Forcetalk option preview

[BigRob]

Here's some sample text from one of Aklon's forcetalk options, it's only partial, but I hope you enjoy. Comments and Criticisms are, as ever, welcome.

 

 

 

PC (1st Time): I’ve heard a bit about your education and your travels, but you’ve only spoken about your tutors. Surely you must have met other people in your travels and come to know them.

 

Aklon (B): In truth, my wandering keeps me from coming to know most of the people I have met. Still, there have been times when I traveled with others, as I do now, and a few periods when I stayed in one place. So I have come to know a few people.

 

PC: 1. Actually, I was thinking more of other people in your master’s house. (Z)

2. (Option for other people)

 

Aklon (Z): There were many people in my master’s house. It was more like a large village in terms of numbers, so I did not know everyone. Cont.

But there were a few people I knew well. Rekhmet and Zida, of course. Mistress Astyr, the head cook, Canethil the blacksmith and Enval, the guard captain’s son.

 

PC: 1. Who were Rekhmet and Zida?

2. How did you come to know the head cook well?

3. I suppose you learned blacksmithing from Canethil.

4. Did you and Enval attend lessons together? (Z.W)

 

Aklon (Z.W): Enval did indeed attend some lessons with me, though his education as a guardsman was different to mine. He and I did not get along very well. We were rivals, if not actual enemies.

PC: 1. Why were you his enemy? What started it? (Z.W.Z)

2. What was Enval like? (Z.W.Y)

 

Aklon (Z.W.Z): Several things, I think. Enval was two years older than I, and born into privilege. Enval’s father was a free man, working for my master for a wage, rather than for his keep. Consequently, Enval had a comparatively easy childhood, though knowing his father, I am sure that it was not too easy.

 

Despite Enval’s prodigious talent for the arts of war, I, a slave, and younger than him to boot, was given almost exclusive access to two battlemasters who far outstripped any others in my master’s house. I think this rankled more than a little.

 

Enval also tried to exert his non-existent authority over me several times and I ignored those attempts. It might have been easier to submit to his power games, but I suspect it would only have encouraged him.

PC: 1. So, did you and he ever actually fight? (Z.W.Z.Z)

2. Why didn’t Enval have access to your tutors? (Z.W.Z.Y)

3. Tell me more about him. (to Z.W.Y)

 

Aklon (Z.W.Z.Z (If Aklon has not spoken of his family)): Yes, we fought several times. We were fairly young, however, and very little came of it, except for us getting into trouble. Neither of us was foolish enough to start anything when it might result in a fatality. (End Dialogue)

 

Aklon (Z.W.Z.Y): Enval and the other guards in training did have access to Zardos and Tekashi, but only on a few occasions. My master wanted his guards to be trained as a cohesive unit, so the more individualistic styles of my tutors were only of limited use. Several older guards trained with Zardos and Tekashi to absorb their skills and adapt them for use by the others, but I was the only one to train regularly with them. (End Dialogue)

 

Aklon (Z.W.Y): He was heavily built, cunning, but not clever and very single minded. Enval was following in his father’s footsteps and doing very well for himself, rapidly becoming a skilled warrior.

 

He was also very arrogant and considered himself to be some sort of nobility, which he was, in a sense. Political machinations were common amongst the servants, as they jockeyed for attention, praise and promotion. As a free man, Enval was born into an already privileged position and even when he was a child, he was attempting to build a circle of followers to help ensure his succession as guard captain.

 

By the time I left my master’s house, Enval had matured considerably and his political skills had become very formidable. (End Dialogue)

[Domi]

Very thorough, Big Rob, and I find it a very realistic dialogue, with well-captured mood.

 

Consequently, Enval had a comparatively easy childhood, though knowing his father, I am sure that it was not too easy.

 

By some reason while reading this sentence it felt to me that Aklon repeated himself, though he did not do it, not exactly. I would suggest changing it a little, to convey the same thought. Perhaps something along the lines of:

 

Enval's childhood should have been easier than mine, though knowing his father, he might have faced his own challenges/might have had his own difficulties while growing up.

[Guest Kari]

Good job BigRob that was great.

[BigRob]

Thanks very much guys. I'm glad it passes muster.

 

 

Consequently, Enval had a comparatively easy childhood, though knowing his father, I am sure that it was not too easy.

 

By some reason while reading this sentence it felt to me that Aklon repeated himself, though he did not do it, not exactly. I would suggest changing it a little, to convey the same thought. Perhaps something along the lines of:

 

Enval's childhood should have been easier than mine, though knowing his father, he might have faced his own challenges/might have had his own difficulties while growing up.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, that sounds like a better way to go. That line was edited while I was doing the posting, because the original did repeat itself. Looking at it now, I didn't edit all that much really. Time to go back to the originals for some serious chop and change.

 

 

Oddly, now I also feel a branch for Enval's father might be in order too...

[KIrving]

I like this very much, BigRob. I particularly like it when questions that get answered lead into more questions. (My PC's are always nosey! ) I also agree that a chance to ask about Enval's father would be good.

 

My only nitpick (and it's purely a personal opinion),

By the time I left my master’s house, Enval had matured considerably and his political skills had become very formidable. (End Dialogue

I personally think that the use of formidable here works well by itself, without 'very' in front of it.

 

Thanks for the preview.

[BigRob]

I'm glad you like it. Most of Aklon's Forcetalks are like this, so you have to dig a bit if you want to learn all his secrets.

 

My only nitpick (and it's purely a personal opinion),

 

By the time I left my master’s house, Enval had matured considerably and his political skills had become very formidable. (End Dialogue)

I personally think that the use of formidable here works well by itself, without 'very' in front of it.

My writing does get like that, adding excess descriptives is my biggest vice. When I go through to do the editing, I'll hopefully pick up the worst offences, like this one.

[Kulyok]

First, thank you for the preview.

 

Are you ready for some unpleasantness? If 'yes', here we go:

 

My thoughts on the whole of it: I am a devoted Slytherin, so my emotional reaction and sympathy lay with Draco... I mean Elvan, here. This is subjective, but since we Slytherins are many and mighty, it is a point to keep in mind, I think.

 

Now, bit by bit and little by little:

 

I’ve heard a bit about your education and your travels, but you’ve only spoken about your tutors. Surely you must have met other people in your travels and come to know them.

 

Some players do not use contractions in their speech at all, prefering long and important "I have been thinking" to short and informal "I've been thinking." Two contractions draw attention even more, in my opinion.

 

Aklon (B): In truth, my wandering keeps me from coming to know most of the people I have met. Still, there have been times when I traveled with others, as I do now, and a few periods when I stayed in one place. So I have come to know a few people.

 

"In truth" and "still" - both are good additions, but two phrases in a row opening with an introductory word do not look well to me. (And bear in mind that the third phrase opens with "So".) I would get rid either of "in truth" or "still".

 

Further, the reader meets with "come to know" three times in total, which also looks awkward. I would delete/replace "coming to know" in the first sentence, ("getting close to", etc. ) I think it would do the job.

 

From PC's view; a logical question here would be: "Why do you keep wandering and never linger in one place?" or some such. The question asks itself, here. Unless it is answered in the earlier portion of the romance, there might be some confusion.

 

3. I suppose you learned blacksmithing from Canethil.

 

Three of the answers are questions, so I think making this one a question ("Did you learn blacksmithing from Canethil?") would improve this selection of choices. Besides, not everybody uses "I suppose" tag, but nearly everybody would ask a plain question in a simple manner.

 

In other words, I think that the shorter PC's options are, the better. Otherwise you may end up "playing the player's character for them." (guilty!)

 

Enval did indeed attend some lessons with me, though his education as a guardsman was different to mine. He and I did not get along very well. We were rivals, if not actual enemies.

 

Do you really need "indeed" and "actual" here? Without them, the speech would be more alive, in my opinion.

 

Consequently, Enval had a comparatively easy childhood, though knowing his father, I am sure that it was not too easy.

 

Double "easy" here creates some awkwardness. Lenient, undemanding, carefree, comfortable, prosperous, well-to-do - any of them might work as a replacement, I think.

 

Despite Enval’s prodigious talent for the arts of war, I, a slave, and younger than him to boot, was given almost exclusive access to two battlemasters who far outstripped any others in my master’s house. I think this rankled more than a little.

 

"almost exclusive access" - does not sound well to me. "Given permission," perhaps? "Privilege"? A battlemaster (or two) took a liking to him?

 

"two battlemasters who far outstripped any others in my master’s house." - In my opinion, the main idea of the sentence is that Aklon was better than the other guy, not the idea that the battlemasters were great. So, I would replace this part of the sentence with "two best battlemasters."

 

Aklon (Z.W.Z.Y): Enval and the other guards in training did have access to Zardos and Tekashi, but only on a few occasions. My master wanted his guards to be trained as a cohesive unit, so the more individualistic styles of my tutors were only of limited use. Several older guards trained with Zardos and Tekashi to absorb their skills and adapt them for use by the others, but I was the only one to train regularly with them. (End Dialogue)

 

I am afraid I did not understand this paragraph. Could you please explain again why Enval did not train with these battlemasters?

 

By the time I left my master’s house, Enval had matured considerably and his political skills had become very formidable. (End Dialogue)

 

I would delete "considerably"(or replace it with "considerably matured") and change "very formidable" to "formidable".

 

 

Cheers! And no, hitting me with something heavy is out of the question: Russia is far, far away!

[Domi]

In other words, I think that the shorter PC's options are, the better. Otherwise you may end up "playing the player's character for them." (guilty!)

 

While I agree with the simplification and weeding out the 'cute' words (this is probably the most common flaw I have seen in the mod writing), I don't like too simple PC options. I think it is desirable to add flavor to them. I like the most the idea of maintaing 'types' of PC throughout a dialogue sequences. Yes, there might not be a reply that will satisfy a particular player with a strong idea for who his PC is and how he talks, but not doing so will render all PCs bland and boring...

 

My two cents, and I am guessing that any discussion of this particular topic might be better of in a more general forum since it is of a generic interest, rather than localized.

[RavenBlack]

Aklon (B): In truth, my wandering keeps me from coming to know most of the people I have met. Still, there have been times when I traveled with others, as I do now, and a few periods when I stayed in one place. So I have come to know a few people.

 

I'd get rid of the "still", but the "so" looks weird too. It almost begs to have a comma in front of it instead of a period, but that would probably result in a run-on sentence. Run-ons = not pretty.

[BigRob]

First, thank you for the preview.

 

Are you ready for some unpleasantness? If 'yes', here we go:

 

I'm ready for some constructive advice.

 

My thoughts on the whole of it: I am a devoted Slytherin, so my emotional reaction and sympathy lay with Draco... I mean Elvan, here. This is subjective, but since we Slytherins are many and mighty, it is a point to keep in mind, I think.

I realise I may be burned at the stake for this, but that entire reference ran right past me... except that you don't think Enval is at fault in their relationship.

 

 

Now, bit by bit and little by little:

 

I’ve heard a bit about your education and your travels, but you’ve only spoken about your tutors. Surely you must have met other people in your travels and come to know them.

 

Some players do not use contractions in their speech at all, prefering long and important "I have been thinking" to short and informal "I've been thinking." Two contractions draw attention even more, in my opinion.

I do use a lot of contractions for CHARNAME, mostly because Aklon never uses any and it's a useful way for me to get Aklon's voice out of my head. Many of the dialogues in vanilla BG2 use contractions for CHARNAME, so I don't think it's a probelm to leave a few in, but it might be a good idea for me to go back when I've finsihed writing and edit some of the more glaring examples out.

 

"In truth" and "still" - both are good additions, but two phrases in a row opening with an introductory word do not look well to me. (And bear in mind that the third phrase opens with "So".)  I would get rid either of "in truth" or "still".

 

 

Aklon (B): In truth, my wandering keeps me from coming to know most of the people I have met. Still, there have been times when I traveled with others, as I do now, and a few periods when I stayed in one place. So I have come to know a few people.

 

I'd get rid of the "still", but the "so" looks weird too. It almost begs to have a comma in front of it instead of a period, but that would probably result in a run-on sentence. Run-ons = not pretty.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

"In truth" and "still" - both are good additions, but two phrases in a row opening with an introductory word do not look well to me. (And bear in mind that the third phrase opens with "So".)  I would get rid either of "in truth" or "still".

 

I'll bit the bullet on this one, that opening reads very strangely, almost liek the sentences are totally disconnected.

 

How's this for a quick rewrite?

 

Aklon (B): In truth, my wandering keeps me from becoming close to most of the people I have met. Yet, there have been times when I stayed in one place, or traveled with others, as I do now, so there were some people I grew to know.

 

 

Further, the reader meets with "come to know" three times in total, which also looks awkward. I would delete/replace "coming to know" in the first sentence,  ("getting close to", etc. ) I think it would do the job.

Ouch, yeah that is another problem... hopefully fixed in the rewrite above.

 

 

From PC's view; a logical question here would be: "Why do you keep wandering and never linger in one place?" or some such. The question asks itself, here. Unless it is answered in the earlier portion of the romance, there might be some confusion.

There's a whole other Forcetalk option more or less dedicated to that, so I think that should be OK.

 

 

3. I suppose you learned blacksmithing from Canethil.

 

Three of the answers are questions, so I think making this one a question ("Did you learn blacksmithing from Canethil?") would improve this selection of choices. Besides, not everybody uses "I suppose" tag, but nearly everybody would ask a plain question in a simple manner.

 

In other words, I think that the shorter PC's options are, the better. Otherwise you may end up "playing the player's character for them." (guilty!)

 

While I agree with the simplification and weeding out the 'cute' words (this is probably the most common flaw I have seen in the mod writing), I don't like too simple PC options. I think it is desirable to add flavor to them. I like the most the idea of maintaing 'types' of PC throughout a dialogue sequences. Yes, there might not be a reply that will satisfy a particular player with a strong idea for who his PC is and how he talks, but not doing so will render all PCs bland and boring...

 

My two cents, and I am guessing that any discussion of this particular topic might be better of in a more general forum since it is of a generic interest, rather than localized. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Unsurprisingly, I agree with Domi on this one. Without a little variety in the wording, the dialogue choices will boil down to:

1. Who was X?

2. Who was Y?

3. Who was Z?

 

Which does look pretty sad after seeing it 2 or 3 times. Even if a player doesn't like the exact wording, it is just a basic question and they can rationalise that your character wouldn't say exactly that, but would ask the question. At least, that's what I do in vanilla BG2 when I'm presented with a choice like that. When something shows feeling or opinion, I try to allow for at least 2 choices, but for neutral questions I try to make a neutral option and stick with it.

 

Enval did indeed attend some lessons with me, though his education as a guardsman was different to mine. He and I did not get along very well. We were rivals, if not actual enemies.

 

Do you really need "indeed" and "actual" here? Without them, the speech would be more alive, in my opinion.

I don't exactly need them, but part of Aklon's "voice" is that his speech is stilted sometimes. Some of it also comes form my writing, but this is one occasion where I'd like to leave traces of it.

 

I might strip out the "actual" though.

 

Consequently, Enval had a comparatively easy childhood, though knowing his father, I am sure that it was not too easy.

 

Double "easy" here creates some awkwardness. Lenient, undemanding, carefree, comfortable, prosperous, well-to-do - any of them might work as a replacement, I think.

Yep, Domi already pointed that one out... It's going to get a complete workover.

 

Despite Enval’s prodigious talent for the arts of war, I, a slave, and younger than him to boot, was given almost exclusive access to two battlemasters who far outstripped any others in my master’s house. I think this rankled more than a little.

 

"almost exclusive access" - does not sound well to me. "Given permission," perhaps? "Privilege"? A battlemaster (or two) took a liking to him?

 

"two battlemasters who far outstripped any others in my master’s house." - In my opinion, the main idea of the sentence is that Aklon was better than the other guy, not the idea that the battlemasters were great. So, I would replace this part of the sentence with "two best battlemasters."

Now that I think about it, "given almost exclusive access" doesn't accurately describe what happened anyway... so as a rewrite:

 

Despite Enval’s prodigious talent for the arts of war, I, a slave, and younger than him to boot, was trained by two great battlemasters, while the guards had to look to their own for instruction. I think this rankled more than a little.

 

Aklon (Z.W.Z.Y): Enval and the other guards in training did have access to Zardos and Tekashi, but only on a few occasions. My master wanted his guards to be trained as a cohesive unit, so the more individualistic styles of my tutors were only of limited use. Several older guards trained with Zardos and Tekashi to absorb their skills and adapt them for use by the others, but I was the only one to train regularly with them. (End Dialogue)

 

I am afraid I did not understand this paragraph. Could you please explain again why Enval did not train with these battlemasters?

OK, it reads fine to me, but I know the story behind it, so maybe it's not an easy read for others.

 

 

Aklon (Z.W.Z.Y): Enval and the other guards in training did have access to Zardos and Tekashi, but only on a few occasions. My master wanted his guards to be soldiers, to fight as one being. My tutors were warriors, fighting as individuals, so their styles of battle were only of limited use to the guards. Some of the older guards trained with Zardos and Tekashi to absorb their skills and adapt them for use by the others, but I was the only one to train regularly with them. (End Dialogue)

 

Better?

 

By the time I left my master’s house, Enval had matured considerably and his political skills had become very formidable. (End Dialogue)

 

I would delete "considerably"(or replace it with "considerably matured") and change "very formidable" to "formidable".

Another example of me shoving in adjectives like a madman, which KIrving picked up on too.

 

Personally, I like the ring of "matured considerably", I think it's fine in there.

 

Cheers! And no, hitting me with something heavy is out of the question: Russia is far, far away!

No worries, fair criticism is fair criticism after all.

[Kulyok]

Aklon (B): In truth, my wandering keeps me from becoming close to most of the people I have met. Yet, there have been times when I stayed in one place, or traveled with others, as I do now, so there were some people I grew to know.

 

Very good, I think. I'd replace "have met" with "meet" and "have been times" with "were times."

 

Unsurprisingly, I agree with Domi on this one.

 

You may find this thread interesting:

http://www.gamejag.net/index.php?name=PNph...ewtopic&t=66693

 

Better?

 

Yes, I think I understand now, thank you.

[Domi]

The more I read of this chanced remarks by Gaider, the more I think - how fortunate we are compared to Bio:

 

You are certainly not under the same restriction we were (one line maximum...both to restrict word-count and to keep the responses as generic as possible)...

[Kulyok]

I think I am fortunate they did. I played Anomen, Viconia and Aerie, with flirts and without, and I will play them again, as I will Kelsey and Coran.

 

I will not play Edwin and Jon - I will read them, since there are no responses I would chose - not even remotely. The mods lose a lot because of that thing David Gaider mentioned:

 

One thing I notice is that you put a lot of personality into the PC's responses. You are certainly not under the same restriction we were (one line maximum...both to restrict word-count and to keep the responses as generic as possible)...but the majority of the responses seem tailored to a specific type of character. I know more than a few people who might complain at the extended responses where you're 'playing their character for them'.

[Domi]

My argument in defense of a character responce will be the following. Three years down the road after all is said and done, I can quote one single line from Kelsey:

 

"Things are bad enough without me being taken for a whore."

 

The rest of my recollections are very vague. It might not be the best example (I think the line was not his).

 

Allow me to quote Merja, here, who has that gift of saying things in a such a precise way, that they can't be just reformulated. Merja once told me, long ago, when the question of 'is Kelsey a MS or not?' was raised: "I wish that JC had written a Mary-Sue, not Kelsey." In other words, Jason aka Kelsey is sweet and all, Jason aka Jason is sharper, more intelligent, more provoqing, more interesting in his writing.

 

To me that statement applied to both NPC speech and PC speech. Departing from Kelsey, I love BG1 so much because PC gets options like "Frolicking nymphs" at the Wyrm's crossing or 'in character' Journal entries.

 

Memorable dialogue, enjoyable dialogue happens, in my, and only in my opinion, when PC is at least a match to the NPC, not simply anyone who queries him or serves as a cue giver. When I talk to an NPC, yes, I am interested in the NPC, and his or her background, but I am also interested in my PC, and how he would be percieved through the NPC's eyes. Otherwise, the goal of interactivity is lost. NPCs might as well just recite monologues, till PC pushes a 'please, no more" button.

 

Now, on the question of the PC option lengthiness... (shuts up speedily)

[Kulyok]

Memorable dialogue, enjoyable dialogue happens, in my, and only in my opinion, when PC is at least a match to the NPC, not simply anyone who queries him or serves as a cue giver. When I talk to an NPC, yes, I am interested in the NPC, and his or her background, but I am also interested in my PC, and how he would be percieved through the NPC's eyes. Otherwise, the goal of interactivity is lost. NPCs might as well just recite monologues, till PC pushes a 'please, no more" button.

 

Has anybody but you wrote the PC-NPC dialogue for which you could say: "Yes, this is my PC through and through, and she is brilliant!" ?