Wednesday, December 10, 2008
The Accidental Nemesis
Many years ago, I started a pen-and-paper RPG with a quickly thrown-together villain who was not expected to survive one adventure. Somehow, he managed to escape, and by doing so he made an impression on the players. Karius was that jerk who got away.
Later, I decided to bring him back for another encounter. This time, I had him plan his exit. He was still likely to die, but this time I made a small effort to keep him alive. It was enough. He escaped a second time, and my group's most hated enemy was born. He made several reappearances, always with an out - usually an important reason for the players to keep him alive. He was defeated often, but never destroyed. He eventually became an important political figure - because he again made himself too valuable to eliminate. This gave my friends an incredible emotional hook into the campaign - they hated the guy, and hated him all the more because they has possessed the power to kill him several times, but it had always been too inconvenient to do so.
It was awesome. It was more awesome in that the guy was an accidental nemesis. It had happened organically.
Later, I found myself playing Daggerfall. In that game, characters and missions were randomly (or algorithmically) generated. I was talking to people on the street, assigned with random names, looking for someone in particular. I soon found out that anybody "in particular" would be a static character found inside buildings - you'd never bump into that person on the street.
And that made me wonder - why not? If so much of the game was randomly generated anyway, why couldn't it randomly make someone that I bumped into on the street "important?" Why did it have to create an all-new character to be my "arch-nemesis" in a random mission? Wouldn't it have been much cooler if the game played off of the history of my actions, storing off certain people and situations to be used later in the game?
Yes, players might get annoyed that the game is effectively rolling out the red carpet for them like this - having the game build revolve around the player rather than the player exploring a pre-created world. But it wouldn't be that the game would be forcing their choices, so much as turning the player's choices into core elements of the storyline.
It's an intriguing idea, if anybody ever really picks up on it. I'd love to play with the concept some day --- but my plate is piled high for a few years...
Labels: Game Design
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 8:14 AM (Permalink)
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
This sort of thing is what I want in my ideal procedurally-generated RPG... but then again, I'm a lover of Dwarf Fortress.
I don't know. I really hate the 'arch-nemesis' concept in books, where the evil genius never dies, because then he wouldn't be available for the sequel.
But in a game, if you're going to have an enemy, it would be really nice if there was a REASON why he's your enemy,... and even better if he's someone you encountered before. But then, in general, I want NPC's to seem like real people. Your actions should affect their lives, for better or worse. And ideally, they should be interesting enough that you remember them later, when you encounter them again.
But I guess I think of this more for characters I've helped, than those I've hurt. Partly that's because I like to play the good guy, but it's also because I want to leave the bad guys DEAD. (And I can't say I think much of the tired plot of a son coming after me for revenge, which is the usual work-around to resurrect an enemy.)
But in a game, if you're going to have an enemy, it would be really nice if there was a REASON why he's your enemy,... and even better if he's someone you encountered before. But then, in general, I want NPC's to seem like real people. Your actions should affect their lives, for better or worse. And ideally, they should be interesting enough that you remember them later, when you encounter them again.
But I guess I think of this more for characters I've helped, than those I've hurt. Partly that's because I like to play the good guy, but it's also because I want to leave the bad guys DEAD. (And I can't say I think much of the tired plot of a son coming after me for revenge, which is the usual work-around to resurrect an enemy.)
Karius is also the name of one of two bacteria from an old Norwegian movie which were conceived to make children brush their teeth.
http://images.google.de/images?q=karius%20baktus
Accidental nemesis indeed! ;-)
http://images.google.de/images?q=karius%20baktus
Accidental nemesis indeed! ;-)
# posted by 
: December 10, 2008 10:57 AM
: December 10, 2008 10:57 AM
Arch-nemeses get old. Sympathetic traits and legitimate escape plans help (as opposed to the Evil Overlord who kills puppies for kicks and gets bailed out by deus ex machina every time), but it still wears thin: every time the arch-nemesis escapes, it gets more frustrating, until you wonder why you (or, in a story, the protagonist(s)) even bother.
A question for the programmers: how difficult would it be to create a randomized nemesis with motivation, characterization, and history based on the player's interaction in the world, and make it convincing? As much as I've enjoyed Dwarf Fortress, I've never really been able to wrap my mind around the dwarves (or adventurers) as individuals -- just a few traits cobbled together in the semblance of background. That's my worry as a player: any randomized nemesis is going to end up looking like it was spat out from a generator.
A question for the programmers: how difficult would it be to create a randomized nemesis with motivation, characterization, and history based on the player's interaction in the world, and make it convincing? As much as I've enjoyed Dwarf Fortress, I've never really been able to wrap my mind around the dwarves (or adventurers) as individuals -- just a few traits cobbled together in the semblance of background. That's my worry as a player: any randomized nemesis is going to end up looking like it was spat out from a generator.
I'd say it all depends in the 'how'! The Arch Nemesis doesn't need to be a so much loathed person if he has charisma. Sure he should be still hated but he needs to be obviously smarter than the players. Nobody wants to be mocked for too long by a dumb enemy.
For that it would actually be interesting to hear from players who the favorite antagonists in games are. Count at least 5 enemies from role-playing games that you liked or thought where likeable. Nice idea for a poll!
For that it would actually be interesting to hear from players who the favorite antagonists in games are. Count at least 5 enemies from role-playing games that you liked or thought where likeable. Nice idea for a poll!
Karius started out as my character's professional rival; I got points for having him as a disad. So at first it made sense to our party that he kept showing up--he was supposed to make my life hell. "Accidental Nemesis" is a good term for him; he had his own story that was going on in the background, and ultimately it wasn't so much that he was following us around to harass us as that his plans and ours were in opposition.
And, of course, he wasn't the Big Bad of the whole plot, and we knew it. I don't think we ever felt the sense of frustration with Karius that you get when you're fighting the main boss AGAIN and he escapes AGAIN because you haven't reached the endgame yet. Also, his appearances were timed really well, because every time he showed up we knew something fiendishly clever was about to happen.
The real challenge was in playing the latest campaign in that setting and having Karius's descendant be my character's beloved mentor. That took some getting used to. :)
And, of course, he wasn't the Big Bad of the whole plot, and we knew it. I don't think we ever felt the sense of frustration with Karius that you get when you're fighting the main boss AGAIN and he escapes AGAIN because you haven't reached the endgame yet. Also, his appearances were timed really well, because every time he showed up we knew something fiendishly clever was about to happen.
The real challenge was in playing the latest campaign in that setting and having Karius's descendant be my character's beloved mentor. That took some getting used to. :)
I see this being wrapped up in organic questing. If the world was able to give realistic, once-off tasks and be able to react to the completion or incompletion of those tasks it would allow the existance of procedurally generated nemeses.
In a recent game of Depths of Peril I encountered something like this type of organic nemesis. In this game some of the quests are shared, and the first to complete the kill of the unique can finish the quest whereas the others fail. Although another faction was leading the race for influence, I was continually losing quests to this one guy, and it aggrivated me enough that I started attacking his base before I was really ready. Instead of a quick, clinical kill, he survived and proceeded to be a pain for the rest of the game. I haven't finished the game yet, but it would be ironic if he allies with the main winner and steals the game away from me, truly becoming the nemesis that he is in my mind.
I've been working on a way to build procedural worlds as a PhD project that focuses on event importance as the fundamental element of the world. This allows the generation of consistent, coherent, deterministic worlds that allow quests to be an intrinsic part of the way the world is created.
Post a Comment
In a recent game of Depths of Peril I encountered something like this type of organic nemesis. In this game some of the quests are shared, and the first to complete the kill of the unique can finish the quest whereas the others fail. Although another faction was leading the race for influence, I was continually losing quests to this one guy, and it aggrivated me enough that I started attacking his base before I was really ready. Instead of a quick, clinical kill, he survived and proceeded to be a pain for the rest of the game. I haven't finished the game yet, but it would be ironic if he allies with the main winner and steals the game away from me, truly becoming the nemesis that he is in my mind.
I've been working on a way to build procedural worlds as a PhD project that focuses on event importance as the fundamental element of the world. This allows the generation of consistent, coherent, deterministic worlds that allow quests to be an intrinsic part of the way the world is created.
Links to this post:
<< Home
