Character Replacements

[BigT2themax]

Permadeath for NPCs would be pretty neat, as long as there is a replacement NPC as some people have suggested. As for a griefer going in and killing all of the villagers, remember battles are supposed to be pretty hard, so it'll likely be impossible to kill every NPC without dying several, SEVERAL times and incurring the consequences of doing so, especially if you're going up against all the guards in the world (also, the server admin would likely just reset the game instance and ban that player). Plus, NPCs will eventually hear about you misdeeds and you'll essentially be banished from every town (guards will attack you on sight, villagers will run away or fight you off) if you decide to just wipe out one of the towns for some reason.

Whilst it should be possible to be a god-like mass murderer and pillager if you get strong enough, the player shouldn't be getting any kindness from all but the most unusual NPCs if they do so. If you decide you want to just kill everyone ever, and start doing so, then most of society should try and stop you, mostly for realism's sake, but also to give the player a reason to not just start murdering everyone. News of a crazy guy killing everyone would spread, descriptions of you would be told to people, and you'll eventually either just succeed in killing everyone, or you'll be killed by guards or whatever. It shouldn't be possible for everyone to just forget about what you've done and then you go back to what things were like before.

Actions should have consequences. It'd be stupid if they didn't.

 

[BrecMadak]

Whilst it should be possible to be a god-like mass murderer and pillager if you get strong enough, the player shouldn't be getting any kindness from all but the most unusual NPCs if they do so.

Just no, this statement supports to be overpowered at the end, which i am strictly against. There should be always some tough guys around the town that are very likely be trouble for you regardless of how powerful you are. This also leads to situations where cookie cutter builds are born, and that is already against the stance of SG, and the community we have, needless to say.

 

[BigT2themax]

Well, okay, I realise I worded that a bit oddly. I wasn't trying to say "becoming overpowered is good", I was trying to say "having freedom to what you want (even if it's stupid) is good". I was just trying to make a suggestion for the AI's handling of the player's wrongdoing, while at the same time keep the people who love playing bad guys happy as well.

People in this thread are weirdly obsessed about mass murder.

 

[Verva]

Characters are dead when they're dead. I see no point in even having an option to return them to life, because then you've defeated the purpose of the game. Now, I'm sure modders will come along afterwards and let you do what you please with NPC's, but let the devs make the game they want to first.

As for multiplayer, they'v already said there won't be massive servers, so unless one of the other 3 people in your LAN party decide to start killing NPC's all willy nilly, then you don't have a big problem. Plus if they do, you can throw cheetos at them or something. Maybe a backup feature could be implemented, so that if something does go horribly wrong (Bug, miscommunication, lag) you can back up a bit and have another go at it. But again that may be something for mods to take care of cause that would essentially give people a "cheat" option.

 

[NoSoAna]

I have been wondering about permadeath too...

The devs said something along the lines of people have their own routine, they are doing what they do. Now a bunch of robbers would be waiting in the woods for a passerby, or possibly invade some village (if they feel strong enough) and go on the killing spree there. And the local lord would send his men to slaughter the robbers... If you follow this train of thought to the conclusion, the world would start to depopulate just by itself, as everyone (every NPC) does what (s)he does according to occupation, predisposition etc. including killing other NPC if necessary to further the goal.

As this would not make the game a lot of fun, I suppose that NPCs will be somehow prevented of killing off each other randomly...

But this in turn will make the game feel a little more scripted. (i.e. robbers might attack a village, but only if the player is nearby to protect the healer, the shopkeeper and the questgiver...)

 

[Verva]

I have been wondering about permadeath too...

The devs said something along the lines of people have their own routine, they are doing what they do. Now a bunch of robbers would be waiting in the woods for a passerby, or possibly invade some village (if they feel strong enough) and go on the killing spree there. And the local lord would send his men to slaughter the robbers... If you follow this train of thought to the conclusion, the world would start to depopulate just by itself, as everyone (every NPC) does what (s)he does according to occupation, predisposition etc. including killing other NPC if necessary to further the goal.

As this would not make the game a lot of fun, I suppose that NPCs will be somehow prevented of killing off each other randomly...

But this in turn will make the game feel a little more scripted. (i.e. robbers might attack a village, but only if the player is nearby to protect the healer, the shopkeeper and the questgiver...)

I just don't see how a few robbers are going to kill of an entire town. What I think will happen is only a few people die here and there, but never a whole town at once. THAT would feel unrealistic and scripted, unless there was a good reason that whole town deserved to be destroyed, and even then it would be an extremely rare incedent.

Plus, I'm sure if the devs see that NPC's are dying off too fast, they'll throw something in there to prevent that. It IS a game and things can be changed to make it more fun, as opposed to more realistic.

 

[NoSoAna]

I think you missed my point. The point is: If random encounters start to kill NPCs, then sooner or later important NPCs will be missing. No matter if slaughtered all at once or one by one.

There would be ways to prevent this, the most obvious being that permadeaths only happening if the player can prevent the death of the important NPC (or hasten it...)

Possibly the story of Sui Generis is set such that a depopulating world - and the erie feeling it generates when at every visit to a town a few more graves are filled and houses empty - is part of what the game should be. Which is to say, depopulation could be included for artistic means (ohh - I think I just wrote one of the most evil sentences ever ). That would mean the player has to focus on the main quest as opposed to building up strength through side quests or dungeons, restricting the freedom in practise even if not theory. If population decrease is on purpose, thats one thing - but if not it would be a major nuisance. And as I wrote above, it could be prevented but the solution would feel scripted, that is to say artificial.

 

[the0thMonkey]

Just a note here. The last few posts seem to mention that a "realistic" game, would lead to a naturally depopulating world. This is obviously not the case. If perfect realism was achieved (ie. the game was a simulation of real life), the world's population would steadily increase as it does in the real world (even as it did in the middle ages, just at a slower rate).

I think most people would find dynamic events (such as bandit raids, highway robbery, etc.) to be highly immersive and an enriching experience overall. This is very much in character with the game as we know it so far. We encounter a problem when faced with the fact that NPC's do not spawn, and their are no children. These two mechanics would lead to a depopulating world.

There are many possible fixes to this problem, and I have two suggestions:

1. New NPC's could be introduced at a reasonable rate that corresponds to the rate at which current NPC's are dying. This would not necessarily have to be immersion-breaking. For instance, foreigners could make their way into town to supplement its population after a particularly brutal bandit raid. This would make sense for realistic reasons. E.g. A new smith comes into town to replace the one who died recently.

2. The factors that cause NPC's to die could be mitigated. For example, instead of a group of bandits just running into a small town and attempting to kill everyone, they could just steal their wares and threaten them. Or they could capture the most important person in town and hold them for ransom. Not only would this be MORE immersive than the default action (mindlessly killing everyone), it would help solve the problem of world depopulation, and provide a possible quest for the player character. Mitigating factors that cause NPC death would not be applicable in every case (for example, a instance of a noble being assassinated by an NPC faction) but it could be done effectively for some.

These are two ways to maintain a stable world population without the game feeling artificial or scripted. I'd be interested to hear if we can come up with some others.

 

[BigT2themax]

Huh, I recently made a post about respawning NPCs in the character death and resurrection mechanics thread. I'll just post what I wrote there:

That's actually a good point, and it made me think that, possibly a few generic NPCs should respawn.

Now, before you stone me to death and point me to the grand list of dev quotes, hear me out for how this could work...

If you seperate all the NPCs into population groups, like, there'd be a population group for the civilians in each town and village, a population of travelling merchants, a population of mercenaries and adventurers and explorers, a population of bandits and other unscrupulous types. Then, if a small part of a population were killed by forces unrelated to the player (monster attacks and the like), then new generic NPCs in that population type would slowly (VERY slowly, like, at least 5 in-game days minimum or so) and randomly respawn (as like, a completely new NPC, not the same one). This would stop everyone from eventually just getting killed by wolves and having the entire world slowly just be wittled down to an empty, desolate world. That'd be no fun in the long run.

For certain populations, of course, if a large enough group of the population were killed, that entire population would be considered to be wiped out, and the population group would stop respawning NPCs, with any remaining NPCs in the population group just buggering off and joining a different population group. This could make things like a village being attacked and destroyed feasible, and the village would likely be left abandoned.

Population groups of travelling merchants and adventurers and that would probably not get wiped out, as there's always people willing to become merchants and mercenaries and adventurers and the like around, but maybe have the respawn rate slow down for a while if many of a certain type get killed in a short period of time ("I'm not becoming a mercenary! Haven't you heard how likely they are to die lately?", "Travelling merchant death rates are too high, it's not worth the gold!").

Of course, any fairly important NPCs, like, the important people in the world of Sui, shouldn't ever be replaced. If the king of Sui gets killed, the world of Sui goes without a king, yo.

Of course, this population groups system is just something I came up with to deal with not letting the every game world instance inevitably become devoid of NPCs due to all of them dying permanantly.

Edit: I just realised, the thread I was talking about was in the insider forum, in case you had no idea what I was talking about.

 

[Infidel]

Definitely no spawning of new characters.

So you're saying that with hard work, persistence and a real go-getter attitude I can exterminate the whole world? It's a Dalek's paradise!

 

[the0thMonkey]

@BigT2themax

That seems like a plausible system. It seems like a possible implementation of the system I proposed. I don't have access to the insider forum (no credit card) so I didn't see that before, thanks for sharing.

 

[BigT2themax]

@BigT2themax

That seems like a plausible system. It seems like a possible implementation of the system I proposed. I don't have access to the insider forum (no credit card) so I didn't see that before, thanks for sharing.

s'aight. Just wanted to share.