Another thread about PC motivations prompted me to write this topic, but being that it is more specific I’d like to have it have its own thread. Rather than to discuss RP from a generic standpoint, I’d like to discuss a persuasion overhaul concept in more detail. Instead of having preset options like “Admire”, “Bribe”, “Taunt”, and “Threaten”, or having a wheel game where your abilities to speak are abstracted by a mini-game, your persuasive abilities could be made to be tied to your prior dialogue selections and to your prior actions.

When your Speechcraft is low, your chance to produce a “positive” outcome (not necessarily a “good” outcome, as evil may be your desired intent) from your selection is lowered. This could even be enhanced by the actual text of the dialogue options you have being more appealing in their writing the higher your speechcraft becomes.

Your Speechcraft is 10 = If you pick an option intended to smooth things over, it probably won’t. If you pick a threatening option, you likely won’t intimidate. If you pick a more colorful insane option, the results will be either good or bad, but not by much. The text of your statements reflects this because the text options make you sound like an idiot.

Your Speechcraft is 90 = If you pick an option intended to smooth things over, it probably will. If you pick a threatening option, you’re more likely to intimidate. If you pick a more colorful insane option, the results are likely to vary wildly in their effectiveness and desired outcome. The text of your statements reflects this because the options reflect a refined and eloquent style of speech.

The examples below, I hope, will illustrate the way this would work in game, rather than a technical discussion of how to program it. (*disclaimer, I don’t claim to be a great writer, nor these to be well written options, but are only for the purpose of example).

A Noble asks you, “By what right do you enter my home? Why are you here?”
------------------------------------------------------
Your speechcraft is 10:
1. “Uh, nothing… uh… Yer Higness.” (“Good”)
2. “Jerk!” (“Evil”)
3. “… this .. isn’t the tavern?” (“Insane”)
4. “…” (Silence should always be an option)

Your speechcraft is 90:
1. “I seem to have the wrong address. Please, forgive my intrusion.” (“Good”)
2. “I shall do as I please, and you shall stay out of my way!” (“Evil”)
3. “What a curious creature… Why do YOU stay in your home? Care to give me the grand tour?” (“Insane”)
4. “…” (Silence should always be an option)
------------------------------------------------------

These would be the option types available to you “in a vacuum” where your only skill was Speechcraft, and you hadn’t done any other actions or selected any other dialogue in the past. To add more depth though, more options could become available to you based on what you have done and said before.

------------------------------------------------------
Your Speechcraft is 10. You have also murdered several people, and committed numerous acts of theft.
1. “Uh...” (Closest thing to “Good” available)
2. “Jerk!” (“Evil”)
3. “Give me your things!” (“Evil” with a perk as a murderer and thief)
4. “Blood... blood…” (“Insane” with a perk for being a murderer)
5. “…”

Your Speechcraft is 90. You have also murdered several people, and committed numerous acts of theft.
1. “I seem to have the wrong address. Please, forgive my intrusion.” (“Good” is still an option because your Speechcraft is high enough to let you pretend you’re different from your nature).
2. “I shall do as I please, and you shall stay out of my way!” (“Evil”)
3. “You will relinquish your valuables to me or suffer the consequence of my wrath!” (“Evil with a perk for being a theif and murderer)
4. “I will use your entrails to paint a mural to the glory of Sithis!” (“Insane” with a perk for being a murderer).
5. “…”
------------------------------------------------------

You would also get new and more proficient statements for your various skills in Combat/Magic/Stealth such that for example you will have more pertinent things to say to a character talking about magic with you if you have high skills in magic than if you have low ones, regardless of your Speechcraft skill. You could also get more things and better things to say about religion and lore if you have read more books and if you have done chapel and/or daedric quests. Etc.

The NPC responses to all of this wouldn’t be unique dialogue, but whatever the normal dialogue would have been in that situation for that NPC, but the way you speak will be the way you modify their disposition instead of the old ways to modify this value. In addition, the NPCs should all have their own personalities flagged for what kind of person they are, so that they like and dislike different types of conversation. They should also have an additional parameter for if they fear you or not, so that even if they don’t like you, this value is calculated alongside and separately from disposition to determine if they are intimidated by you or not.

Any thoughts or additions? No voice acting has to be done because its only the voiced files already present that are used to respond to whatever the PC says, and the PC “says” things by selecting from text options. It would take a lot of writing these options and designing a new script system to identify all of these variables and react accordingly. Even if the devs don’t do something like this, how likely could something like this be implemented by mods?

It's definitely an improvement on the Morrowind/Oblivion versions. However, it seems like a lot more dialogue to produce/implement.

Also, 'jerk' seems like a bad example. Remember the context here.

"Giggity Giggity...Barkeep...Vodka tonic for me and a rufie-colada for my date..."

Remember that the PC has a Speechcraft of 10 in that example. Maybe the exact word "Jerk" is not so good, but of course saying anything "Evil" when confronted by someone in their own home where you are trespassing is not going to make any sense. I thought it should seem out of place and pathetic to try an evil statement in that circumstance when your skill is so low.

@ Black 6: LOL, we'll put you on the "Insane" writing staff

Thats looks really interesting and only relay how much writers BGS have for improving dialogues, as well nice to see some well done characters and less generic NPC
http://www.lgnpc.org/

Well one problem is (and its not a problem with this system, its a problem with any system) is the voice acting. The NPCs have to be more generic to accommodate the voiced responses. Its the PCs dialogue that becomes less generic in the system I propose. To each thing the PC says though, the NPC response would be a selection from the pool of dialogue natively available to their reactions. So, if you threaten an NPC with an eloquent or dumb threat, in either case, what the NPC says back doesn't really relate to that. The NPC will simply respond by either being or not being sucessfully threatened:

PC threatens the NPC:
Success: NPC says "Please, no, don't hurt me!" And cowers.
Failure: NPC says "Oh, is that so!" and draws a weapon or runs to find a guard.

You can't really have a unique response to each PC statement for each type of NPC without using text. The amount of space it would take to hold that data would be too large along with other technical problems that I just don't see it as feasible. In text yes, but in voiced, no. Still there could be variety in the reactions of NPC conversations that are actually related to a specific quest or topic, and not just a chance encounter. So if you threaten someone who is guarding a specific item for a quest it could be

PC threatens the Dunmer NPC guarding "Drum's stolen goods":
Success: NPC says: "Fine, you can have the blasted "merchandise"... worthless anyway..."
Failure: NPC says "Take them from me if you can, N'wah!"

But if it was just a random encounter in a house, the first example would be more appropriately non-descriptive.

Then why not mix unvoiced dialogues and voiced ones?
Small and middle replies can be voiced while, informative texts will not?

Personally, I really hate this. I honestly had to uninstall mods I tried out (in part, not in total) because I just really didn't like looking at a quasi-realistic face flapping its lips at me with no sound coming out and just having the text to read when then two seconds later, when I close the dialogue box, said face then suddenly makes actual sounds and says audibly "Farewell!". So, was I temporarily deaf, and then suddenly got my hearing back? It breaks the "I" word.

I also don't see the need for very descriptive dialogue from each NPC for each and every scenario where you talk to them. Events not tied to quests are forgettable to the history books, so why should every NPC who's house I break into have to have a unique response? If there are enough non-unique responses, and enough responses unique to race/station/gender then it would help to diversify enough. Every single NPC doesn't have to have its own voiced dialogue.

But here we go, down the rabbit hole and kind of off-topic. The system I proposed at the top could be implemented with or without every NPC having a unique voice data file or silent voicing. Though that is somewhat related, it really is a separate issue that can be worked out on the end of the system. Giving more dialogue options and making the NPCs react (however technically they do that) differently based on your actions instead of using a "wheel" system is the topic.

Then you are in circle without exit, as you already say NPC can have voice acting differ from thats what will in text, or voice only first sentences from large text

I never suggested that NPCs have any different voice or text. The system was about overhauling the choices the player has (not NPC) to chose from. You know... when you are spoken to by an NPC the menu presents you with some text options to click on? That is what i propose to be overhauled and then used as the replacement in part for another Persuasion mechanism. The way it affects NPCs is that this is the system where their disposition and the new "intimidation level" variables are calculated from. Once that is determined by this system, their reaction follows the same way it did in the other games. If the things you chose make them have higher disposition, they will respond with favorable dialogue and (if applicable) new information. If they not, they will have lower disposition and not be cooperative.

This system is about a better way to generate the numbers that in turn generate NPC responses to you, not about the actual responses themselves. Its a new system for Persuasion itself, not a new set of NPC responses TO your Persuasion choices.

Then system looks really interesting

The biggest issue I have with using pre-determined lines for your own end of the dialog is that they would often be totally contrary to what I'd imagine the character saying. It's probably "acceptable" to have the NPCs say things that make marginal sense under the circumstances, but to have your character say something totally unrelated to what you're trying to accomplish, because the developers intended it to be "appropriate for all occasions", just grates on me. In an "open world" game, being totally subject to someone else's vision of your character is to be shackled.

I guess instead of specific writing, you could just have a list of types of responses that are greater than the list you had in other games. Replace the specific written dialogue with general types of things to say, just like "Boast" or "Threaten" were in the other games. In having more of them though, and in putting them into the system above, the effectiveness of each one would be weighted by your previous actions and dialogue, and not all options would be available to you at all times depending on your skill and previous actions. You could even make it so that you could choose to speak with lesser eloquence on purpose when your speech craft goes up, and potentially make it so that that would sometimes be a better option (common folk might not like or understand such big words or guards might want it to the point).

So instead of the example above, you would select one of the options (#), and then a sub option (a, b, c etc). Again, the exact word I picked to describe them are for illustration purposes, not the exact word that I would hope was used in such a system.

"What are you doing in my house?"
Your Speechcraft is 10
1. Apology - ( a) Bumbling
2. Nasty - (a) Trite
3. Threatening - (a) Pathetic
3. Crazy - (a) Incomprehensible
4. ...

Your Speechcraft is 90
1. Apology - (a) Bumbling (b ) Humble © Effusive (d) Exquisite
2. Nasty - (a) Trite (b ) Mean © Cutting
3. Threatening - (a) Forceful (b ) Subtle (d) Authoritative
3. Crazy - (a) Incomprehensible (b ) Odd © Bizzare
4. ...

To save space, the following example will only be for the Speechraft of 90 example:

You also are a murdering thief:
1. Apology - (a) Bumbling (b ) Effusive © Exquisite (Note that "Humble" is not available any more because your character just can't pull it off even with high Speechcraft
2. Nasty - (a) Trite (b ) Mean © Cutting (d) Infuriating (Note that you've added "infuriating" to your list)
3. Crazy - (a) Incomprehensible (b ) Odd © Bizzare (d) Disturbing (Note you've added "Disturbing" to the list)
4. Threatening - (a) Forceful (b ) Subtle © Agressive (d) Authoritative (Note that "Agressive" was added to the list)
5. ...

Of course, again, these exact words and categories aren't what I'd demand, just scribbling the system in text on the paper napkin of the forums really. I do see your point that specific dialogue could feel limiting instead of freeing. But giving more options for general types of things to say with adjectives associated with each as a tree of options would be a lot better I think.

I look forward to seeing the mod.





For reals.

i personal would like some "realism" in the interaction.. if i have strength 100 no matter what i say to someone , even if its "who do you think you are" .. unless of course they have a strength level close to you... intimidation isnt something that should soly based of speech. but also your strength ,wepons skills, what your wearing, ect.. if a punny kid walks up to you on the street and says "give me money" are you going to give it to him , no , your not intimidated, if he pulls a gun, then yes you are intimidated. if he was a buff guy, you would to, he he was in a gang, you would, ect.

Fair enough also. It would require another system overhaul though such that the game could dynamically determine your intimidation level based on a variety of factors, not only combat strength. It needn't only be limited to your intimidation of someone though, but your appearance and capabilities may shape other aspects of people's disposition towards you. Your wealth, the clothes you are wearing, your reputation, what deeds you've done and quests you've accomplished, your fame/infamy, and also your combat capabilities would all, ideally, play a role in a baseline for how someone reacts to you. This is then modified further if you actually speak to them and choose the dialogue actions.