-magical parrot familiar for complete realism.

 

A "A-harrr me hearties / Walk The Plank / X marks the spot" (etc) sound-set is also essential. Developers please note. I've been supporting you for many years and I think it's payback time.

[Kelverin]

"There are plenty of new creatures to take on"

 

Always a good thing. Tell me more

[Xard]

Probably the thing that I enjoyed most though was the placeholder introduction, which used comedy stick figures (it was a bit Kingdom of Loathing.) I wasn

[Sand]

Newcie, that was bad. VERY BAD!

 

[Xard]

Probably the thing that I enjoyed most though was the placeholder introduction, which used comedy stick figures (it was a bit Kingdom of Loathing.) I wasn

[Jeff Husges]

Stick figure art by Annie Carlson, not MCA. >_

[Starwars]

So there are a now two stick figure masters at Obsidian...