NPCs and trust

kevin.granade · 2016-03-24T05:34:47.000Z

A possible tweak to the “promise to keep you safe” mechanic, what if the player (the user, not the character) can opt in to a risk of morale loss in order to make their check more convincing? Basically it would give two options “pledge to keep safe. (sincerely)” vs “convince you will protect them”.

Coolthulhu · 2016-03-24T15:24:51.000Z

You mean as in two different levels of morale loss or just one with morale loss and one pure speech check, with NPC trust loss (or something like that) on failure?

Litppunk · 2016-03-24T15:37:55.000Z

I think he means that to NPC if it passes the skill check means you don’t suffer any moral penalties because you are a villainous sort and never really intended to do anything more than use them as a meat shield. Having the downside being if the the skill checks you and you fail, NPC knowing your lying and losing massive trust with you/ considering you an enemy.

Or vow to protect, care about the NPC and suffer major morale penalty if they die, with the plus side that they trust you up front to protect them, and no chance of failing a skill check.

Logrin · 2016-03-29T10:10:47.000Z

Wait wait wait…

I CAN FEED THEM MUTAGENS NOW?!

I’ve been trying to get an artifact that mutates over time and get them to hold it…

Straume21 · 2016-03-30T06:49:58.000Z

I think that how easy it should be to work with and direct NPCs should be directly related to a character’s intelligence stat.

High intelligence (in comparison to that NPCs intelligence) would make it easier to get them to trust you, perhaps only needing to complete one mission for them, or perhaps none at all, and they’ll simply follow you because your character passed the intelligence test against their random stat.

Low intelligence (in comparison to the NPCs intelligence) would make it more difficult to get them to trust you, needing to either lie to them, make a promise to them, or complete a number (3, 4?) missions for them, with each successful mission bringing you closer to gaining full access to their inventory, worn items, weapon choice, and general approach to enemies.

Straume21 · 2016-03-30T06:52:00.000Z

[quote=“Logrin, post:24, topic:10843”]Wait wait wait…

I CAN FEED THEM MUTAGENS NOW?!

I’ve been trying to get an artifact that mutates over time and get them to hold it…[/quote]

Alright… wait a second.

Is this in the latest experimental? Otherwise, how would I do this? I’ve never tried to feed an NPC, much less give them any kind of drug whatsoever. I’ve only ever used first aid kits on their wounds.

Wally-kun · 2016-04-01T23:19:17.000Z

I think getting the AI to understand that intelligent things want to run if they feel outmatched is a thing. I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t charge a Hulk with pipe and nothing but the shirt on my back. Calculating their odds vs enemies should be a thing. If they aren’t equipped to handle it, or are but don’t know about many of that target simultaneously, they disengage. If wounds mount up, they try to flee. The NPC’s confidence and personality can be used to tweak how they see the data (psychotic raiders never flee and take just about anything they have a chance against, or turn tail very easily despite their aggression).

Nickal · 2016-04-04T15:02:40.000Z

Been gone a long while. Factions have been fledged out somewhat?!?

Logrin · 2016-04-05T12:54:28.000Z

I would love to be able to tell NPCs to ‘Eat anything when hungry’ so that I don’t need to keep hand feeding them. You’d see them do like a survivor do then. Eating candy out of dead zombie’s pockets.

Coolthulhu · 2016-04-05T14:00:22.000Z

They eat from their own inventory.

Logrin · 2016-04-05T17:18:07.000Z

Yeah, but with low initial melee skills it’s usually:
a) Equip em’ so they don’t get killed
b) Equip em’ so they don’t need to be hand-fed.

Nomad gear is a good compromise but the fact that I can’t repair the stuff they’re wearing means that I usually prefer to just dump them in a RM13. Even then they usually get stomped by the first Mi-Go that sneaks up on em’