Making Virtual Children Talk

[Scarborough]

Well, I would disagree about not bringing them anywhere.  I think it's really a case by case thing.

[MorganChaos]

I would prefer to interact with your character, not your character's props.

This kinda rubs me the wrong way. I don't like the idea that a VNPC child, something my character cares about deeply, to the point that it's their entire purpose for living, is a prop to you, worth no more mention than a cloak. I only hope this attitude doesn't have any IC bearing whatsoever. I'm sure it doesn't, but this sort of attitude disappoints me. VNPC interaction can be just as rich as that with PCs.

[Anonymous]

VNPC interaction can be just as rich as that with PCs.

I have never found this to be the case.  VNPCs are there for flavor as far as I'm concerned.  Having to kludge up my RP to account for an invisible character doing whatever another character wants has never been fun for me.

[Cenghiz]

I agree with CRW.. VNPCs are for flavoring your solo-time. You may make up VNPC personalities to spar with you during soloing or have a friendly chatter with your child/father/mother.. But when you're at a crowded tavern? Let the child silently play at the entrance of the tavern with other VNPC children.

If I was wrong making VNPCs talk, let them not speak. Not a big loss.. Sorry about misinforming about making VNPCs speak with emotes. Seems my fault was kindly ignored or unobserved in the game.

[Angela Christine]

I would prefer to interact with your character, not your character's props.

This kinda rubs me the wrong way. I don't like the idea that a VNPC child, something my character cares about deeply, to the point that it's their entire purpose for living, is a prop to you, worth no more mention than a cloak. I only hope this attitude doesn't have any IC bearing whatsoever. I'm sure it doesn't, but this sort of attitude disappoints me.

In real life, many adults are not interested in talking to a 7 year old kid, or watching you talk to your 7 year old kid, or hearing about your kid, or looking at pictures of your kid, or even eat sitting at the same table as a kid.  As a kid I found the whole concept of "children should be seen but not heard" outrageous, but that didn't make it go away.  On the other hand, as a kid I found sitting with a group of adults was deadly boring, and would much prefer sitting under the table playing to sitting at the table listening.  There isn't 100% overlap between children's world and adult's world, and there doesn't have to be.

Once they are past the babe in arms stage it is perfectly reasonable to have them toddle off to do their own thing while adults work or sit around and discuss adult things.  It isn't that the kid is shy, she just isn't interested in the water tax, the grain harvest, or the price of mead in Red Storm.  They don't much care about who said what about who, and they only want to hear about the adventures of Malik's Trouser Snake if it happens to be an actual snake that Malik drops down other people's trousers as a joke.  

Heck, if the kid is over 5 years old and certainly if she is over 8 years old she shouldn't just be sitting around with the adults giggling and being adored -- that doesn't prepare you for any life but being a noble or a whore.  That kid should be doing chores!  If your family are tailors she should be practicing her needlework on scraps of cloth.  If you are hunters she should be cleaning and oiling the gear, checking the tools and weapons for obvious damage (yes, an adult will also have to re-check the items, but she will accomplish some useful work and more importantly learn how to do it properly through practice).  If your family are entertainers she should be practicing basic tumbling routines with some of the other kids.  Adults are barely necessary.  The 12 year olds supervise the 9 year olds, who supervise the 6 year olds, who supervise the 4 year olds.

Kids don't need to be the center of attention all the time.  Back in the 1950's in rustic northern Alberta my mother was stuck out in the back alley after breakfast with a piece of bannack (travel cake) and told not to come back in until supper time, and that was when she was 3-5 years old.  This was not considered abusive, it was just what you did with kids that were too old to stay in the crib all day, but too young to do useful work or go to school.  People had work to do, and there just wasn't time for coddling.  (I mentioned that it was rustic, right?  It was like the Walton's, but less endearing).


Personally I don't think the problem of making VNPC children speak should come up much in public, if at all.  When grown ups are doing grown up stuff, kids have to take the back seat.  Kids are allowed into Zalanthan taverns, but that doesn't make the tavern into a McDonald's, it is still very much an adult place and children are not the focus.  Forcing me to talk to your (VNPC) child is very much like forcing me to talk to your (wearable) pet bird or pet lizard -- it is slightly bizarre, both ICly and OCCly.



Angela Christine

[Scarborough]

Pubs in Zalanthas, seem like they would be like a medieval pub... they sell food, it's a hub for information, it's a gathering place, it's a place to come watch a show (bards, jugglers).  Little kids would be working to run errands and gather information too, so of course they'd be in the pub.  

What bothers me is people saying those of us with VNPC children simply should not bring them into pubs and RP with them because it's bothersome to you.  That's not a good reason.  I don't roleplay for you.  I roleplay what fits my character and have reasons for having a VNPC child around.  If somebody bringing their pet lizard, or their VNPC child, or VNPC visiting mother into the pub bothers you OOCly then ignore it or go RP in another location.  At least there's roleplaying happening, at least it's not pointless sitting and idling.  If it bothers your character ICly, then your character should say something or leave.

[Maybe42or54]

Well Scar, she isn't saying that you can't do it, she is saying that babying them isn't getting them ready to be good at being VNPCs and living past the time your Pc moves on. By making them want to be the center of attention whenever you RP with them in public may not be healthy for them. If you dig needy children, right on. If you only make them needy so you can RP with them, then..

[Angela Christine]

Yeah, what 42 said I said!   :lol:



To summerize:

The problem:  There is no coded way to make VNPC children

speak in public.  Having all children be shy or mute is unsatifiying and unrealistic.

My reply:  It is not necessary for children to speak or to be mute.  They can just be busy doing other things.[/list]

You can have all the VNPC kids you want, and take them with you everwhere like ducklings.  But there still won't be any coded way to make them speak.  So I'm simply offering another option for roleplaying with them in public:  mute, shy or busy.  I think busy is a lot less restrictive than mute.


Angela Christine

[bloodfromstone]

I have had the pleasure of playing with a few people who had prominent virtual families that were very well done. One in particular always referred to her rather large family that she would go and visit. Her parents had occupations, personalities, and other children. I felt like I knew her family pretty well, despite never having actually met the virtual bunch. I recall drinking to celebrate the birth of her newest sibling, talking about uncles and aunts, etc. Cheers to you, good-vNPC-playing-person.

My point is that you can run vNPCs in the background of your character's life, and still have them have meaning and personality. It may not be quite what you're looking for, but it's a pretty good option. Plus, it will make it a little less jarring when the kid is finally old enough to be taken over by a player, and he begins acting a little differently than you would have had him act in the past.

[Akaramu]

What bothers me is people saying those of us with VNPC children simply should not bring them into pubs and RP with them because it's bothersome to you.  That's not a good reason.  I don't roleplay for you.  I roleplay what fits my character and have reasons for having a VNPC child around.  If somebody bringing their pet lizard, or their VNPC child, or VNPC visiting mother into the pub bothers you OOCly then ignore it or go RP in another location.  At least there's roleplaying happening, at least it's not pointless sitting and idling.  If it bothers your character ICly, then your character should say something or leave.

What she said, bravo.

Some players enjoy roleplaying around their pets, others enjoy interacting with VNPCs. Either way, its roleplay, and the player is having fun and is staying active in the game. If a PC has a problem with a kid being around, they can say so and leave or go sit somewhere else, just as they would in RL.

I have gotten the impression that the female players (me, AC, MorganChaos, Scarborough, Bebop) have been in favor of VNPC child roleplay, and male players have been against it. An interesting observation, if it is true and I am not getting genders mixed up.  

AC argues that a child does not need to talk to be roleplayed with, and I agree, but once in awhile it would be cool if a VNPC could talk for specific situations where the silence is jarring. It should not be high priority, but might be worth considering.

As another note, the 8 year old daughter I roleplayed with was not needy at all. She would get bored of sitting on my PC's lap after a little while and rush off to do something else. I also dont think she was the center of my roleplay, but an important part of my character's life. I did not NEED to have the kid show up once in awhile (except for a few specific RPTs), but it was possibly one of the most enjoyable experiences in my Arm career. Thats what counts, I play the game to have fun, without breaking any rules, and I let others do the same.

[John]

Some players enjoy roleplaying around their pets, others enjoy interacting with VNPCs. Either way, its roleplay, and the player is having fun and is staying active in the game. If a PC has a problem with a kid being around, they can say so and leave or go sit somewhere else, just as they would in RL.

That's cool. Just don't try to get the VNPC to talk via emotes.

once in awhile it would be cool if a VNPC could talk for specific situations where the silence is jarring. It should not be high priority, but might be worth considering.

If you can't stop the situation from being jarring when the VNPC doesn't codedly talk, don't roleplay with the VNPC.

Me, I'd prefer not to roleplay with virtual characters in such a prominent manner. And please don't be offended when they're called props. Because they are. Just like NPCs are props. Also my PC can't do anything to your VNPC without either your consent or heavy imm help. I find that jarring. Given those limitations, I get more fulfillment from playing with NPCs and PCs. Oh, and VNPCs should never be used in a way that gives you an advantage without imm approval. IMO that includes having your kid be a performer in a manner that gives you an advantage.

[Akaramu]

That's cool. Just don't try to get the VNPC to talk via emotes.

I did not do that, and after reading Naiona's post I believe everyone knows that it is a no-no.

If you can't stop the situation from being jarring when the VNPC doesn't codedly talk, don't roleplay with the VNPC.

Lets assume the following hypothetical situation: (This has never happened ingame that I know of).

My character is invited to a private party and because the host has a family as well, he asks my character to bring my kid along. I could decide that the child is ill and cant come, or I could decide that me and the host's player deserve some fun and take the kid with me. I remember that I play the game for fun and chose option 2. So far, so good.

At the party, unexpectedly, a templar shows up. The templar wants to know something about my character, but due to my position / friends / whatever he does not dare interrogate me personally. The templar knows that my kid is there, and begins asking them a few questions. The kid is not mute and too scared of templars to not answer the smart questions that dont seem 'bad' or harmful in any way. Now, this is jarring, and it would be cool if the kid could speak a few sentences.

You cant blame me for taking the kid to the party because no one knew they would need to speak at all.

Me, I'd prefer not to roleplay with virtual characters in such a prominent manner. And please don't be offended when they're called props. Because they are. Just like NPCs are props.

Thats fine, then just dont roleplay with VNPCs. No one has a problem with that.

Also my PC can't do anything to your VNPC without either your consent or heavy imm help. I find that jarring.

The chance of that needing to happen aren't that big. They are about as big as the chances of you needing to do something to an NPC in a secure space who codedly never moves, but realistically does leave that spot once in awhile. Or the chances of you needing to do something to a virtual entitiy that exists, but is not being roleplayed by anyone. The MUD wants to be as realistic as possible, so these jarring situations arise. They are not common, but they CAN happen, and in that case we'll just have to deal with it.

Given those limitations, I get more fulfillment from playing with NPCs and PCs. Oh, and VNPCs should never be used in a way that gives you an advantage without imm approval. IMO that includes having your kid be a performer in a manner that gives you an advantage.

Can you define advantage? I dont think it gives me an advantage if I go through a dance script with my PC and emote a few musicians in the background. And before anyone asks, I DID try to find player musicians, for quite a while, but none were available, and realistically my PC with her background would easily have found someone. She already knew and used those people in her background.

[Morfeus]

At the party, unexpectedly, a templar shows up. The templar wants to know something about my character, but due to my position / friends / whatever he does not dare interrogate me personally. The templar knows that my kid is there, and begins asking them a few questions. The kid is not mute and too scared of templars to not answer the smart questions that dont seem 'bad' or harmful in any way. Now, this is jarring, and it would be cool if the kid could speak a few sentences.

You cant blame me for taking the kid to the party because no one knew they would need to speak at all.

For me, this is -exactly- reason why playing with VNPCs too much brings some discomfort. Because at that moment, you are playing two characters - you and your child. IMHO would be more proper to wish up about it than making your child speak with the templar itself. Because VNPC child played by you would never do something unexpected (nothing you do not want to). And what if this templar will want to question your child without your presence, for example? Take it away and ask it in place where mom cannot listen?

[Akaramu]

For me, this is -exactly- reason why playing with VNPCs too much brings some discomfort. Because at that moment, you are playing two characters - you and your child. IMHO would be more proper to wish up about it than making your child speak with the templar itself. Because VNPC child played by you would never do something unexpected (nothing you do not want to).

Why do you assume the child would never do anything wrong? If I am trusted with playing a Drovian, I think I can be trusted with playing VNPCs realistically. If the child was questioned somewhere else it could be handled in email, just like many other things that have to be handled in email sometimes. Its not such a big deal. I'd rather enjoy the game and risk the 5% or so chance that something which requires staff intervention could happen. VNPCs or no, that chance is always there.

I had another character with a VNPC child who needed to handle stuff over staff in email pretty often because it could not be done with ingame roleplay... in 9 out of 10 occasions it was for reasons not related to the child.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I side with Akaramu. I really enjoy using VNPCs and did so often before this thread popped up. I'm somewhat concerned now - the staff's view seems to not use VNPCs often. Is that the case?

Part of the allure of this game is bringing the world to life. When you've played for 7 years, I'm pretty sure you should be trusted to use VNPCs wisely.

I think VNPC commands should be available when you reach Karma Level 2.

[mansa]

...I'm somewhat concerned now - the staff's view seems to not use VNPCs often. Is that the case?...

http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=206464#206464

http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=205811#205811

As Naiona is the only 'OFFICAL' staff member responding in this thread, (Because LEGENDS are OLD and GRUMPY) she has said nothing about pro usage, or con usage.  The only thing she's implied is that having conversations using the emote command is bypassing the language code.  It allows for anyone to understand your conversation, when they shouldn't be able to.

To continue this thread:
I disagree with VNPC commands.  I say, we should make prominant VNPCs into NPCs and be able to boss them around.  Perhaps there should be a javascript for the NPC creator on the site.  Eh?

[Angela Christine]

I think part of the problem with VNPCs is that they take the game back to the level of "Let's Pretend," "Cops and Robbers" or a MUSH.  It isn't a lower or higher level of roleplay, it is just roleplay without mechanics.  Pure roleplay, if you will.

For those that may live in countries without Cops and Robbers or Cowboys and Indians, it goes something like this . . . well, at least it usually ends something like this:

"Bang bang!  I shot you!"
"No you didn't, you missed.  Bang!  I shot you!"
"No you didn't, you're already dead!"

I believe Paintball was invented just to prove whether you did in fact get shot or not.  


Most things in roleplaying games like MUDs, D&D or other pen and paper RP games, can be resolved through code or mechanics.  If I try to hit you there is a dice roll or bit of code that decides if I succeed.  That code can be a crutch, and lead to awkward situations when you want to do things not covered by the code.

For example, suppose that I want to shake hands with someone.  There is no "shake hands" command.  There isn't even a doc that tells me if shaking hands is a custom anywhere in the known world.  Just grabbing their hand and shaking it could get me into trouble, because it is power emoting.  The other guy might have a thing about hand touching and would dodge any attempt at hand shaking, which I over-ride if I just go "em shakes %man hand."  So you see slightly silly exchanges like:

The man holds out his hand toward the guy.
The guy takes the man's hand.
The man shakes hands with the guy.

Three emotes just to shake hands.

Even some hard-coded commands are considered taboo.  I've seen people complain about the "give" command.  Apparently using "give rock man" can be bad roleplay and power playing, because the other guy might not have accepted the item, and now it is in his inventory and he has to deal with it.   :roll:   Again you get into overly elaborate emote exchanges to accomplish a simple task, just to make sure that you have consent to codedly hand over the item.

The manly man holds out his hand, offering a small stone to the girly man.
With a look of interest, the girly man reaches out for the stone.
give stone girly

I hates it.  

When dealing with "owned" VNPCs everything can get bogged down like that.  If I'm playing a crabby old crone I can't just whack a particular VNPC child with my cane as they run past, because the "owner" can say "nah uh, she was running at the other side of the table, you couldn't have reached her from where you are sitting."  Bang Bang, you're dead.  No I'm not, you missed me.


There are two basic kinds of VNPC.  

One is the atmospheric VNPCs, the nameless, faceless crowds of people who surround us.  The guy on the street.  These guys bump into you in crowded rooms.  They ride past you on the road.  They stand in front of you in line at the gates.  Atmospheric NPCs are awesome.

The other kind are persistent individual VNPCs, and they are usually owned by one player or a small group of players.  They each have a specific, individual name, personal habits, and a history.  The are a

named NPC in every way, except for being disembodied and therefore immune to the code.[/list]


Some special app roles do give you specific control over one or more NPCs.  You can make them preform coded actions, including talking and emoting.  They are part of the game world.  From a playability perspective having children as controllable NPCs would be the best possible solution.  You have your baby object that gets upgraded to an NPC when they get to toddler age.  To keep everybody honest they would have less combat skill than a newbie merchant, and using them as sparring dummies would be strictly prohibited.  Heck, give the little buggers just 1 hp, that ought to discourage misuse, and how hard is it to kill a kid?  Then they can talk, follow you around, and everybody knows where the kid is, or isn't.  No awkward situations where both mommy and daddy emoting having the baby with them, in different places.  If you log in and your kid is not in your apartment, then your kid is not in your apartment.

I can understand why NPC children are not available anymore, it could get to be a real burden for the staff.  First a baby object, then a heavier baby object.  Then an NPC.  The kid would need at least minor updates every RL month or two, to reflect growth and aging.  Plus having to monitor how they are being treated.  Is mom carrying around her baby object in her backpack?  Is there a mad pickpocket going around sneakily slipping babies right out of their mother's arms?  You can make the baby holdable to discourage thieves, but then you get the hilarious situation where the person holding the baby gets into combat and accidentally uses the baby as a weapon or shield when the combat code kicks in.     I suppose you could make the baby wearable, perhaps in the mysterious forearms location, but then you get into the problem that wearable pets have, where the person "wearing" the live thing sort of forgets that it is there sometimes.


Obviously forcing all PCs to be barren would be bad.  But having NPC and VNPC children around is frustrating.  Bang bang.



Angela Christine

[Cale_Knight]

I want to have Angela Christine's virtual babies.

[ale six]

My characters always die right around the time they decide to have kids, so I've never actually roleplayed this. I can't speak from experience.

From what I've read though, I don't think anyone in this thread is "against" having VNPC children or other forms of using VNPCs in roleplay. Within reason[/] they can be great. Just realise that there is no easy way to let VNPCs talk. So.... don't. Simple. There are workarounds, and plenty of people have posted them. You can keep them in the background of a scene, which lets them be there to enhance YOUR roleplay, without taking center stage and thus taking the focus off of actual coded characters.

The only other time I don't like use of VNPCs is when people abuse them to their character's advantage in ways that may not be realistic. The simplest example is when two PCs are arguing and one guy emotes the entire tavern yelling and jeering and throwing things at the other guy. I call this the "Me and all my imaginary friends say I'm right!" manuever. Other examples are posting a rumor on the rumor boards about someone and then claiming your character is in no way involved with that rumor at all. (The "All the VNPCs think this because I say so, but my PC didn't do anything so you can't hurt me." tactic.)

Beyond those two things, use VNPCs all you want in the background. Virtual backup singers, virtual hairdressers, virtual parents/best friends/ kids, virtual competitors, whatever. When they're used right, VNPCs are great. When people try and take them too far, it gets sticky and bad.

Moving back to the kids thing a moment: Sometimes I see people using their virtual children for the "Look! I have a baby! Isn't it CUTE?!" factor and not much else. Yeah, we get it. Virtual kid. Fine. Would your character really drag the kid around to taverns and into public through storms and everything? Suppose the kid starts crying and annoys some templar who decides to have his HG guard punt the baby on top of a roof? That should be a very real fear for most commoners. You could always consider hiring a virtual nanny.

Relevant piece of docs: http://www.armageddon.org/general/pregnancy.html

Six says no to VNPC commands and no to baby objects, unless she can eat them.

[Scarborough]

I feel all special (kind of), having spawned five pages worth of chatter, ideas and consideration.  That helpfile on pregnancy seems to encourage a variety of roleplay with VNPC's that are a character's children.  Because staff do not want child objects, nor "hybrid" child PC's created from virtual births, and encourage RPing child VNPC's in that helpfile, it seems like the people playing the parent(s) need to make the call inthe end; they need to decide the extend to which their child is necessary, or even personally (oocly) enjoyable to have around.   There is no perfect way to make them talk, but there is a work around if Templar Fancypants directly asks your child a question at the next highbrow party, which, as pointed out, I did post somewhere on page 1.  

I actually used the say command with carefully added emotes in game the other day, during a relatively solo RP session (unless there was a hidey watching), and it not only helped me feel more in touch with the scene, it made for a nice little log too.  I don't think I'd ever use that work around in a setting with lots of people, however; not unless it was OK'd by staff.

It is rather curious that there seems to be a general difference of basic opinion based on the sex of the player.  Curious and intriguing.  That was an astute observation, if true.  I don't know posters well enough to know who is a male or female, but yes, I am female, Akaramu.  I wonder if there's also a difference in opinion amongst the males based on age.  I'm not that interested where I'd have a poll or anything, but it's all interesting "Men are from Mars, women are from Venus" sort of stuff.

[Morfeus]

I have gotten the impression that the female players (me, AC, MorganChaos, Scarborough, Bebop) have been in favor of VNPC child roleplay, and male players have been against it.

It is rather curious that there seems to be a general difference of basic opinion based on the sex of the player.  Curious and intriguing.  That was an astute observation, if true.

I was rereading the thread and I do not think this observation is true. On the other side, true is I somewhat miss the line between "VNPC alright=females" and "VNPC not-alright=males" because I did not see any post claiming VNPCs are wrong in general, but saying using them very much and in plots could be problematic. (Bang bang, ha!)

[MorganChaos]

Yeah, that's a decent point. It's a good chance that the comment rubbed me the wrong way because of like, maternal instincts. Desire to treat a child as a helpless person and not a thing.

[Maybe42or54]

Maybe looks at children and sees $ signs. Even in Armageddon.

[Bebop]

Be able to talk with them animately let people hear what they are saying and be able to chat back between them, not have an OOC responsibility to repeat things or have a shy/mute kid.

I would prefer to interact with your character, not your character's props.

A character's child isn't a prompt.  It can be their reason for living.

I think it would be sad to incorporate these OOC feelings into your RP, IMO.  I think VNPC can be a lot of fun and it really can flesh out your character.  Characters aren't PCs born at their creation they are supposed to be living feeling people with (some of them) living breathing family that they can interact with.  

The goal of a VNPC is not to make them do whatever you want, though I'm sure some people do, do that.  But that would just be a poor example of RP IMO to make the "perfect" child that will do whatever it is you want etc etc.

[John]

A character's child isn't a prompt.  It can be their reason for living.

It's still a prop. Everything that isn't controlled by a player is a prop used to tell a story.

I think VNPC can be a lot of fun and it really can flesh out your character.  Characters aren't PCs born at their creation they are supposed to be living feeling people with (some of them) living breathing family that they can interact with.

Agreed. But when you take the interaction to a level where someone has to e-mail the imms to get information, deal with the OOC command or be jarred because of the need of a VNPC says command, then you're overusing the prop and it detracts from the game.

Can you define advantage?

Something that your character would be unable to do or have without the VNPC.

And before anyone asks, I DID try to find player musicians, for quite a while, but none were available, and realistically my PC with her background would easily have found someone. She already knew and used those people in her background.

Did you try e-mailing an Imm? They could have gotten some NPCs for you to pay, put out a request for a role, or at the very least said "sure, use the VNPC."