Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Lies, lying in conversation

conversation morality lying game mechanics

  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

Poll: LIES DAMN LIES (130 member(s) have cast votes)

When do you think lying should be possible?

  1. Always! All obey the Trickster! False rumours are his gospel :D (90 votes [41.10%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 41.10%

  2. When asked about facts (44 votes [20.09%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 20.09%

  3. When related to personal beliefs (39 votes [17.81%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 17.81%

  4. When related to quests (43 votes [19.63%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 19.63%

  5. Very seldom (3 votes [1.37%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 1.37%

  6. Never (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Should lies be explicitly marked in dialogue, or be implicit?

  1. Always explicit (84 votes [64.62%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 64.62%

  2. Explicit when quest-related (19 votes [14.62%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 14.62%

  3. Always implicit (27 votes [20.77%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 20.77%

Should lying require a successful skill/ability roll

  1. Yes, always (66 votes [50.77%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 50.77%

  2. Only when quest-related (13 votes [10.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.00%

  3. Only when concerning facts, not personal beliefs (35 votes [26.92%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 26.92%

  4. No, never (16 votes [12.31%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 12.31%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#61
OliverUv

OliverUv

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 14 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

There is nothing preventing them from omitting the [lie] marker when it doesn't make sense, i.e. in the case you just mentioned. This was never a problem in PS:T. You do have intelligent humans designing the dialogues, and they'll all have discussed guidelines for these things before they start writing dialogues.



#62
Amentep

Amentep

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5182 posts
  • Location:Fawcett City
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Lords of the Eastern Reach Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

I'd argue that it only made sense in PST because the setting is such that belief alters the planes; ergo the distinction of intent is important.

 

In a game like Baldur's Gate where the setting isn't supposed to respond to the character's beliefs (and thus their truth or lies), there is no reason to (IMO) make a distinction between intent and action. 

 

EDIT: To further clarify, lets take Wimpy (from Popeye); his classic statement "I'll pay you Tuesday for a Hamburger today."  When he says it he either means it or he doesn't.  If he doesn't pay he either lied or something unknown happened to prevent payment.  IMO its harder to have a system that makes a distinction between intent (lie, tell truth but something happened, lie but did it anyhow) than action (money paid back on Tuesday, money not paid back on Tuesday).


Edited by Amentep, 12 February 2013 - 09:02 AM.

  • JFSOCC likes this

#63
Lephys

Lephys

    Punsmith of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 7245 posts
  • Location:The Punforge
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

1) Since the game won't allow you to literally grabbing a persons throat and putting a knife to it, that action has to be part of the text for the bluff.  [put sword to throat] I'll cut your neck like a ripe mellon.  Or something.

Exactly. You'd have to tag it. And it would be handled by dialogue. So, how would the player know whether or not he was telling the game to have his character ACTUALLY be about to cut someone's throat, or just bluff about cutting someone's throat?
 

2) So if that "Oh, of course I did as you asked!" warrants some kind of believability check, then so should the initial "Yeah, I'll totally do this thing you're asking me to do! In fact, I LOVE coconut!" should, too, if you're lying. - contextually, however, the game can't assume what you mean to do - even when you tell it that; for example if there is a "Yeah I'll totally do this thing [lie]" option there's nothing in the game to prevent you from then "doing that thing".

Then you changed your mind, and you end up doing that thing. Doesn't change the fact that you had no intention, whatsoever, of doing that thing when you lied about it.

Either your bluffs and lies have a chance of failure (between people's ability to detect such things, and your character's ability to deliver falsehoods in a believable manner), or they don't. If they don't, then... okay? That seems pretty lacking in the dialogue depth department, but whatever. No worries about lie tags, I suppose. But, if they DO... then, how can the game determine whether or not to check if it doesn't even know if you're lying or not?

You say it isn't important, because your future actions will determine whether or not you were lying. But, that isn't true. If I say "I'm going to the grocery store," and I get out on the road, and it turns outthe grocery store's on fire, I'm probably just going to turn around and go home. Did I lie? No. Did I do what I said I was going to do? No. So you see... If your character says "I'm going to kill Lord Blargity!", and you get to Lord Blargity, and someone else assassinates him before you can kill him, then you didn't lie. But your actions later determine whether or not you were lying, right? Nope. They don't.

Really, mechanically, it comes down to the bluff/lie check. If there's a mechanic difference between a lie and a non-lie, then it would be horrendous design on the devs part not to tag it for the player's knowledge.
 

I think you're walking down a bad path when you start trying to have your game understand the players motivations rather than their actions.

I want the game to take into account both. I don't want it to be an AI, and understand my hopes and dreams. I just want my character's... well, character to be represented in the game. If you change your mind 743,000 times throughout the game, then so be it. That's probably gonna generate a spotty reputation at best, but go for it, and Connect Four. However, I want character depth, and I want to be able to suck at lying, and to be really, really good at it, with different characters. And none of that matters if the game never cares if I'm deceiving anyone, or what the intentions behind my words are.

Edited by Lephys, 12 February 2013 - 01:14 PM.


#64
Amentep

Amentep

    Forum Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 5182 posts
  • Location:Fawcett City
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Lords of the Eastern Reach Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Then you changed your mind, and you end up doing that thing. Doesn't change the fact that you had no intention, whatsoever, of doing that thing when you lied about it.

Except the game has no way of knowing what your intentions are; if you say "I won't do this [lie]" and then do this, what is the fundamental difference between that and telling the truth from the perspective of the game? What is the difference between saying "I will do this!" and then not doing it and lying?

(Note I do not think that "bluff" and "lie" are synonymous, and I'm not convinced that you'd need a bluff check for something that is within the realm of normal believability.)

#65
OliverUv

OliverUv

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 14 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

I agree that the distinction between lies and bluffs is important. Bluffs should obviously be marked (if an identical non-bluff answer exists.)

 

However, I still support the ability to [lie] because, as I explained in the middle of page 3 of this thread, it could be used as a mechanism for letting you choose part of your character's history. Are you pro/against this mode of storytelling, and a follow-up question: do you have this opinion in general or just for this game?



#66
moridin84

moridin84

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 266 posts
  • Location:Ireland
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

If there was an option between two lines, one with a [Lie] tag and one without, where the [Lie] tag would cause a bluff check then I would pick the one without the [Lie] tag. Regardless of whether I meant it or not. 

 

I think 99% of people who play the game would do the same. 


  • Lephys likes this

#67
OliverUv

OliverUv

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 14 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

A good point. Lying should be there when it is sensible.

 

I think the game should make you emotionally invested enough in the stuff that goes on that anything worth lying about isn't going to make you just skip lying about it just to skip a bluff check. If it can't manage to do that, well, I don't expect it to have a particularly interesting story anyway.



#68
Lephys

Lephys

    Punsmith of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 7245 posts
  • Location:The Punforge
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Except the game has no way of knowing what your intentions are;

No, but it has every way of knowing what your character's intentions are, and it can then allow the player to choose.

If there was an option between two lines, one with a [Lie] tag and one without, where the [Lie] tag would cause a bluff check then I would pick the one without the [Lie] tag. Regardless of whether I meant it or not. 
 
I think 99% of people who play the game would do the same.

Hadn't really thought of that. Excellent point. This pretty much renders the "same line but one has a [lie] tag" thing pointless. However, I still say that any other time, it should be marked, for the simple fact that, if your character KNOWS something is false when he/she says it, the player should know this as well.

This ONLY applies to the main character, aka "you," and what that character says in dialogue that the player can choose from a list of options. If all the NPCs in the entire game (and even your party members) want to lie 24/7 and not inform the player, that's totally fine by me.

But, if my character provides someone with information that I don't know isn't true, and my character knows it, I need to know that. If my character knows it isn't true, it shouldn't be a mystery to me. You can't perform an action later on to determine whether or not some information (we'll say about a past/existing event or state of something) is true.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: conversation, morality, lying, game mechanics

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users