Author Topic: Quests Again?  (Read 2543 times)

snow_RAveN

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 736
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #15 on: December 29, 2003, 04:38:33 am »
Quest: Get seport dead

reward: take a screen shot :):P;):]
Quote
Originally posted by DepthBlade
I am not as good as you with posting totally random pointless things that neither are relative or make any sense.

Harwen

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #16 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.
 

lynx_lupo

  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 1431
  • Sorbus aria!
    • View Profile
    • Linux pri nas
(No subject)
« Reply #17 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...
"Amor sceleratus habendi"- Ovid
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you eat them." -Godzilla

Fish

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 200
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #18 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.
Doing things just for the halibut.

Fish

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 200
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #19 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?
Doing things just for the halibut.

Wedge

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 619
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #20 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.
Ninjas have feelings too.  Mostly they feel like dancing.



Fish

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 200
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #21 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.
Doing things just for the halibut.

Harwen

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #22 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.
 

Harwen

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #23 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.






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.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2004, 01:09:10 am by Harwen »
 

Fish

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 200
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #24 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.
Doing things just for the halibut.

Harwen

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #25 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 :)
« Last Edit: December 31, 2003, 12:00:29 am by Harwen »
 

Boldstorm

  • Hydlaa Notable
  • *
  • Posts: 525
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #26 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.

Harwen

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #27 on: January 05, 2004, 01:10:41 am »
Fixed the link for the menu, hope you like.
 

FunGun

  • Wayfarer
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #28 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.

Harwen

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #29 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