Topic: Player Creation

[Noonien]

So, ya want to create a new player/character for the game. Groovy, but how? There are many ideas out there, so lets here them! My personal idea (as discussed with Morgul over a pizza) would be to have a number of slots you can put different traits/parts of the character into (life-style, wealth, intelligence, health, whatever). Say you have slots A - D, with the A slot being the most important and the D slot being the least important. For each slot there's a numerical range attached to it, say 0 - 20 for D, 21 - 40 for C and so on. For those sections you have a total pool of points to pull from and distribute among those slots to help define your character. Following the trend, a pool of 200 points would be cool. Well too bad, I was thinking having a max pool of about ~130 points to distribute would be acceptable (nobody's perfect   ). And then, though some method that pool would be created. Say someone might have a pool of 100 points to distribute, they could be all intelligence but almost nothing else. Not everybody starts out with the same value for their respective pool. Balances out dosn't it?

There are probably better ideas out there for character stat creation out there, hell we could directly rip-off WoC and use the D&D D20 system. So lets here something!  

[Morgul]

Ok, let me explain mcrobotic's idea (as I understand it) and then give me thoughts, and finally, suggest my idea.

The Container Method:[/u]

Basically, imagine containers A,B,C,D. (A > B > C > D) You assign traits in the order of importance... say the traits were Intelligence, Widsom, Charisma, Skills. So we have:

Container:
A -> Wisdom
B -> Skills
C -> Charisma
D -> Intelligence

Ok, now for argument, let's say the contains have max values of:

A: 100
B: 50
C: 35
D: 15

Which means total they all hold 200 points. Instead of giving the players 200 points at character creation, we only give them 100. This means that you would have to assign the number of points you wanted to start depending on how important it is to you, knowing full well that you won't be able to max everything. Let's say you do it this way:

A: 20
B: 50
C: 25
D: 5

This would mean that starting off, you have more skills and more Charisma then you have Wisdom, but your character has the capacity to gain more wisdom as you play... but will never inprove his Skills since it's already maxxed out at character creation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, this system is interesting, because it already assigns max values to your stats when you create the character... However I don't know if I like *ALWAYS* having to be really weak in one area. Some people are all around good at everything.. and I can't make a character like that with this system. It bugs me.

[Morgul]

Ok, here's my idea:

The 'All Men are Nerfed Equally' Method:[/u]

Genereral Idea: Basically, Take Shadow Run's Priority System, mix it up with a random number generator, and add a little nerfing in for spice.

Ok, let's say you have Prority Slots A through D, which all have point ranges assinged to them like so:

A: (100 - 200)
B: (50 - 110)
C: (30 - 60)
D: (10 - 40)

Notice, we have 10 points overlap between each one, and the one above, or below it. Now, let's take the following Attributes (Wealth, Skills, Knowledge, Personality), and assign them to the following slots:

A: Wealth
B: Skills
C: Personality
D: Knowledge

Now, once we assign them, we let the computer pick values in the range of each one, and that's the number of points we have to work with in each Attribute. Let's say it assigns the following:

A: 120
B: 50
C: 60
D: 25

Now, notice that we actually start out with more points in Personality then we do in Skills, even though we assigned Skills to a slot above Personality.   Just because it's assigned to a slot below something else, doesn't nessicarily mean that it's going to have more, just that on average it will. This means that you don't always know how many points you'll have given a slot, but you do know the least you're going to have. It makes it dynamic, and still allows for you to create characters that start off good at something.

Now, wait, there's more. Let's say you were really pissed off at the fact that you have more Personality points than Skill points. You can 'purchase' more points by lowering your max in any catagory, at -2 in a catagory gets you 1 point in any other catagory you want. Let's say the max (in all catagories) is 255. You want to put 20 more points in Skills. That means you need to take a total of -40 in max points. Let's say you do it this way:

A (max): 255
B (max): 255
C (max): 235
D (max): 235

So, now you have a 70 in skills, but once you've been playing for a while, you're not going to be able to be as Knowledgable, or have as many Personality traits as another character who didn't nerf themselves.

Now, keep in mind, all number in this can be changed.. and most likely will. This was all just to illustrate the idea. So, what do you think?

(Oh, as a side note... You can't nerf wealth, since it's only at character creation that it matters... IE: it determines how much starting cash you have. having a 'max' for it is retarded... there's no reason why you can't have a million dollars, just because you don't have a max high enough.)

--Chris

[fehknt]

I like it.  It allows people to change thier characters around from what they're given, but only if they really want to, because of the high cost.  I'd propose that increasing your highest stat costs even more, say it's a 3-1 trade there.

Maybe allow people to choose if thier character has "even" stats (almost all equal), or "normal" (fair range) or "extreme" (crazy highs and lows), and then put them to prioritizing them.  Even stats won't matter too much how you prioritize, but the others it would.  It would allow you to make a character that was a jack-of-all-trades, non-specialist, or a normal specialized person that can do ok but not good outside thier specialization, and they can make a person that's freakishly good at some things, but pretty terrible at anything that they dont specialize in.

[Duffy]

Except for the random generation part it sounds good. By having the points randomized you could potentially run into two problems. One of them being that  someone could get a really good random draw or a really horrible random draw.  Both obviously cause some unfair factor on either the creator or other players. The easy solution to a bad draw is to simply remake your character. This brings up problem number two, remaking characters till you get the best "stats". This will obviously create a problem, the system will cause player customization to become just the priority you give each "stat". So why bother with the random numbers at all? Now of course anyone who knows anything about randomization knows that the chances of getting the perfect stats aren't very good. But it is possible, and players will use this to gain an advantage.. (I've spent a lot of time with D&D Character Creation programs, it can be done)

Best solution I think would be to stick with the point distribution and the priorities, but make three changes.

1.) Depending on priority the point cost from your starting point pool changes. Sorta sticks to what morgul said. (Somthing like: A slot 1-1 exchange, B slot 2-1 exchange, etc...)

2.) Put a cap on each priority, doesn't have to be very low, but it insures no one is "perfect" in something and has nothing else at all. (while this could be argued as nerfing yourself I guarantee someone will think of a way to exploit it, its just one of those things you know can cause problems, just don't know exactly what yet.)

3.) Since you want this to be close to realistic, you should probably account for natural talent. This is a possible use for a quick random number to be added to your "stat" scores. Range for each possible increase would be determined by the priority slot. This would be a hidden number anyways so players would not be able to exploit it, also it should only be enough to help but not enough to horribly overpower a character.

[fehknt]

Why let players know thier exact scores?  It isn't needed for anything but maximizing character abilities.  Just let them put thier priorities, and let the player know that they will be assigned any of a possible range of numbers, but they don't need to know exactly what numbers they got, until they start hitting maximums, at which point they've put far too much into a character to just re-make it to get better starting stats.

[Morgul]

I have mixed feelings about showing the stats to players. It's nice to know where your character stands in terms of others, but it also allows for a good deal of problems with powergaming. Hrmm... I'm gunna have to think about that one.

Now, there's another thing that's pretty important that's been glossed over. What will we put in these priority slots? How general are we going to be? What's the system for creating a character with certain skills, and personality traits. Heck, do we care (from a game persepctive) about the personality traits? What things are going to be based on how the player plays the character, and what's going to be a part of the character's stats?

I think I need to put more thought into answering my own questions...

[Duffy]

Just as a player, from my personal viewpoint, I would feel very uncomfortable making a character who is going to have completeley random stats that I can't see. (aside from the priorities) Concept just bothers me.

On the note of what the actual stats should be...well most commonly stats in RPGs reflect the physical aspects of the character,  personality is often left up to the player, since that is the realm of roleplaying. Sadly in most MMORPGs the actual "roleplaying" group is a minority.

Showing the stats won't be a problem if you can eliminate the ability to simply make a powerful character, for those familiar with DnD we used to have a rule that only 2 stats could be above 14, and 2 stats had to be under 10. This eliminated the problem of every player having the "perfect" stats for there characters.

Ultimately it depends on what stats player's get to choose from and what they effect,  and if the system is designed to stop exploits.

[fehknt]

Even with those rules, people will just re-do their character creation until they have 2x18, 2x13, 2x9 (assuming 6 stats as in D&D).  I really think the only method that will work if we allow the players to see their exact numbers would be to use a point-based system, where every character gets X points to spend among their stats.  

What would you think about hiding the stats until at least 10 minutes of play-time have elapsed?  or 30?  that'd make it dauntingly hard to try to "beat the system" because it's random, but if you really don't get stats you like, then you'll know before you spend more than a half-hour playing that character.

and, the way I was proposing didn't have completely random stats, you'd just assign a set of ranges, the way you like it.  then you get a random number falling in that range.  If you want to be pretty sure what your stats are, choose the "even" setting, and the ranges are tight and close together -- you have a good idea exactly what your stats are, but don't have much in the way of a _possibly_ high stat, and if you're willing to chance it, choose "extreme" and get the possibility of having a really good stat, but also have to accept that it might not work out that way and you may get a really lously stat, and a only moderately high stat.

Besides, starting stats are only _really_ important in the early stages of the game, in a game where over time you can change your stats.

[Morgul]

Ok, here's my thought. We use the priority system, and keep it all fixed point values.... However, we give the player an option to select an 'Edge' (something he's good at, or some sort of bonus), whose cost has to be paid for by selecting 'Flaws' (Something he'd bad at, or something that hinders him).

Here's an example. I want to make a character that is a natural hacker. I select an edge that allows my character to have a sixth sense about computer security (it takes him less time to do a hack than normal). However, since that's pretty powerful, I have to balance it with flaws, let's say, I have to take two... one's a bad reputation, and the other is a poor constitution (doesn't have the endurance of a normal person, or w/e the stat is for that). I've got my hacker, but he's not going to be good at running from the police that were staking out his apartment because of his bad rep as a hacker.

Basically, the concepts here are stolen from Shadow Run, however I've modified them a bit. I like using a priority system, and maybe varying some of the stats randomly (a small amount). For example, I don't want putting wealth in Slot A *always* mean you have 230 million credits (or whatever)... I'd rather it meant you have between 200 Million and 240 million. If people want to keep re-creating characters all damn day till they get 240 mil, I personally don't care. Also, here's something to note: IF they make a character... they have to play it for a set time limit until it can be deleted... and I think there should be a max number of characters you can have.... that should cut down on it. (especially if there's no way to know your exact stats until after you've created the character.)

What do you think?

[fehknt]

There's a game system called Alternity that does the perk/flaw stuff.  You get X character points and get to spend them on any combination of raw stats and perks, while a flaw or three can give you a couple extra points.

The key to the system working, I think, is that in a perk/flaw situation, you always lost more than a perk gave you that cost an equivalant amount.  Maybe not much more, but enough to make it count.  The perks/flaws made for a good basis for your character concept.

If the ranges aren't too great that the randomness will cause, then I see no problem -- the main problem is with many large ranges of numbers, then it becomes worth it to re-do your character many times to get good numbers. To vary it to add some flavor and not too much more I think would work just fine.

It's usually easiest to do the perks/flaws on a point basis, rather than 1 for X basis...  but that's your call.  I like the idea of being able to nerf your own stats for extra goodness in the perk area, myself (or perks without any flaws).

[whitelynx]

I definitely agree that edges and flaws should be done on a point-based system, but I'm undecided whether we should do edges and flaws with the same points as skills. There are some very good reasons to keep these separate, mostly ease of balance.

As far as the stats system in general, I envision more than just different settings for your point spread. Thinking in an interface sense, I envision a slider that can go from a very flat spread (about 5 points worth of spread from min to max) to a very steep slope. (about 50 points spread) That way people can set it any way they want, and there's more variance just from where they happened to have clicked it. In this case, user error could be enough randomness. ;-)

I definitely think it's still a good idea to add some randomness to the _outcomes_ of the points, but not necessarily to the points themselves. Taking the example Chris was giving of a very Shadowrun-like assets system, a certain number of points put into assets would give you a certain range of outcomes. This way people could make minor adjustments however they felt appropriate, but within the bounds of the spread they chose earlier. I almost think that there should be minimums as well as maximums for each slot to further enforce the point spread idea. (it would be easier to show this on a whiteboard, but oh well...)

Dave

[whitelynx]

Thinking more about this, I have come up with the following rough idea for the method of character creation:

1. Player ranks their character's stats into different slots. The stats here could include wealth/assets, physical attributes (constitution, dexterity, strength), mental attributes (intelligence, wisdom, charisma), skills (this may actually be determined by their intelligence), or knowledge (ditto).

2. Player chooses a distribution for the slots. This limits how many points they can put into each slot. The distribution would basically be the spread from the highest slot to the lowest.

3. Player distributes a fixed number of points between the different slots.

4. Player chooses edges and flaws. (this may be integrated with 3 if we decide to share points between the two... edges and flaws could even be in a slot.)

5. Choose skills.

6. Choose knowledge.

Much of this is again ripped from Shadowrun, as Chris was saying. The split between skills and knowledge is one thing that I really admire about Shadowrun. Integrating knowledge into an MMORPG may prove challenging, however...

Dave

[fehknt]

Knowelege could give characters additional options when talking to NPCs?  You only know to ask if there's a link between two things if you know of the other thing that happened 100 years ago...  Just a thought.

[Morgul]

Well, knowledge has more 'practical' applications. Do you know how to repair something? How about how to dock a ship? Do you know how to read anything other than English? Do you know how to read? Things like that I believe are where knowledge would be used....

[fehknt]

well, to me repairing something sounds more like a skill, while perhaps a where parts are in a specific model is more knowelege based.  Knowing how to dock a ship, again, doesn't mean that I can dock a ship.  Maybe if I was a skilled pilot I could, but then I suppose I'd have to know how and be skilled at something related, but if I was a good pilot, I could probably figure it out.

Languages could be placed under knowelege, I agree.

If we're using skills and knowelege, we're going to have to be careful to come up with a basic tenet that seperated the two.

Like, maybe, skills can only be learned by doing, but knowelege can be learned by sitting down with a book and studying _about_ something, or by having a more direct interaction.

[contingencyplan]

Personally, my view on life is that just about any skill can be trained and knowledge can be learned, while talent / intuition cannot.  IMO, this would be a fairly good basis for character creation:

Let's take working on computers as an example.  I have a good, intuitive understanding of how computers (esp. software) work.  I can look at a program and to some degree see how it is working, what it's thinking.

However, I do not have all the knowledge I may need to fix a computer.  For a given problem, I have the intuitive understanding so I can understand the solution when I find it, but I lack the knowledge to have the solution ready to go.

On the other hand, given the right knowledge, any person can fix a single computer problem - all they need are the steps to follow.  However, if they lack an intuitive understanding of computers, they may not be able to modify those steps to solve a different (though perhaps similar or related) problem.  If someone's just following a manual to find the solution, then when a situation outside of the manual presents itself, the troubleshooter is lost.

So how does this relate to skill?  Skill comes when knowledge and intuition combine with use over time (perhaps even on a mathematical level).  I have an intuitive understanding of computers, and I have a fair-sized knowledge base to draw on.  Furthermore, I have worked with computers for a long time, and I have learned where I can find answers if I don't know what to do already.  I have honed my intuition and increased my knowledge by applying them over years.  Thus, I consider myself to be "skilled" with computers.

So how can we incoporate this into the game?  Well, let's say you're working on a computer fixing skill.  You have a datapad that you can use to download and learn new information - gain knowledge.  However, you must have an intuition in that skill area to be able to use your knowledge effectively.  And by using that skill more and more, you become more proficient at its use.  

Thus, when you use your computer skill, knowledge + intuition (+ time, maybe) determine whether you succeed in using it.  If you can succeed, the three combine to determine how long it takes you to accomplish the task.  

Btw: I think the inverse should be true as well - if you don't use your skills much, over time they begin to weaken.  This way we don't have any leetster "pwnzor of all teh trades" players.  

Perhaps we should also have a general "computer skill" that you can emphasize when creating your character, then have sub-categories underneath that (hacking, troubleshooting, etc.).  The intuition aspect applies to all, while the knowledge and time applies to the specific category.  

In short, anybody can learn to do something by gaining knowledge and spending time using the subject.  However, their "intuition" determines how successful they are in using that skill, both in areas within the subject that they are familiar with and in areas they are not.

My rambling thoughts on the subject. (I'm eating, working, and sleep-deprived while writing this post.  Interesting combination.)
~Brian

[Morgul]

I really like this idea. I think that 'Skill' should be calculated based on 'Intuition' and 'Knowledge'. Hrm, I'm thinking it would work this way:

Computers:
     Intuition: X
     Skills:
          Build/Repair: (X + Y1)
               Knowledge: Y1
          Hacking: (X + Y2)
               Knowledge: Y2


That gives you a basic breakdown. Intuition is the same across all the skills in one general area, where as knowledge is specific to that particular area. The more you use any skill in a general area, the more your intuition increases (slowly). The less you use a General area, the more your intuition decreses (till something like half your starting value, I'd think. Never zero.... since you'll still have some sort of intuition, even if you never use it.) The same goes for knowledge, except it would be on a per skill basis. (Computer Build/repair is a skill... computers is not.)

Whatcha think?

[whitelynx]

I personally don't think that intuition should decrease. However, what contingencyplan mentioned about "time" could also be called "experience". The more experience you have in a given skill, the faster you can perform it and the more likely you are to be successful. However, if you neglect to use a certain skill for a while, your experience should probably be the stat that drops. Also, knowledge about a certain skill could drop over time with lack of use, but over a much longer time span than experience.

Dave

[contingencyplan]

Here's another couple of ideas that I had for Player creation.

What about genetic modifications?  By this time in the future, we should have a better understanding of the human genome, and may even be able to add characteristics like nightvision or things like that.

Additionally / alternately, what about cybernetic implants - things that help you think?  This might work well for a Field / Squad Commander, who switches from FPS to RTS view frequently.  This view could be switched and controlled directly via the brain, rather than having something like an arm-mounted device.

Perhaps we could have human-computer interfaces as well - this would definitely help enhance people's computer skills, since they can control a computer by thinking, rather than via physical devices (keyboards, mice, touchscreens, holograms, or whatever they're using 600 years from now).

What do y'all think?
~Brian