Mod NPC Idea

[Runescarred]

>and by that I do not mean only Chaotic Evil aaargh death and destruction and burned cookies, mwaahahaha!

 

What I meant was including replies for other kinds of evil than the obvious one (CE being the most extreme): a sophisticated, manipulative and domineering LE; a self - serving and pragmatic NE... in many mods any evil alingment is presented as the Ax Crazy cliche - this generalization is not always adequate.

 

> I can't see Naomi being attracted to a CE individual

 

I take it she won't be discussing philosophy outside of the romance, then?

[Endless Twilight]

>and by that I do not mean only Chaotic Evil aaargh death and destruction and burned cookies, mwaahahaha!

 

What I meant was including replies for other kinds of evil than the obvious one (CE being the most extreme): a sophisticated, manipulative and domineering LE; a self - serving and pragmatic NE... in many mods any evil alingment is presented as the Ax Crazy cliche - this generalization is not always adequate.

 

Naomi is an essentially good person. If you want a successful relationship with her, you will have to at least act like the sort of person Naomi would have a successful relationship with. She will not romance a card-carrying villain - more than one of her banters has her mocking the openly, wantonly evil sort of person common around the Moonsea and in Xvim's church.

 

> I can't see Naomi being attracted to a CE individual

 

I take it she won't be discussing philosophy outside of the romance, then?

 

The discussion will be limited to only one or two dialogues. I'm assuming a CE Charname will be actually behaving according to their alignment, so one possibility I'm strongly considering is including an alignment check in her romance - a Chaotic Charname may not be able to romance her at all, because I can't see Naomi romancing someone whose worldview is so incompatible with her own.

[cmorgan]

There is a way to do both, and it is actually what BioWare does - JCompton has this written up as the "looping lovetalk" approach, in a nice tutorial over at PPG.

 

At base, it uses a linear storytelling approach.

 

Naomi - I think we should not kill those deep gnomes. They have a right to exist.

 

PC - reply

 

Naomi - Well, I have given my opinion.

 

It doesn't require much work on a modder's part to add in more options - but it takes lots of extra writing time trying to be creative and still lead back to the same response and have it make sense...

Naomi - I think we should not kill those deep gnomes. They have a right to exist.

 

PC - Soft - I think you have a point. Perhaps we can find another way.

PC - Flirty - Well, when you flip your hair like that, how can I possibly say no to you? We will find another way.

PC - Domineering - Well, for a kiss, I might be pursuaded that you are right...

 

{now we add in some tailored ones, all leading back to the same next state}

 

IF ~Alignment(Player1,LAWFUL_GOOD)~ THEN REPLY ~We would never do that. It is wrong, and they have broken no laws.~

IF ~Alignment(Player1,LAWFUL_EVIL)~ THEN REPLY ~A waste of time. They have nothing useful to our cause, and they have broken no laws. But perhaps we can threaten them, and they will voluntarily donate to our cause...~

IF ~Alignment(Player1,LAWFUL_NEUTRAL)~ THEN REPLY ~A waste of time. They have nothing useful to our cause, and they have broken no laws.~

IF ~Alignment(Player1,CHAOTIC_NEUTRAL)~ THEN REPLY ~Awww... it might be fun. Or maybe not. I don't know. Let's try, and find out, shall we?~

IF ~Alignment(Player1,NEUTRAL_GOOD)~ THEN REPLY ~I don't see what killing them serves. It doesn't help us any, and it sure doesn't help them.~

IF ~Alignment(Player1,NEUTRAL_EVIL)~ THEN REPLY ~You just haven't thought this through. Killing them will give me weapons practice, and perhaps loot. But I suppose if you wanted to distract me from doing what I want, we could always find something more... exciting to do? Perhaps in my bedroll?~

IF ~Alignment(Player1,NEUTRAL)~ THEN REPLY ~A waste of time, and a disturbance of my goals for no reason.~

IF ~Alignment(Player1,CHAOTIC_GOOD)~ THEN REPLY ~Hey, they are evil creatures, living in the Underdark. They are evil, by definition. I think getting rid of evil beings is a good idea. You can stay here if you want, but I think I am going to go rid the world of a little darkness.~

IF ~Alignment(Player1,CHAOTIC_EVIL)~ THEN REPLY ~I didn't ask for your opinion, girl. If it excites me, I do it. So either you get frisky with me, or I go kill something that squishes when I step on its entrails. What's it going to be?~

 

Naomi - Well, I have given my opinion.

 

The player will only see one of the "alternate pathways by alignment", so they get the fun option if they have the alignment - and you only end up with 4 + exit (instead of a whole pile of replies).

 

This is cool stuff to play around later, though.

 

/EDIT - and you can see how long it takes to write, because two replies got posted while I was typing!

[Guest Guest]

Soft/Flirty/Domineering

I'm missing a sane/factual/neutral option here.

[Endless Twilight]

A great idea for the future, Cmorgan, but I would like to emphasize that I am only a beginning modder, and don't intend to try anything very fancy. At the moment, the romance is only in the "thinking about it" stage.

 

I'm missing a sane/factual/neutral option here.

 

I am assuming that Charname will only progress the romance if she's interested in Naomi - I don't like dead-end paths in dialogue trees unless it's supposed to be a tricky, involved conversation, and a factual/neutral Charname wouldn't progress the romance because it wouldn't develop the relationship. Take the line to end the dialogue if you wish.

[berelinde]

If you think about most dialogues, you will realize that there is a lot of overlap between the different voices. A rational PC might very well find an appropriate reply in the soft/flirty/domineering response pool.

 

Naomi: What did you like best about living in Candlekeep?

Soft-spoken PC: The library there was incredible. I spent days at a time just wandering through the stacks, reading whatever took my fancy.

Flirty PC: The stable boy was quite impressive... and always eager for a little distraction, if you know what I mean.

Assertive PC: People traveled to Candlekeep from all over Faerun. I loved hearing about all the new places.

Exit: Who wants to talk about that musty old dungeon? Let's talk about something else.

 

No, I haven't forgotten that Naomi is a lesbian. The flirty PC response would lead to a state where Naomi and the PC could discuss sexual orientation in a way that doesn't break immersion. Or it could be a romance break, if Naomi would rather just end the conversation at that point.

 

A rational PC might choose either the soft-spoken PC response or the assertive PC response and feel right at home in doing so.

 

Including variations for class/alignment in the above discussion could be simple, too, and you wouldn't necessarily have to include options for everyone. You could include these two responses in the block above, for example.

 

Mage PC: I had the opportunity to study with some of the best mages in Faerun.

Lawful PC: Candlekeep is an orderly place. Everyone has a job to do, and each person knows his role.

 

I'm inclined to disagree with you about providing dialogue options for the PC that doesn't agree with Naomi. It's nice to be able to rattle the NPC's cage every once in a while, even if it does stop the conversation dead in its tracks. I wouldn't advise doing this in every dialogue, but it's a welcome change to be able to tease the NPC at least once or twice and not have it end the romance.

 

But I understand your desire to keep it simple. It's far better to make your first NPC's dialogue linear than it is to make it so complicated that it's impossible to debug. And linear doesn't have to be boring. If you're creative enough, you can make even a looping branch dialogue interesting.

[Endless Twilight]

Sigh. Maybe this wasn't the best idea after all, seeing the immense amount of work that goes into a romance.

 

As it is, Naomi won't talk about her sexual orientation much. If Charname is interested in her, fine. If she's not, also fine. For Naomi, it's not a subject worth talking about - she happens to like women, no more remarkable than a woman who likes men.

[Runescarred]

>Sigh. Maybe this wasn't the best idea after all, seeing the immense amount of work that goes into a romance.

 

Ummm... sorry? Seriously though, I would advise not to surrender - this mod idea does look promising.

 

>she happens to like women, no more remarkable than a woman who likes men

 

I really, really like this approach: main focus being the romance, not the homosexual character in it. Helps to avoid the angst and bad drama. Chapeau bas!

[the bigg]

I really, really like this approach: main focus being the romance, not the homosexual character in it. Helps to avoid the angst and bad drama. Chapeau bas!

Historically, same sex romances in BG2 mods manage to avoid being the regurgitation of 'OMG LESBIANS!!!!11' and bad dialogue that one would imagine from something found on a gaming forum. Probably because those same sex romances are written by actual homosexuals, and not nerdy teens whose goal is to play the game one-handed.

[berelinde]

Sigh. Maybe this wasn't the best idea after all, seeing the immense amount of work that goes into a romance.

It is a lot of work, but writing any NPC is a lot of work.

 

It might be time to ask yourself what you really want to write. Do you want to write an NPC that romances Aerie or do you want to write an NPC that romances the PC? If the NPC you really want to write is the one that romances Aerie, there's no need to stress yourself out writing a romance for the PC. Auren doesn't romance the PC either, and plenty of players like her.

 

As it is, Naomi won't talk about her sexual orientation much. If Charname is interested in her, fine. If she's not, also fine. For Naomi, it's not a subject worth talking about - she happens to like women, no more remarkable than a woman who likes men.

I didn't mean to imply that it should be a long conversation because, as you already observed, it doesn't merit a long converstaion. Just like a hetero romance, it comes down to "interested" or "not interested." But if the PC expresses an interest in a gender other than the NPC's, I would think a word or two might be in order, or perhaps a silent romance kill. I write this into straight romances, too. If the PC sleeps with Chanelle or Anishai, Gavin will ask if the PC prefers women. If she says yes, he'll quietly end the relationship. No muss, no fuss. Since his friendship track is very much like his romance, no big deal.

 

Players often recruit NPCs they don't intend to romance.

 

One way to avoid the whole issue would be to set it up like Angelo. You need to actively flirt with him in order to start the romance. If the PC doesn't make the first move, the romance never starts.

[Sister Vigilante]

Other mods choose "voices" for the PC. In one of the mods I'm working on, I used the Bennet sisters in Pride and Prejudice as a model:

PC reply 1 (Lydia/Kitty): narcissistic, attempt to turn the conversation toward the PC

PC reply 2 (Jane): all compassion

PC reply 3 (Elisabeth): practical, full of advice

PC reply 4 (Mary): inappropriate, sometimes wildly so

PC reply 5: exit the dialogue

 

Man, you should copyright this. The "Bennet Rubric" would be a perfect way to structure PC responses.

[Endless Twilight]

It might be time to ask yourself what you really want to write. Do you want to write an NPC that romances Aerie or do you want to write an NPC that romances the PC? If the NPC you really want to write is the one that romances Aerie, there's no need to stress yourself out writing a romance for the PC. Auren doesn't romance the PC either, and plenty of players like her.

 

Point taken. I felt kind of obligated to write Naomi as a potential romance for Charname, but as I've developed her character more, a romance with Charname has felt increasingly awkward - Naomi truly does see Charname as far out of her league. She might find Charname very alluring and attractive, but in a very intimidating way.

 

Definitely something to think about. I'd just sort of gone in with the assumption that Naomi had to be a romance option, but Naomi and Aerie fit very naturally in my mind where Naomi and Charname do not.

 

I didn't mean to imply that it should be a long conversation because, as you already observed, it doesn't merit a long converstaion. Just like a hetero romance, it comes down to "interested" or "not interested." But if the PC expresses an interest in a gender other than the NPC's, I would think a word or two might be in order, or perhaps a silent romance kill. I write this into straight romances, too. If the PC sleeps with Chanelle or Anishai, Gavin will ask if the PC prefers women. If she says yes, he'll quietly end the relationship. No muss, no fuss. Since his friendship track is very much like his romance, no big deal.

 

Naomi wouldn't be bothered by Charname being bisexual.

 

Players often recruit NPCs they don't intend to romance.

 

One way to avoid the whole issue would be to set it up like Angelo. You need to actively flirt with him in order to start the romance. If the PC doesn't make the first move, the romance never starts.

 

Points taken, and until my computer gets back from the shop, all I can do is think and sketch.

 

Thank you a great deal, Berelinde. You've been a big help.

[Runescarred]

Historically, same sex romances in BG2 mods manage to avoid being the regurgitation of 'OMG LESBIANS!!!!11' and bad dialogue that one would imagine from something found on a gaming forum. Probably because those same sex romances are written by actual homosexuals, and not nerdy teens whose goal is to play the game one-handed.

 

*One - handed? How does one pla... aaaaah, THIS * Touche, I remember playing the Sarah mod and enjoying it because of the matter - of - fact approach to the whole thing. Yet, I still compliment people for not going OMGOMGOMG about it whenever I get the chance. It's just me and my post - slash fiction trauma...

[ericp07]

And this sort of thing is why I was iffy about writing Naomi as a romance to begin with - very daunting, and a huge amount of work for a beginning modder. My thoughts for how to generally do each dialogue were like this:

 

PC Reply 1 (Soft): Tries to bring the conversation to a level comfortable for Naomi, trying to make her feel safe and comfortable talking to Charname. Generally oriented towards a good Charname.

PC Reply 2 (Flirty): Teasing, but affectionately so - might include separate versions for a more aggressively flirtatious Charname and one who wants to tease Naomi out of her shell.

PC Reply 3 (Domineering): Aggressively establishes that Charname is Naomi's superior, and that Naomi should bow to Charname as the higher position in the hierarchy. Generally oriented towards an evil Charname.

PC Reply 4: Exit conversation.

 

You and I are in the same boat! Mine is the first mod I've attempted (recently resumed after a long hiatus), and I haven't written a word of romance dialogue. I, too, had originally thought to write a mod sans romance, but I've been persuaded to do so, and I feel it will enhance the mod Fortunately, I have no release date in mind Keep working on it, by all means!

 

Best wishes,

Eric

[cmorgan]

The cool thiong is that fundamentally, you don't *have* to do anything. I agree with Sister V - Berelinde's "Bennet Sisters" approach is way cool - it stops the time hemorraging my NPC is undergoing by trying to be too specific, but gives a good range of PC options. On the other hand, if adding this level of detail is scaring you off, please remember -

 

some of the coolest NPCs out there are straightforward ones with BioWare style responses - 1 NPC > 2 to 3 PC >1 NPC > exit type stuff. I think you will have a huge amount of fun just writing what you see in your head, and *then* going back and possibly adding other ideas.

 

Don't let the workload scare you off - it isn't work, it is fun. There is no deadline, no money headed your way if it is good or bad. It is really all about having fun breathing a character to "life" in a way you wish that a character in game would be. And that is both fun, and way, way cool. And your audience will appreciate getting a chance to see a new character and interact with her, with or without romance!)