[MUD-Dev] NPC Goals ( Was: RE: Dynamic Timelines)

[Lord Ashon]

-----Original Message-----
From: mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu [mailto:mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu]On Behalf Of
Travis Casey
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 7:45 AM
To: Lord Ashon
Subject: Re: [MUD-Dev] NPC Goals ( Was: RE: Dynamic Timelines)

<EdNote: Slight reformatting on the example)

Monday, December 11, 2000, 1:52:30 PM, Lord Ashon <ashon at wsunix.wsu.edu>
wrote:

>>> - Making NPCs behave in a consistent way.  This requires the system
>>>   to know things about the NPCs.  E.g., if Bubba has a goal "marry
>>>   Buffy", then if Bubba's first scheme to do that is thwarted, it
>>>   makes sense that he'll try another one later.  If Bubba goes after
>>>   a different princess every few months, things will seem less
>>>   consistent.

>> This statement I agree completely.  The Mobile's _must_ know a couple of
>> things:

>>  - They Must Know their Own Goals
>>  - They Must know the 'shape' of the World
>>  - They Must know how to get things done.

> Question: What do you mean by "the 'shape' of the world"?  My guess
> would be that they need to have a way to check on current
> world-state, but I'm not sure that that's what you mean.

Answer: The shape of the world is the basic Alignment Shift of the
world.  If most of the players are good, than if the NPC is being evil
they have to be circumspect.  And if the players are evil, and if the
NPC is being good, they had better be circumspect.  I hope that that
explains it a little more.

> Bartle's four divisions seem overly simplistic to me, especially
> when dealing with NPCs.  Take Achievers, for example; they desire
> power (higher levels, more goodies, etc) -- but people in the real
> world don't usually want power simply to have power, they want it
> for a *purpose*.  You could class an NPC as an achiever, but that
> doesn't give you much by itself -- what's that NPC going to *do*
> with the power they gain?
>
> To me, it seems that Bartle's divisions are answers to the question
> "How will X go about achieving their goals", but they don't help us
> decide what those goals are.  (Well, to some extent, they do, but
> it's a very vague guide at best.)

See, I was seeing Bartle's divisions as being used to determine an
NPC's capabilities.  The way I envisioned it was the fact that the
division was how the NPC had gone about achieving it's previous goals,
getting the NPC to where they are right now.  We are both looking at
the system from different points of reference.  *G* Seems to happen a
lot on this list, and in the MU* Community in general.

>> Passions
>>
>> This is perhaps one of the most innovative ideas that I have heard
>> of in dealing with NPCs If we use the Bartle Suits to give 'weight'
>> to a set of passions, and then randomize it to give it a little
>> variability, we can match or 'shift' the direction of our npc's If
>> we have to many killer NPC's/Players we can give weight to the
>> algorithm to shift more of the npc's to an explorer or achiever
>> goal.

> Instead of thinking of these as goals, I think it might make more
> sense to think of them as methods.

> For example, a character might have a goal of "defend my village
> from the orcs".  An achiever might try to gain enough personal power
> to defend the village.  An explorer might seek a new place for the
> village to move to.  A socialiser might try to talk to the orcs, or
> to organize a defense.  A killer might go on the offensive, trying
> to destroy the orcs.

The passions are used to determine how the NPC would deal with a
situation, and how they would use their capabilities to accomplish
those goals.

For Example: 

  A character has the passions of Love:Home, Protection:City,
    Hate:Orcs

  An Achiever would be: Love:Home:10%, Protection:City:80% (Modified
    by GOAL:MAYOR:100%), Hate:Orcs:30%

  An Explorer would be: Love:Home:10%, Protection:City:60% (Modified
    by GOAL:LEARN:ORCS:50%), Hate:Orcs:30%

  A Socializer would be: Love:Home:50% (Modified by CAPABILITY:WIFE),
    Protection:City:40%, Hate:Orcs:30%

  And a Killer: Love:Home:10%, Protection:City:40%, Hate:Orcs:90%
    (Modified by GOAL:KILL:ORCS)

These numbers would than be used to determine the best way for the
character to deal with the invasion of his home city.

>> PC involvement: Plots could be generated with PCs as objects --
>> e.g., Bubba might put a price on the head of a PC who thwarted his
>> plans, causing the system to search for NPC mercenaries who might
>> decide to go after that PC.  I'm not sure how good an idea this
>> would be -- it allows for "natural" solutions to certain problems
>> (like paladins who are misbehaving), and can reward PCs who take an
>> active interest in doing things on the mud by giving them more
>> attention.  On the minus side, however, it may focus too much
>> attention on those characters.

>> Players need to be an integral part of the Plots.  If Bubba is
>> trying to destroy a certain temple, He should know how powerful it
>> is (How many players attend there) and know that it will make it
>> more difficult.  So he will go about trying to frame others for the
>> job.  Or even to go so far as to hire players to be a part of his
>> plot.  Bubba hires a group to raid a guildhall, and bring him back
>> a specific Item, which he will use to destroy the temple.  or
>> whatever.

> I'm not sure that I'd accept this as true of all plots.  First off,
> there are always ways for players to become involved -- they can kill
> one of the principle characters in the plot, try to prevent a plot
> from succeeding, etc.  Secondly, I think there is value in having a
> few plots that aren't necessarily of direct interest to the players --
> not a lot of them, just a few.  For example, a good knight might fall
> in love with Buffy and ask for her hand in marriage, and Buffy accept.
> This may not involve any players in any direct way, but the simple
> fact that some things happen without player involvement will go a long
> way towards making a world seem more real.

I Had not thought about it in that light.  Background plots are of
course a large part of any role-playing.  The little hooks that taunt
players and when the follow it they find it to be completely harmless.
these would keep players on their toes and keep them from expecting
everything of being grandiose.

--Lord Ashon

_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev