Identifying unfamiliar things

From: yorkaturr
Date: 2002-06-25 22:57:18

I promised Origon to figure this out once I have time.

Meanwhile, I would be interested in hearing your ideas about the following:

How does one recognize the proper names of trees/animals/items/anything else identifiable?

One method has been suggested, and it involves a number of "lore skills". The higher your lore skill in a certain subject, the more things you recognize under that subject. One obvious problem with this is that you can't possibly scale the difficulty of recognizing items. For example:

Skill level 10: Odd tree
Skill level 20: Oak tree
Skill level 30: Pine tree

Another problem with this approach is obvious, if you crudely divide lore skills into "plant lore", "animal lore" etc, how is it possible that you know the names of animals you've never even seen?

A few possible solutions:

- More lore skills. Lots of them. For example, if we make plants and animals culturally, or otherwise inclined. With "elven plant lore" you would know about elven trees and elven herbal plants, with "dwarven mineral lore" you would know about metals and gems. This still doesn't solve the difficulty scale problem, if we don't apply some obscure random formula and make a skillcheck every time you encounter a strange recognizable item.

- Identify blueprints. Discard all lore skills. Instead, you will need to look up the information about each and every item that you want identified, for example by reading a book.

- A hybrid of the two above.

tell me your ideas

From: Rahl
Date: 2002-06-26 18:13:06
In-Reply-To: 1690

I think the "blueprint" idea would work alot better then god knows how many different lore skills.

From: raeky
Date: 2002-07-26 02:47:58
In-Reply-To: 1690

my thoughts on this was that names for items needed to be learned from someone who knows them (at first the sages would know everything.) Walking arround in the wilderness you would see a tree for example. you mouseover it for say 2 seconds and a popup shows labeling it as "tree" possibly other options would appear there like "cut down" or "collect firewood" or something. If you where in the near presence of someone who knew the proper name of this tree it would show the proper name for it, and thus you your self learned it. It follows the logic, if you where near someone, and wanted to know the name of an object but didn't know you would ask that person what it was, since they know you automaticly would learn it. This only works if you mouseover it in the near presence (speeking distance) of another player who knows its real name.

That was my thoughts.. when the game first starts sages would lead expiditions into the wilds with some players, and teach them things, instruct them to learn the names of the plants/animals/minerals as they travel, and then those players can teach other players... etc...

From: Zaxim
Date: 2002-06-26 20:45:33
In-Reply-To: 1691

yeah but it will be so tiresome, looking in your "blueprint book" to see if that moving log is going to kill you.

I think we should have blueprints and a lore skill. Because people are already taught about some types of trees and animals.

From: gxest
Date: 2002-06-27 18:26:37
In-Reply-To: 1693

Blueprints don't work like that, atleast not the blueprints meant in this case (there are also physical blueprints).

And yes, I am a big advocate for blueprints for each and every item that the player has knowledge about. I see no problem in a player having a database of 1000 or more different mental blueprints (information about a) what the finished item looks like b) how to operate the item c) how to identify the item).

The problem that you mentioned, that people are already aware of certain things could be easily solved by giving a new character a set of blueprints, to represent his starting knowledge.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying we should completely simulate memory and knowledge in-game, but imho we should do it with some items and things, including flora and fauna knowledge.

From: raeky
Date: 2002-07-26 02:52:32
In-Reply-To: 1695

if a player was so inclined to write down all there "blueprints" on paper and give to another player then so be it. it would be massively expensive to buy that much paper. Paper at this time was a very expensive luxury.

plus we can specify how much paper (pages) it would take to write down this skill/knowledge. That way more complex skills takes more paper, thus is far more expensive.

skills also can and should be learned by observation and by direct teaching, the second being the fastest way and best way to learn anything.

From: raeky
Date: 2002-07-26 02:49:27
In-Reply-To: 1738

the idea of reading a book to learn is also possible. One can learn to identify animals/trees/minerals/etc by just reading books. thus it wouldn't be neccessary for them to learn from another player. but i still am quite fond of my method of learning objects real names from other players.

From: Takomtor
Date: 2002-08-03 04:06:21
In-Reply-To: 1738

" If you where in the near presence of someone who knew the proper name of this tree it would show the proper name for it, and thus you your self learned it. It follows the logic, if you where near someone, and wanted to know the name of an object but didn't know you would ask that person what it was, since they know you automaticly would learn it. "


This could be implemented by enabling drag and drop of those "choices" that one has when "mouseing" over the target. If you want to teach the name, drag and drop the name of the tree and the other player would learn it just about automatically (well, as I am studying Chinese right now, I know that when someone tells me a new word I am not necessarily able to remember it for too long). On the other hand, if this dragged and dropped item would be "chop down" it would initiate a longer teaching session. System should also be equipped with some kind of verification from the students side, wheather he/she wants to study or not. And yes, one could also just scroll/go through the skill/item blueprints to drag and drop it from there.

From: raeky
Date: 2002-08-03 04:12:48
In-Reply-To: 1768

possibly. I think learning should be done fastest if done from a teacher. Learning from a book wouldn't be very effective, usualy.