Let''s say you''ve got a mechanic where you want to build loyalty among a number of NPCs working for you. The reward for maximizing their loyalty is that they become devoted to you, which means they allow you to surgically modify them into super-units. The penalty for having low loyalty is that they may quit spontaneously, become susceptible to bribery, commit sabotage, or turn traitor. How would you best represent loyalty? The easiest way is a status bar, but that lacks subtlety. If you suspect you have a traitor or saboteur in your midst, all you have to do is look for the lowest status bar and then isolate that NPC. Another method might be a fuzzy status bar, but that seems only a stopgap measure, as you''d just look for the lowest fuzzy range, and isolate those NPCs. Another approach might be labels rather than numeric representation, such as "Loyalty: Uncertain" or "Loyalty: Steadfast". Better than status bars, but it would never inspire the kind of paranoia and strategic "who-dunnit" thinking I''m going for. One method I''ve thought of is that loyalty has a true, but hidden representation, then all the other NPCs have an opinion of each other''s loyalty. So trying to figure out who''s disloyal is a matter of what multiple NPCs say about one NPC. If NPC opinions were muddied by faction- and personality-related biases, the player would have a challenging time determining who the actual traitor was. This might lead to gameplay where the player attempts to "set up" a given NPC to test their loyalty. For example, if the player is a mobster, they may demand a suspected undercover cop kill another cop. Or they might have an NPC followed, to see where they go and what they do. Any thoughts on this idea or loyalty/trust gameplay dynamics in general? -------------------- Just waiting for the mothership...

Yeah I think the obvious idea is to not even show their loyalty tot he player with stats, but rather just by how they interact with you and the other NPCs.

[edited by - botman2 on March 10, 2004 8:03:21 PM]

While it certainly depends a lot of technical implimentation, character expressions can be used as a sutle representation of loyalty. For instance most of the time NPCs have a regular facial expression (or a mini face is shown on their status panel in place of a bar of text) but occasionlly it changes for a second or two to a different expression, such as angry, sad, exagerated happy, etc. A low loyalty character might show angry and sad more often then normal. However at the same time normal characters may be inclined to show the same emotions due to random factors in their own "lives". You can also use the reverse. After a sabotage the guy who keeps acting extra happy and yes sir might be guilty. Basically the different emotional displays would lead the player to suspect characters. His suspicions may be correct, but its up to the player to determine just how many angry faces an NPC needs to make in order to make him suspicious enough to execute (just like in real life, you can make this a very fuzzy thing, so that while a very angry looking NPC might get pegged by the player as guilty, there is still a chance it was just a mistake).

You could also use your opinion idea and have NPCs make different faces when around different NPCs (for instance everyone who gets near someone they suspect of being a traitor might give him the evil eye)

Yeah, I agree. I think the last part you said was good about what other NPC''s say. I also agree that how polite they are to you or what their facial expressions are could indicate loyalty. Any way you can portray eagerness to serve. I also think the quality or speed of the work they do for you should be determined by loyalty. If a mechanic tries to sabotage something then you can guess they are disloyal

Its an interesting question, how do you represent loyalty in game for npc. Well you could have two values public loyalty and private loyality. Public loyaltiy is how loyal an npc appears to be it can be relfected in the how efficently they work and the npc willingness to follow orders. A low or negative loyalty value would mean they publicly oppose you. While private loyalty is how they really feel about you. This is reflected through subtle means such as the quality of their work, and dialoge. Low or negative values may mean they turn traitor or organize an ungerground movement against you, even commit sabotage.

It could lead to some interesting dualities. Such the gunsmith seems to be fairly loyal and produces a rifle a day. However in actually he is rather disgruntled and as result is making poor quality rifles. You may not even be aware of the fact that your troops are armed with these low quality weapons until you send them into the field and guns begin to jam and missfire.

It could be interesting would you allow the player to have a seceret police force, to monitor the npcs and route out traitors?

It would take complex desgin but it would be interesting if traitors npc could frame loyal npcs. Thus tricking you into sysmaticlly elimaninating all your loyal follows and filling your ranks with traitors.



-----------------------------------------------------
Writer, Programer, Cook, I''m a Jack of all Trades
Current Design project
Chaos Factor Design Document

quote:

---

Original post by Michalson
While it certainly depends a lot of technical implimentation, character expressions can be used as a sutle representation of loyalty.

---

I might be accused of "dramatic overplaying" if I used this idea, but I like it! Although I like it more as one possibility, say combined with TechnoGoth''s idea of private and public loyalty. Let''s say there are transparent NPCs and poker-faced NPCs. You know the transparent ones maybe because they''re always showing emotion, and the poker-faced ones because they never show emotion.

For the transparents, slitted eyes, excessive sweating or looking away when talking might be construed as dishonesty. In keeping with the RPG feel, I could add lines of expository text, like "Hawks seems to be sweating profusely" or "Davis looks nervous."

quote:

---

For instance most of the time NPCs have a regular facial expression (or a mini face is shown on their status panel in place of a bar of text) but occasionlly it changes for a second or two to a different expression, such as angry, sad, exagerated happy, etc. A low loyalty character might show angry and sad more often then normal. However at the same time normal characters may be inclined to show the same emotions due to random factors in their own "lives". You can also use the reverse. After a sabotage the guy who keeps acting extra happy and yes sir might be guilty.

---

It would be nice if I could establish a visible pattern change somehow. The guy who suddenly is being extra helpful should be distinguished from the guy who''s always helpful. Maybe expository text here, too, along with facial expressions? For example, "That''s odd. Johnson certainly seems happy all of a sudden."

The NPCs are supposed to have random things happening every once in awhile in their lives, too, so this could work to muddy the picture.

quote:

---

Basically the different emotional displays would lead the player to suspect characters. His suspicions may be correct, but its up to the player to determine just how many angry faces an NPC needs to make in order to make him suspicious enough to execute (just like in real life, you can make this a very fuzzy thing, so that while a very angry looking NPC might get pegged by the player as guilty, there is still a chance it was just a mistake).

---

Yes, I think this is essential. There should always be the possibility of targeting the wrong guy. And, of course, everyone who''s ever been accused of a crime is innocent (heck, just ask most people who are in prison. )

quote:

---

You could also use your opinion idea and have NPCs make different faces when around different NPCs (for instance everyone who gets near someone they suspect of being a traitor might give him the evil eye)

---

Hey, I like this. It might not have to be around the NPC, but whenver you simply ask about the NPC. This, coupled with dialog, would hint at where their inter-NPC loyalties lie. Along with the player''s own sleuthing, they should get a more clear picture of who''s loyal to who, as well as who''s loyal to them.



--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

quote:

---

Original post by EvilProgrammer
Yeah, I agree. I think the last part you said was good about what other NPC''s say. I also agree that how polite they are to you or what their facial expressions are could indicate loyalty.

---

Haha, but what if they''re just sucking up? (I do have a Toady personality type, so maybe you know just by looking at their personality type).

quote:

---

Any way you can portray eagerness to serve.

---

Yeah, this right here deserves extra special attention. I might prove my loyalty to you by taking risks above and beyond the call of duty. For instance, if you think I''m disloyal, I might try to do something to critical wound your enemies and prove my loyalty. I think there''s a lot of mileage to be had with just this concept alone, because then the NPC''s actions speak louder than words.

Maybe one option to prove loyalty is to send an NPC on a dangerous mission (you can split them off from the party). If they do it, it might help prove their loyalty. If they disappear on the other hand, it was probably them!

quote:

---

I also think the quality or speed of the work they do for you should be determined by loyalty. If a mechanic tries to sabotage something then you can guess they are disloyal

---

The NPCs produce labor for some tasks, which does have a value attached to it (depending on the success of skill tests). I could make the NPC''s intentionally create critical failures...

Since the NPCs can inform on each other, I''d need a mechanism for detecting intentional failure. In this example, for instance, maybe the better a mechanic you are, the more you can make any failure look like an accident? And the better any other mechanic is, the better they''re able to determine it wasn''t an accident? What do you guys think?

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

Which one is more fun? Will players get a kick out of sniffing out saboteurs if it requires a lot of effort? It seems like an awful lot of micromanagement, but I could definitely get into it. Of course, I dig games like Romance of the Three Kingdoms so I''m not sure I represent the general audience''s tolerance for micromanagement.

I think this is a question that is answered by answering how important and fun the feature is in the game. You''ve named all the different ways that I can think of to represent loyalty except performance. A disloyal character could perform poorly compared to a loyal character.

quote:

---

Original post by TechnoGoth
Well you could have two values public loyalty and private loyality.

---

Sold! I like this idea!

quote:

---

Public loyaltiy is how loyal an npc appears to be it can be relfected in the how efficently they work and the npc willingness to follow orders. A low or negative loyalty value would mean they publicly oppose you. While private loyalty is how they really feel about you.

---

Would it ever make sense to have someone publicly oppose you but privately support you? Hmmm... Maybe if an NPC was trying to do some sort of double agent work? All other cases make sense, though: Public oppose, private oppose; public support, private oppose; public support, private support.

quote:

---

This is reflected through subtle means such as the quality of their work, and dialoge.

---

This could especially work if other NPCs communicate what is said about you in private, or if they report on the quality of an NPC''s work.

quote:

---

It could lead to some interesting dualities. Such the gunsmith seems to be fairly loyal and produces a rifle a day. However in actually he is rather disgruntled and as result is making poor quality rifles. You may not even be aware of the fact that your troops are armed with these low quality weapons until you send them into the field and guns begin to jam and missfire.

---

Hmmm... yes. I already have the idea that you can be sold goods and sell goods that have critical flaws in them. This would be a another instance of that. You can see any NPC''s skill level, so if you get a bunch of goods from a highly skilled NPC that are utter crap, you know something''s up.

quote:

---

It could be interesting would you allow the player to have a seceret police force, to monitor the npcs and route out traitors?

---

I have something like this in the form of Security and Policies. You can designate an NPC as Chief of Security, but what you get back from him is based on his loyalty and personality. Also, there''s a game setting called Policies where you can invade privacy and such, where you spend manpower and resources to randomly search quarters and such. It lowers the chance of disloyal acts but also lowers morale on the targets. Finally, you can buy inventory items such as spy-flies, security cams and truth serum, which all affects morale and loyalty. (You''re running a faction aboard a starship or colony, btw).

quote:

---

It would take complex desgin but it would be interesting if traitors npc could frame loyal npcs. Thus tricking you into sysmaticlly elimaninating all your loyal follows and filling your ranks with traitors.

---

I''m picturing Iago from Othello here! Yeah, this is great.

Just thinking about this for a moment: For it to work, NPCs would need to be able to accuse other NPCs of a crime; it would be nice if they could have evidence as some sort of inventory object (which could be as simple as a description and a picture, such as "Tape of Hawks talking to your enemies" or whatever).

NPCs could forge the evidence, based on a skill. Whether or not you can tell its a forgery or they get caught forging evidence would take something else. A skill in forgery is obvious, but something else would be better.

Another angle would be the ability for an NPC to plant evidence. The evidence would be in lock and key style, such as "this is spanner with Rho''s blood on it was found in Johnson''s quarters."

There''s a lot of juicy possibilities here if the gameplay can be puzzled out!

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

It''s an interesting idea for a game, but I really think that it is way too complex to insert into an "ordinary" RPG. I mean, if I played an RPG, a party-based one in which the other members of the party (you control a special one and the rest are your "followers") have so deep personalities that they could do the stuff mentioned previously in the thread... Well, to be honest, I don''t think that trying to figure out if anyone is disloyal is anything I''d like to spend time doing. I''d probably just wait until he tries to attack me and then kill him

Of course it depends a lot on the game. If it''s some kind of detective game in which the objective (or big part of the game) is to find the traitor(s), then it''s a really interesting idea.

------------------
"Kaka e gott" - Me
Current project: An RPG with tactical, real-time combat with a realistic damage system, and randomly generated world and dialogue.