Jump to content

Friendship paths for BG1 NPCs?


Kulyok

Recommended Posts

In my opinion, yes, it is. We simply do not have everyone available to write and BG1NPC is about evenly distributed content. Not only some of the writers will disagree with the idea that their character suddenly needs (25 - n) talks with the PC (where n is the number of the already existing ones), but it might not just be feasible for them to write them, and I know that some of them for sure would not want anyone else write for their char. Heh, me included, sorry! With the exception of Xan, obviously, 'cause Kulyok made him more hers than mine anyway by now.

Link to comment

Oh, one more thing. I wanted to caution about 25 talks for each character, to be honest. Not only it is a huge load on each writer (who is not Kulyok), but it can also become quite crowded in the game space when every character has 25 friendship talks. My IWD2 has less, and my game 'talks' to me all the time already. Sometimes more is less. I suggest a more modest figure of 15-20, and some of them - player-initiated.

Link to comment

OK, then the line is as follows, from my perspective:

  • The BG1 NPC Project is closed. No new submissions are accepted; the last two quests are the only wiggle room we have.
  • Since it is closed, Authors no longer have a say in anything other than actual BG1 NPC content, which is not to be changed. The position of Charcater Czar or Guardian, etc. becomes moot.
  • As of this G3 Anniversary, BG1 NPC moves to open source for code. If another mod or modder wishes to work around BG1 NPC code to make their content match, they should be allowed to do so, rather than compete directly with us.
  • The responsibility I see myself having at that point is strictly bugfixing and maintainance. Authors will need to protect their characterizations in whatever way they choose to do; I cannot act In Loco Parentis for authors who are not available, and do not wish to for those authors who are presently active.
  • Ergo, the discussion points I made above are also moot. Characterizations made via secondary mods are open after the G3 Anniversary.

This is ok by me; it reduces my anxiety about balancing competing author needs, and frees me up to pursue rojects for both BG1 and BG2.

 

 

But I must beg/ask/plead to Kulyok and Jastey - PLEASE wait to develop these ideas until AFTER the G3 anniversary. I need your help in finalizing the two quests. berelinde and i both have many things going on right now, and out of fairness to the project, those last two quests need serious help. I would ask that you both spend your time on either the romance doc or (preferably) handle Faldorn's Quest - I have a rough, but beetween the two of you I bet you could complete it in a week (where I would take immensely longer). I will post the code in the workroom tonight, and please, please, please could the two of you take it over - I need to do a Bull Ruish on the final buglist, including a new wrinkle in Dynaheir's Quest latest internal.

Link to comment

I tried, but failed miserably. CamDawg had good ideas in his magequest to steal, but I'm no CamDawg - and at this point, I think the safest thing to do is let Kulyok and Jastey see what they can do with it. it may mean changing the Diviner to another character and not getting the book from the FAI; but between the two ladies I think they can do what i can't seem to. I have an older version that is mostly your work that I will put up, rather than my mess.

 

Tiax I kicked tail all over, building out the opportunities for evildoing, extortion, murder, and double/triple crossing to the point where it is nearly incomprehensible, but berelinde is dialing it back (I got lost in the plot/counterplot extort/counterextort Pathways of Evil and things got tangled. She is untangling them).

Link to comment

Well, it's not a big deal if it does not get included. I knid of gave up on it shortly after starting to code. Faldorn ain't Jaheira, so the scores of angry fans won't be coming and asking "Where is it?!!!" ???

Link to comment

I've got mixed feelings about the friendship path for BioWare NPCs. And I'll explain why now.

 

I'll use Ajantis as an example, both because Jastey and I enjoy an excellent working relationship and because I've got a pretty good idea of what Ajantis is like. On one hand, I would enjoy a friendship path with Ajantis. My male paladin might not worship the same god, but I'm certain that the two of them might become devoted friends and companions.

 

But on the other hand, it still feels like technical evasion of the prohibition against modding the mod. Were Jastey to write that friendship, she would be free to include whatever romance checks she likes, because she's the BG1 NPC Project Ajantis romance author. But if I wrote that friendship track, I couldn't use those variables without her involvement. She might or might not have time for that. Without her active cooperation, Ajantis would potentially launch both the friendship track introduced by my mod *and* the BG1 NPC Project romance track. I know from my own experiences with Gavin that having both the friendship and the romance track run simultaneously is more than any player could be expected to endure. The guy would never shut up. And what about the situation where a female might start out in the friendship track, but want more? That's a common situation in real life, and it works beautifully in mods, but implementation would be impossible without BG1 NPC writer cooperation.

 

Also consider that the BG1 NPC Project introduces player initiated dialogue to the NPC in question. A friendship path might well want to do the same. Experience on BGT installations has taught us that the situation is messy.

 

Now consider Dynaheir. Domi's said that she's done modding BG1. She's been most gracious about cross-mod content, but I fear that asking her to approve an entire mod might tax her time too greatly. Yet I'd run into the same trouble, because Dynaheir already has friendship content in BG1 NPC and she has a fully developed romance. Adding another would be a bit odd, just like with Ajantis. And someone else would have to write it, as Domi has moved on.

 

I do not anticipate that anyone would play these friendship mods without having BG1 NPC as well. The clash in characterizations might be severe. For example, Domi has portrayed Kivan a certain way. I love the way she has portrayed him, but I am absolutely certain that I could never write Kivan like Domi, nor should I attempt it. Yet my impression of Kivan is shaped by the BG1 NPC Project. Without it, I would have a very different perception of Kivan, and the friendship path I wrote would likely diverge radically from BG1 NPC. That creates problems. Player perception would be that somebody is right and somebody else is wrong. I wouldn't want to subject either myself or Domi to that.

 

I would also prefer that any friendship path mods be packaged separately. For a collaboration to be successful, it needs a coordinator, an editor in chief. Recent experience has taught me that this situation puts collaborators in the uncomfortable position of having to conform to that editor's vision. For example, cmorgan and I both imagined that given Renal Bloodscalp's personality *as we see it,* the encounter in Romantic Encounters might well be made available to both male and female protagonists. We're both Americans. In our experience, homosexuality does not carry the stigma that it might in more conservative cultures. This idea was vetoed by the editor in chief because of what can most conveniently be described as cultural differences of opinion. In the end, the opinion of the editor in chief overruled contributor objections, and Renal Bloodscalp is available only to female PCs. It's a single, brief encounter. It wasn't worth arguing about. What happens when the contribution is significantly larger, and represents a bigger investment of modder time? It's possible, nay, likely, that contributor vision might clash with coordinator vision. Not a situation I would approach with any enthusiasm, I must say. When you take into consideration the fact that the opinion of the contributor might also clash with BG1 NPC Project writer vision, it becomes even less attractive, especially with no possibility of including BG1 NPC Project variable checks.

 

So, in closing and in summary, I want to say that while I like the idea of further BioWare NPC development, I recognize that authors who are not also BG1 NPC Project authors are at a significant disadvantage, and that I would prefer this to be implemented either as a completely independent effort, with each modder packaging their mod separately, or that the coordinator limit his or her involvement to personal contributions and packaging.

 

I am also loathe to step on the toes of BG1 NPC Project modders who have poured their hearts and souls into the NPCs they helped define.

 

Edit: damn it, I type to slow. The conversation has moved on. I hope at least some of this is still relevant.

Link to comment
OK, then the line is as follows, from my perspective:
  • The BG1 NPC Project is closed. No new submissions are accepted; the last two quests are the only wiggle room we have.
  • Since it is closed, Authors no longer have a say in anything other than actual BG1 NPC content, which is not to be changed. The position of Charcater Czar or Guardian, etc. becomes moot.
  • As of this G3 Anniversary, BG1 NPC moves to open source for code. If another mod or modder wishes to work around BG1 NPC code to make their content match, they should be allowed to do so, rather than compete directly with us.
  • The responsibility I see myself having at that point is strictly bugfixing and maintainance. Authors will need to protect their characterizations in whatever way they choose to do; I cannot act In Loco Parentis for authors who are not available, and do not wish to for those authors who are presently active.
  • Ergo, the discussion points I made above are also moot. Characterizations made via secondary mods are open after the G3 Anniversary.

I am fine with that. applause to point no 3, open source. It makes parts of berelinde's arguments moot (only the one), that BG1NPC variables can't be used as checks. They can!

The problem with different characterisation and different point of view on the character remains. But it remains, since people have moved on and are no longer available. So if additional content for NPCs is wanted is has to be written by other modders.

 

cmorgan concerning BG1NPC finish: I'll do my best.

Link to comment
And someone else would have to write it, as Domi has moved on.

 

Actually, I'd like to have a choice about writing or not for the charaters I was originally developing. No, I will not do it out of my own initiative ('casue you know, 5 characters, 20 talks each....), but if the mod is kickstarted, well, I would like to have this option.

 

I'd like to point out one more reason why a separate project makes far more sense than attempting to beef up BG1NPC. BG1NPC develops BG1 to the level of content seen in BG2. What Kulyok is suggesting (20+ firenship talks) firmly belongs in the 'modded charcater' realm. BioWARE never developed their characters to such a degree. Unlessthey do it in DA. The highest dialogue saturation we had seen was in KOTOR and it is nowhere near that point. And sometimes less is more.

Link to comment
As of this G3 Anniversary, BG1 NPC moves to open source for code. If another mod or modder wishes to work around BG1 NPC code to make their content match, they should be allowed to do so, rather than compete directly with us.

 

No, they don't. If Joluth wants to write Branwen-Dynaheir romance conflict, she should ask Domi, because Dynaheir romance is her work. If berelinde wants to write Gavin-Xan romance conflict, she asks me, because Xan romance is my work.

 

But I must beg/ask/plead to Kulyok and Jastey - PLEASE wait to develop these ideas until AFTER the G3 anniversary.

 

I did code Domi's Xan's quest, Xan's quest documentation and recoded the romances - simply because I loathed the idea of letting someone else screw it up.

 

(Anyway, when I asked you a year ago - PLEASE do not support BGT version, please keep it to strictly bugfixing and maintainance, you assured everyone at the forum that you would).

 

This idea was vetoed by the editor in chief because of what can most conveniently be described as cultural differences of opinion.

 

Untrue. I suggested female-only Renal, because male homosexuals do not usually attend high positions among thieves - I never vetoed everything. My suggestions were made in the same vein as my posts in Gavin's mod - free to be ignored.

 

I would also prefer that any friendship path mods be packaged separately. For a collaboration to be successful, it needs a coordinator, an editor in chief. Recent experience has taught me that this situation puts collaborators in the uncomfortable position of having to conform to that editor's vision.

 

But you're still participating in BG2 NPC IEP, right?

 

 

 

With the exception of Xan, obviously, 'cause Kulyok made him more hers than mine anyway by now.

 

Um, yes, it just happened. Well, the day I was accepted for Xan romance writer was the day Xan was doomed, I suppose. ???

 

 

So, it turns out that idea of BG1 friendships is rather unpopular, except for Xan, Ajantis, and that Domi mentioned to me she'd like to write for Kivan/Dynaheir/others, if it comes to the whole BG1 Friendship mod(which it might not).

 

 

So. Would you Domi/cmorgan be all right with including written and tested friendship paths for these two into BG1 NPC Project, given that we've written romances for these two already(Xan's friendship path triggers if his romance is inactive)?

Link to comment

As I mentioned before - no, because BG1NPC is about making the content *even* for all NPCs. You just can't make one NPC special, Kulyok, and not give the rest the fighting chance. It's just not fair and not a BG2 standard.

Link to comment

But then we must take out all six romances, and half of Kivan's talks because it's about even-ness.

 

Okay, a separate project it is, then. Oh dear... I so want to play it, but I so don't want this headache...

 

 

 

EDIT: Okay, so BG1 NPC Project is firmly out of the question and out of the discussion.

Link to comment

Romances are different, as they are comparable to BG2 distribution of content. Kivan has 8 dialogues which is not all that heavier than 2-5 other has, and you are talking about 25, for god's sake.

Link to comment

Hey, where did I mention twenty-five dialogues? (But, incidentally, um, yes, Xan has twenty-five). I think fifteen could work just as well - it depends on the NPC in question, and things to write about.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...