Gameplay => Wish list => Topic started by: Harwen on December 28, 2003, 07:43:56 pm
Title: Quests Again?
Post by: Harwen on December 28, 2003, 07:43:56 pm
I got this idea from the Dynamic Quests thread I read and I didn\'t really get it, but it seemed unessecarily complicated so yeah, I got this other idea:
How could PC\'s do quests without cheating other characters? Well, I thought of the auction system, ( I know it\'s not finished :P ) that is basically on an honor system. So is selling your weapons in MB right now.
But I was thinking if I wanted to get some materials for making me a poweful potion, I could just get me a quick escape route, a dumb newbie, and a convincing quest story and get my item without any hard work or fighting. I also might not have to run away, if the newbie is gullible enough.
I don\'t think that is fair at all, besides realism and possible humor, so I think a menu or form based system is in order. Note: This might be a little shaky right now.
I need 50 bricks of ignot to make a Large Scimitar.
I am busy with my shop since it is newbie rush hour, so I ask one of the more experienced ones to get them for me.
I put the command /createquest , a menu pops up with the following feilds:
Name of Quest: ***ting Bricks Needed Item(s): Ignot Brick 50, [amount2], [amount3]...e.t.c. Time Frame: Before I curl up and die would be nice. (or
The Name of the quest is purely for kicks, the
Needed items will be seperated by commas if more than one is required, but the real name of each item must be given ( I am sure other restrictions can apply, like unique items and numbers of them).
The time frame the quest must be completed in; this has the option of timing the quest recipents for things such as races, or just being a jerk with the quest :P . Or, it can be jocular or nonexistant.
The For feild is also optional, as it can be targeted to players anywhere, but they will be alerted when given a quest. If the word \"Everyone\" is placed here, it is an open ended quest which anyone can complete.
Reward is the fun part, this is where you put how much money, what items, or both the player(s) get when they complete your quest. The important thing is here, only when the other player brings back the 50 bricks of ignots, and gives them to me using the /questcomplete command, are the items autmatically traded. As for open ended or muptiple quests, you can keep giving a reward for as long as you have the offered money, or items. In the other case, all players given the quest ( if it is assigned quest) are alerted the item is no longer availible, and the quest dissapears.
Or if I place Yes in Continuous? the same player can complete the quest and continue to get a reward from it if he has for example 150 brick of ignots, and gives it to me 3 times.
Also, the quest maker is able to show any player their created and avalible open-ended quests by typing something like /showquests , and the Player can choose which open ended quest to take by doing someting like /acceptquest the quest now is an assigned quest, but it is still availiable to other players, so this type of quest might be favored by shopkeeps and such as an unlimited number of people can accept and complete these types of quests (thorian gronk, anyone?).
I can think of other useful options such as /closequest that keeps anyone else from accepting the quest, but still needs to be completed by those assigned. Or /openquest which will make the quest open to all players who know it\'s name. Of course there is /cancel quest , but as i mentioned, items will not be given automatically. This could all be recorded in the players databases, how many quests completed, or given. A player can use the command /viewquests to see all the quests they have been assigned. That player can also use the /queststatus to see the requirements of the quests again.
So what do you think? :]
Title:
Post by: Boldstorm on December 28, 2003, 08:02:02 pm
Wow I like this :tup: I was also slightly confused trying to figure everything out in the other post. Got me thinking with your idea. You could also do things to make your quest more intresting possible or side quests to your quest. Maybe add a command /expandquest and that would allow you to add more options to your quest. It could open up another menu similar or the same as the one that opened at the /createquest . You could also use this to maybe add side quests to your current quest. Maybe also have a /questmessage \"Name of Quest\" that would allow you to send messages about your quest to anyone who has already accepted it.
Well whatever but I definetly like your idea. :)) :)) :))
Title:
Post by: Axsyrus on December 28, 2003, 08:14:02 pm
ahh, now this is a good idea! (and much better than davis\' thread, i still don\'t know what he wants :P)
i would really love to see something like this in the game, although there should be some more things to protect dumb n00bs, like having an NPC that tells you the value of each item so newbies know they shouldn\'t do a quest if the reward is too low, but this is a really good idea :]
Title:
Post by: lynx_lupo on December 28, 2003, 08:19:42 pm
mmmh, very good! :tup:
I\'d add some reward-give forcing to avoid abuse.
Title:
Post by: Fish on December 28, 2003, 08:34:45 pm
Here?s a system that would work, I like it.
It might have to be a little more complicated, for instance more options, but it?s the opposite of selling something. It would also be interesting to be able to put the character in NPC mode and log off. When the quest is finished the character leaves. There has to be a mechanism for turning the quest off when you?re character?s resources are played out, otherwise people would do the quest and get nothing.
Possible options
Bonuses for the first people to accomplish the quest. Winner take all quest. Straight item purchase, get me the goods you get the cash. Maximum number of people allowed to take on the quest. Character prequalification, the character must meet some minimum requirement to take on the quest.
There probably a lot more. It might be better to have a pop up that manages the quest rather then doing everything at the command line.
Title:
Post by: Harwen on December 28, 2003, 09:14:12 pm
Yes, Fish, I like those options too! I was thinking of more options, but I wrote that in a flaming mad rush because I was upset at the complexity of the other post. :D :))
The prequalification and the bonus ideas are great. But my system already does the Straight Item Purchase, which I concentrated on. And winner take all can be done by only having one of the reward items, or amount of money. Although a check box would make that easier to implement, yes.
Here\'s how I thought to implement you ideas:
Bonus: Simply another menu option that gives you the chace to set first place, second place, third place bonuses. (maybe in an >>advanced tab that leads to more complex options like this?)
Max Players: Another option added that would let you indicate a number allowed, or even a minimum number of people that needed to complete the quest.
Prequalification: Option in advenced tab.... ( or an option for guild rank or to belong to a guild)
I also thought of
Guild Quest: which would assign an entire guild witha quest, maybe for another guild as a tribute, or as a challange from Talaad or Laanx or someone else...(great for politics) :]
and Party Quest: you could give a quest to a party, meaning that they would have to defeat something, or maybe a simpler way of assigning multiple people to a quest? Guild Quest is better thought out though. :rolleyes:
I also like your idea of expand quest Boldstorm , though I am not sure about that level of complexity. But your /quest message idea is definetly a must! :)
Title:
Post by: Boldstorm on December 28, 2003, 09:20:57 pm
I like this idea more and more! Some of my ideas probably weren\'t thought out the greatest either I was so confused by the other post that when I read yours and it made sense I just started thinking of a few things. Didn\'t work them out the greatest lol.
Title:
Post by: Harwen on December 28, 2003, 09:30:09 pm
That\'s okie Boldstorm! That\'s how my idea came to bear :D
I want to thank you guys for staying on topic :)) :)) :)) !
Title:
Post by: seperot on December 28, 2003, 09:42:35 pm
great idea harwen
quest name: get seperot a sunbed
reward: to fan me all day :P
Title:
Post by: Harwen on December 28, 2003, 10:01:30 pm
Don\'t push it Sep ;)
Title:
Post by: Tylyu on December 28, 2003, 10:05:55 pm
Yes, great.
It\'s going the same way the msg I posted on \"Templated Generated Quests\" in that other tread, with kinda scripting, but you\'re adding better interface.
Nice one.
Title:
Post by: Fish on December 28, 2003, 11:06:31 pm
Tylyu whether you?re using a template some interpreted code or a macro they?re very closely the same thing. Templates generally don?t have logic in them though so I tend to think of it more like a macro. You set up some environmental variables, write quest structure including comments, then set up the dialogue. Being able to pull variables from the character that is talking to you like a skill level or a factional rating may be important in determining whether they qualify.
One problem I see though is if these variables are made available that means you may be able to get more information from a potential client than that client is willing to tell you. Interesting security problem. I guess it?s in the developer?s best interest not to allow a player-based quest to be scripted but rather have a panel were options are made available.
There should be some basic limits in a player-based quest. For instance if nobody takes on the quest for two days and you haven?t logged in to check, your player goes out to play. The maximum amount of time before the quester is kicked off the quest is one day. In order to start the quest and then log off you have to stand in a particular spot, eliminating hideous lag from having players litter the streets with quests.
Also giving the GM an interface that catalogs the quests to look for ridiculous ones to remove, like you give me a diamond I?ll give you a rat hair. Or possibly not allow any quests without their express permission may be an important feature. If a player runs a couple of successful quests the GM could change their status.
I think with any system it?s good to think about how to curb abuse before hand.
Title:
Post by: Harwen on December 28, 2003, 11:54:03 pm
Yes, I agree Fish, it\'s important to realize that the individual gamer, is intelligent and likes a good game. But realistically the individual gamer also has a darkside. Generally gamers are also reckless, violent and inconsierate, as insulting as that may seem. You don\'t have to look far in the fourms to find people like that.
Simple things like automatic item trading when completing a quest, max quests you could make per day or week are a great way of keeping abuse at bay.
Things like coding out quests, and making your own npc\'s are large, stinking gateways for abuse. It might be fun for some people, but the second you can say that you aren\'t thinking about the majority of players, just because one person isn\'t a coding idiot, and will find a system easy, doesn\'t mean it\'s good for everyone.
And I can\'t stress enough how important it is for people to be able to do something \"out of the box\" (i use the term loosley) without having to say the game sucks. I mean, I want to type /questcreate, click six times, type a funny name, and have somone look for materials for me while I am selling short bows and potions to noobs.
Not to downplay your Idea Tylyu, but I guess an idiot-user-friendly system is in order. (not to call anyone an idiot, I can\'t program or code for ****)
Title:
Post by: Vengeance on December 29, 2003, 04:27:26 am
Obviously, we would want an in-game GUI that is easy to use for this instead of a scripting language, but otherwise I *really* like this idea. I even like most of the extensions people have suggested here.
a. List of 1 or more items to turn in b. 1st, 2nd, 3rd place rewards for \"race games\" c. Could be for parties (groups) or individuals. d. Rewards could be financial or could be exp points or another item. e. Quest definition could include RP items such as name of quest, story behind quest, and quest hints.
- Venge
Title:
Post by: Saphire on December 29, 2003, 04:30:08 am
Wow, nice dynamic PC quest assignment idea... its like trading, except its like it\'s continual. you could easilly setup a quest where in you require materials and give a quest to a miner to get you said materials. once he has given then to you you give him his reward and he could keep comming back to you with the required item to get the reward...
and what YOU make could be the materials needed for a quest for someone else... and around and around it goes until it comes full circle. :D
[some quests could require a certain amount of \"quest completion points\" or something, as a filter so anyone above or below or at \"X #\" of quest completion points could do the quest..]
Title:
Post by: snow_RAveN on December 29, 2003, 04:38:33 am
Quest: Get seport dead
reward: take a screen shot :):P;):]
Title:
Post by: Harwen on December 29, 2003, 06:25:58 pm
Hehe, thanks Venge :) it\'s good to hear you say you like it :D
I found a problem though, or well my brother Ozkar found a flaw: When on a quest, you could make your own quest and give it to someone else to do for you, (at a lower price of course) and then the person you gave the quest to would give it to another person and so on...
Maybe not being able to make a quest while you are on one could fix this.
I really like the RP elements idea, the menu could have several \"tabs\" that was sort of a wizard that led you though the building of a quest, and there were several modes like, quick set up(no story or RP elements), typical (short story with RP) and full custom which would have all the options.
I considered the exp points part, and I decided that the game should take care of that by it\'s own mechanism like getting skill points towards empathy or something automatic like that, since that seems to me a huge abuse venue.
Title:
Post by: lynx_lupo on December 29, 2003, 06:38:21 pm
why would that quest giving be a problem? It\'s great! You see you can\'t do it and give someone else to handle it...think of a big corporation; bossing around...
Title:
Post by: Fish on December 29, 2003, 07:26:01 pm
There is a developer interested +OH YES!+ :D
Vengeance - If you could delete the spam out of this thread I would appreciate it. We seriously need to keep this a working thread (be cruel pleas) I don?t know how we can award EXP from one player character to another effectively. One player would have to lose it the other one gain it. Just making EXP for a quest completion seems problematic, subject to abuse. Even transferring it seems like a mechanism for power leveling a low level. This may be best an NPC option only.
It would seem this idea would work well for all player to player transactions. Since most of the sub modules will be essentially the same making it one package may be the easiest to code. Since each transaction has a different trigger mechanism the computer can automatically select which menu is correct. I?ll mention the ideas here but they need their own thread .
Available for player transactions. Trade, a standard player to player trade window for money and goods. Sales, turns a player character into a vendor. It allows a person to set up their character and walk away. Auction, timed bidding in an auction room. It?s set up correctly this could be a fun system. Quest, sets up player character quests.
If anybody has other ideas for transactions don?t hesitate to post it.
Trade transactions. Sets up a trade with targeted player. If targeted player is busy for instance in battle, already trading, doing a different transaction, away from keyboard, or some other status that does not allow trading this operation fails. To alleviate players from annoying player character?s they also can run a (no trade status) or if the player is on your ignore list the trade will fail.
Sales transactions. Since any decent RPG has encumbrance it is important to be able to sell from a cart or stand. When you?re character goes into sales mode it shouldn?t be able to move except to pivot. In order to sell items you pull the items from your cart or person onto the menu then type in the cost. When you go into trade mode the items are for sale and you can?t move. The reason for this is you have gone into sales mode and cannot move far away from your cart or place of business. If you move to far away from your cart or place of business and there were items for sale on that cart going into sales mode will fail. In the future you might be able to hire an NPC to sell for you, however my guess is you better be doing a pretty good business to afford that. If you have formed a group and are selling items group members should be able to set more items for sale. One group member is the point of sales other group members are either producing items for sale or faring products around. If you have a group that has hired an NPC to sell then nobody will be left standing waiting for people to buy from you. This might also work well for Guild stores.
Auction transactions. Auctions are performed in an auction room (just like in reality). You place an item on the auction table and the NPC auctioneer auctions off the items in order. In order to bid on an item you simply increment up your bid in the auction transaction section and if you have the highest bid the item is yours. This system would give the computer control of the important parts of an auction. For instance if you don?t have enough money you can?t bid any higher. Since the computer is auctioning the item the auction is guaranteed to be fair. The money received goes straight into the bank. In each transaction 5% goes to the auction system just like in real life.
Anyways the above transactions are not a part of this thread. If you like one of them copy it over to another thread and start it. They were just random ideas I had about transactions.
Title:
Post by: Fish on December 29, 2003, 07:29:21 pm
Quest transaction. This is the one were talking about. One of the key factors I think of is how to keep this fair for the person setting up the quest and the person doing the quest. Once a person picks up a quest it wouldn?t be fair for the person that set it up to cancel. Especially if the player doing the quest is mostly done, all that work for nothing. At some point if nobody takes on the quest the person who set it up should be able to get out of it. The only solution I can come up with is that the computer through an NPC take over the quest. This would free up the player making the quest to do other things. It would also require that you give the NPC all material that has given out in the quest. A sort of guarantee that there is in fact a prize. When the quest is over, the person who started it is done, you go to the quest NPC and collect the materials /money and then you can start a new quest.
Setting reasonable limits, this applies to quest set up by players not NPC quests, they don?t have any set limits.
Each player is limited to one running quest they set up.
The player running the quest cannot stop the quest if somebody is on it.
The player presenting the quest must put a time limit into it. It defaults at 24 hours. But for a Guild quest it may want to be pushed up to a week.
You?re ability to set up a quest can be revoked by a game master.
Only the Guild leader can quest the Guild.
Only the party leader can quest the party.
You can only have one Guild quest one-party quest and one personal quest. If you are on a personal quest and your Guild leader selects a Guild quest you will not be kicked off. This will emanate people running around excepting all kinds of quests they have no intention of completing.
There probably other good limits to set however I think this list covers most of the ways the system could be abused.
By the way does anybody have an idea of what this window would look like?
Title:
Post by: Wedge on December 29, 2003, 08:24:58 pm
Hmmmm... no creating NPCs for your own little quest would be too messy. And obviously if you had to stand around and wait, that would be dumb. What there needs to be is a central repository in every major city for this kind of thing. You go there, post a job, leave the reward, and then anyone can try to complete it. Also you need to sign your name when you take on a quest, with the date and time, so there is an indication of how long someone may have already been working on a quest, and how many people are on it. You\'ll be notified when someone has completed it, and you can go there and pick up whatever they had to get for the quest.
A dynamic player run quest generator! If players don\'t put up enough jobs for the demand, then you can just have NPCs go and leave stuff there aswell.
Title:
Post by: Fish on December 29, 2003, 09:30:10 pm
I agree Wedge. ____________________
There is no reason why the quest engine couldn?t be used for other purposes.
Supposing you want to have a house built for you. So you start up a quest ?build me a house?. You put up enough money and specified what constitutes a house. A contractor comes by, another player, and thinks they can turn a tidy profit building a house. They in turn produces some quest like get me lumber, build a seller hole, I need stonework done and other parts required to build a house. When the house is complete and they turned a deed over to you they get the quest money. It might really work well set up like a guild quest for a guild that does this sort of thing.
It merely runs like a multipart quest. Phase one secure location and plans. Phase two purchase required materials. Phase three build the building.
In the above example there may be a negotiation phase like where the house is supposed to be and its size and dimension but the quest engine could probably take care of most of the details. Especially guaranteeing payment when the house is complete.
There has to be a lot of different cool angles, a not just kill a dragon and get me its head.
Title:
Post by: Harwen on December 29, 2003, 10:08:27 pm
Hmm, I sort agree with Wedge and I sorta agree with you, Fish. While I do admit that a quest engine can be used for many things, and hopefully increase the level of depth the quest can have, I believe simplicity, and working out the kinks in the simple plan and taking a step at a time are best.
For example:
Quote
why would that quest giving be a problem? It\'s great! You see you can\'t do it and give someone else to handle it...think of a big corporation; bossing around...
That\'s a lare venue for abuse, although it would make things more realistic, we have to think about the fairness of the system, that\'s why I included automatic trading of items when the two parties have the items.
And Fish, I think that the fact thet you can make multiple quests and time them are a must.
Take for example, not being able to finish a quest, ever. You now make the poor smithy waste his quest on you, since he cannot make anymore quests for the day because of you. He gets angry and kills you.
I think there should be a max number, yes, but to avoid abuse, two things are important:
The control the Quest Maker (please do not refer to him/her as the GM) has over the quest.
and
The control the PC (person(s) assigned to the quest) has over the quest.
Being able to say to the short, bad-tempered bald little smithy that the quest is too hard should be as easy as /quitquest No one gets hurt, albiet mildly annoyed. No arm twisting.
If the QM decides he want to cancel the quest for whatever reason, all parties, QM and PC will be notified as to minimize pointlessness.
Yes there are venues for abuse, but only the kind of abuse that can result in annoyance (such as dumb people cacelling quest while you are inside a dungeon, surrouded by spiders) but no one loses an item, or money (and that is important)
The house-building thing you brought up Fish.... might be solved by a simpler, but specific \"in game contract \" so I think it is fit for another post.
I also am interested in your (ever more creative) additions to the quest system such as your solution to my shaky party quest idea, the administration\'s control for a quest in theory is good, but I must disagree about the Guild leader only questing a guild, I believe that Guild Quests should be allowed to be given by any guild leader ( or politician ) to any other guild, since this adds a huge part to the RP part of the game (which is also important)
And I also agree on your kill dragon, bring me the head thing, which I think you are mistaking my idea for something too simple. There should be options for adding RP elements to it, but we must consider the simplicity of the design as to let most everyone be able to set up a quest withing a minute, and an epic quest within five minutes as a minimum.
And about the design of the menu, I will draw up a desin and post it.
Title:
Post by: Harwen on December 29, 2003, 11:32:38 pm
Okie, here you are, this is what I think it should remotely look like after you tupe /createquest , but ofcourse, suggestions and improvements are always welcome.
(http://mercury.walagata.com/w/harwen/Menu1.jpg)
The advanced tab is the same, with some text feilds and more radio buttons. This is where the RP elements and the more complex options go.
Title:
Post by: Fish on December 29, 2003, 11:43:40 pm
Wow there is a lot of it is to work with!
Let?s start at the beginning.
A GM is the game master in control of the game.
I think by forcing the person producing the quest to put up the loot upfront whether it be cash or prizes and then limiting the participants to the amount available takes care of a lot of problems.
Unless of course you state it?s a race at that point the participants should clearly understand that it?s a race and that there are a limited number of prizes and what those prizes are. There may also be a posted start time where the participants get a standard tell explaining the objective of the race.
I think this idea would limit the abuse on both sides. The prizes are guaranteed by the plane shift engine as well as the response, whatever that might be.
Running multiple quests but having a limit is OK I think. Say fore. But if you set up your time limits correctly and prevent someone else from entering the quest, when the time is up, you can cancel the quest. Because your guaranteed nobody is on it.
Suppose you?re on a quest and realize that it isn?t going to happen. .I agree that being able to quit a quest at any time is important. This means if you?re on a quest and realize there?s a better one you can decline the first one and then onto the second one. Your character would still be on one quest at a time. You?re still in control however you can still only do one quest. There may be reasons why you would want to take on a second quest simultaneously. Like suppose you?re going to the same spot to pick up two objects for two different quests. However there should be a practical limit to how many quests a player can take on simultaneously. Say three.
Suppose you?re smithing something say five hinges and you then provide it to the person who asked for them the quest is over. You?re free to do any other quest you like. It?s not a one quest per day it?s one quest at a time. It?s also over if it times out.
So there are really two time limits to a quest. The time the quest is active and the maximum time allowed to complete the quest. Add the two together and that?s the end of any possibility of your quest having somebody on it. At some point it?s up to the QM to set reasonable limits.
To quests and entire guild would seem to require the blessing of the leader. To allow any guild member to quest the entire guild seems problematic. So saying that only the guild leader can accept a quest for a guild seems reasonable. If you don?t like the quests your leader is accepting on your behalf either get rid of them or quit the guild.
The same might be said for group level quests.
Title:
Post by: Harwen on December 31, 2003, 12:00:03 am
Yes, that seems all together and agreed upon :) I wonder (and horribly hope) if it will be implemented ?(
My dumb picture host is screwing with it\'s servers so my uber-cool sig and design of the menu are dead X( grrr...
Well, off to think up other ideas :)
Title:
Post by: Boldstorm on December 31, 2003, 01:16:21 am
I can see your sig fine which is uber-cool btw. But the menu isn\'t showing up and I was really looking forward to see what you had come up with. Oh well hope to se it soon.
Title:
Post by: Harwen on January 05, 2004, 01:10:41 am
Fixed the link for the menu, hope you like.
Title:
Post by: FunGun on January 06, 2004, 05:45:07 pm
As someone already mentioned there should be a npc in every bigger city where u can find those PC Quests, how about calling him PCQG, PlayerCharacter Quest Generator Dude Guy whatever. Don\'t know much bout the making of Menues and stuff but it\'d surely be pretty cool if u had two options when talking to him:
I Want to make a Quest: All those lovely Ideas u wrote already and maybe that menue of Harwen
What Quests are there: A Menue where u can see the quests on the left and when u click on one of them u see all the info on the right, including persons participating and the time they r working on it so far.
This would lower the chance of someone starting the Quest without realising that it is just about to be ended. Furthermore the usability would be way easier and even the worst beginner might get the quest he likes.
Furthermore there could be some sort of QuestSearch. Examples: Person1 searches a quest which needs wood, and finds 2 of those one in CityA and one in CityB. For he is Closer to CityA and the reward is better he walks to CityA and starts the Quest. Person2 wants to get a certain reward, so he searches for it and there is one that has exactly the reward he wants. So he wanders to the city starts the Quest and maybe even gets the reward.
I don\'t know much bout coding and stuff but though that\'d be a hell lot of things to do I guess me and everyone else posting in this threat would greatly appreciate this to be implemented.
Title:
Post by: Harwen on January 06, 2004, 07:12:06 pm
Yes, lets all wish really, really hard and hope this becomes implemented in some warped, distant and twisted way :D
Title:
Post by: tallimar on January 07, 2004, 08:47:55 pm
how about personal quests and general quests? personal quests can be given directly from the employer to the employee with all most of the options mentioned above, whereas general quests are kept at a questbank(so to speak) where the open-ended quests are given. that way, if i need some errand-boy to go get me some mandrake for a potion i can simply ask him or his party to go to X place and get it without having to trek over to the nearest metropolis(which could be very far away) just to post a help wanted ad.
Title:
Post by: Harwen on January 07, 2004, 09:54:00 pm
Exactly, I see your point tallimar, since the general quests would be the open-ended ones I mentioned, they should be in a centeral place where everyone could access them. This is much more efficient! Of course, in the posting of such a quest you would:
Give away your quest, just like a personal quest.
Set a max number of people, time frame, e.t.c
And most importantly, give away your position, as in level, city, region, and maybe coordinates like /pos.