I posted this in another thread previously, where it was a out-of-nowhere type, discussion-breaking post, so I decided to dedicate a thread to it.
I've been writing a dialogue system which I'd like to call a "turn-based dialogue" (just as a gimmick). To give a rough outline, NPCs have varying, context-sensitive limits of time, or "turns" allocatable to dialogue at any given moment. These include current tasks and situations, like hostility, surprise, working hours, idle, well-being, eating etc., as well as special conditions for quests, with appropriate answers associated with these situations. So, there are base values for how long a NPC can take the time to talk and how many times you can bugger a NPC during one instance of such a situation. Then base values are affected by NPCs' own stats on the spot and constitute a final value for any given situation for the NPC in question.
Each dialogue option the PC can choose takes a certain amount of time, or "turns", and a dialogue option may dictate specific responses of specific lengths from NPCs. Each of these options also have base values of their own, which are affected by PC's stats and the outcome of both can affect the total time (that final value I mentioned above) a NPC can allocate to dialogue with PC, so the number of turns a dialogue can last is determined. This number can change on the fly during a dialogue. PC's stats coupled with good or bad dialogue options, may give fever or more turns for the dialogue to last, within the dynamic min. and max. limits I mentioned above. When your turns are over, NPC will start giving you appropriate responses associated with the situation should you insist on keep talking.
In addition to that, there are initial and optional "observation checks", and appropriate dialogue options associated with the results of these checks. An initial observation is an automatic roll whenever a NPC is lying, hiding something, is afraid of something or doing something shady during the dialogue (like, say, giving a signal secretly to someone somewhere you can't see, poisoning your drink as you speak or trying to extract information from you without alerting you). PC is either succesfull at noticing an anomaly or succesfull at identifying the anomaly itself or unsuccessfull at noticing anything. If PC is successfull at noticing or identifying an anomaly, relevant expression in NPC's dialogue lines becomes selectable (e.g. hyperlinked). You can make additional rolls for "optional observation" to try to identify the anomaly or confirm that something doesn't add up or just gain more information about an already identified anomaly, all by choosing the "observed" expression in the dialogue. Needles to say, only the relevant stats, depending on the situation, are taken into account for these rolls.
However, every one of these optional rolls go through the NPC. NPC may notice your efforts at leeching information from his or her actions, words or the immediate surroundings, and if (s)he does, that can alter the direction of the dialogue and the number of turns, both in a good or a bad way, as well the NPC's disposition. There are also situations when an option roll itself may take a turn as well. Alternatively, you can choose to ask the NPC about an observed anomaly directly, both before and after making optional rolls.
As for the presentation of observation; they either take place in the main dialogue box, next to the relevant dialogue text ( and in italic for example, with different colour coding), or a dedicated information box, like in Fallout. There may be hyperlinks to various bits of information within the observation text itself.
For example, you notice that the alchemist NPC does things as you speak. Through your stats, including sufficient level in an alchemy skill, you notice what he's doing, which may not be necessarily good or bad. As a result of your successfull initial observation, you notice that (read from information box) that he's adding X to Y while doing Z. X,Y and Z could be hyperlinked, so when you click on one, additional information (at no cost, since you've already made the observation based on your current information and experience) about it comes (preferrably in a new box). However note that you may not have observed to what end X,Y and Z are being used, mostly based on skill level. Now, if you believe your skill level should be sufficient, you could risk losing a turn at cost of an optional observation. Alternatively, you could give it a rest, and the next time you will read a book about alchemy, you will have recognised what that NPC was doing. System should keep track of observation checks of course, so it's not up to the player's memory or "player skill", but the emulation of character's memory.
Obviously, there should be a way to hint the player whether (s)he would have a chance of recognizing the observed situation after focusing, and I was thinking maybe colour coding on the observable expression. Also, with this specific example, there is also the problem of players remembering such processes and trying to find in-game workarounds. To overcome this problem, for this specific example (and many other similar ones), I've thought about making many variants of specific things, like formula here. Say, 15 different formulae for a posion so player isn't exactly encouraged to find out the answers from get-go. Another possible solution would be complete randomization of things, e.g. herbs, ingredients and formulae here, but that might break consistency and reasoning to a degree.
Remember again, this is but an example. I've come up with many different situations, from mundane to common, making use of many types of skills (diplomatic, social, military, roguish etc.) where this type of system would be suited to (and not the other way around, ie. coming up with situations specifically suited to this system), all with their own problems, and despite still having a long way to go, I know these can be overcome in meaningful ways, which is also why I'm describing the system here.
In addition to all of these, there are a number of ever-present dialogue options for changing the communication style (think Daggerfall; blunt, gentle) and other possible actions, all of these, everything tied to skills.
Without going into detail, it goes like that. Turn-based, or "tactical" dialogue. I've been wanting to write about it to get input, ideas and opinions from Codex for sometime, but have been hesitating. The part about dialogue in the OP in that other thread (about "immersion") fueled me for some reason. Sounds complicated perhaps, but it really is not. It has some flaws and issues, but nothing unsolvable I think. Hopefully, I'll go somewhere someday, making use of that.
I've been writing a dialogue system which I'd like to call a "turn-based dialogue" (just as a gimmick). To give a rough outline, NPCs have varying, context-sensitive limits of time, or "turns" allocatable to dialogue at any given moment. These include current tasks and situations, like hostility, surprise, working hours, idle, well-being, eating etc., as well as special conditions for quests, with appropriate answers associated with these situations. So, there are base values for how long a NPC can take the time to talk and how many times you can bugger a NPC during one instance of such a situation. Then base values are affected by NPCs' own stats on the spot and constitute a final value for any given situation for the NPC in question.
Each dialogue option the PC can choose takes a certain amount of time, or "turns", and a dialogue option may dictate specific responses of specific lengths from NPCs. Each of these options also have base values of their own, which are affected by PC's stats and the outcome of both can affect the total time (that final value I mentioned above) a NPC can allocate to dialogue with PC, so the number of turns a dialogue can last is determined. This number can change on the fly during a dialogue. PC's stats coupled with good or bad dialogue options, may give fever or more turns for the dialogue to last, within the dynamic min. and max. limits I mentioned above. When your turns are over, NPC will start giving you appropriate responses associated with the situation should you insist on keep talking.
In addition to that, there are initial and optional "observation checks", and appropriate dialogue options associated with the results of these checks. An initial observation is an automatic roll whenever a NPC is lying, hiding something, is afraid of something or doing something shady during the dialogue (like, say, giving a signal secretly to someone somewhere you can't see, poisoning your drink as you speak or trying to extract information from you without alerting you). PC is either succesfull at noticing an anomaly or succesfull at identifying the anomaly itself or unsuccessfull at noticing anything. If PC is successfull at noticing or identifying an anomaly, relevant expression in NPC's dialogue lines becomes selectable (e.g. hyperlinked). You can make additional rolls for "optional observation" to try to identify the anomaly or confirm that something doesn't add up or just gain more information about an already identified anomaly, all by choosing the "observed" expression in the dialogue. Needles to say, only the relevant stats, depending on the situation, are taken into account for these rolls.
However, every one of these optional rolls go through the NPC. NPC may notice your efforts at leeching information from his or her actions, words or the immediate surroundings, and if (s)he does, that can alter the direction of the dialogue and the number of turns, both in a good or a bad way, as well the NPC's disposition. There are also situations when an option roll itself may take a turn as well. Alternatively, you can choose to ask the NPC about an observed anomaly directly, both before and after making optional rolls.
As for the presentation of observation; they either take place in the main dialogue box, next to the relevant dialogue text ( and in italic for example, with different colour coding), or a dedicated information box, like in Fallout. There may be hyperlinks to various bits of information within the observation text itself.
For example, you notice that the alchemist NPC does things as you speak. Through your stats, including sufficient level in an alchemy skill, you notice what he's doing, which may not be necessarily good or bad. As a result of your successfull initial observation, you notice that (read from information box) that he's adding X to Y while doing Z. X,Y and Z could be hyperlinked, so when you click on one, additional information (at no cost, since you've already made the observation based on your current information and experience) about it comes (preferrably in a new box). However note that you may not have observed to what end X,Y and Z are being used, mostly based on skill level. Now, if you believe your skill level should be sufficient, you could risk losing a turn at cost of an optional observation. Alternatively, you could give it a rest, and the next time you will read a book about alchemy, you will have recognised what that NPC was doing. System should keep track of observation checks of course, so it's not up to the player's memory or "player skill", but the emulation of character's memory.
Obviously, there should be a way to hint the player whether (s)he would have a chance of recognizing the observed situation after focusing, and I was thinking maybe colour coding on the observable expression. Also, with this specific example, there is also the problem of players remembering such processes and trying to find in-game workarounds. To overcome this problem, for this specific example (and many other similar ones), I've thought about making many variants of specific things, like formula here. Say, 15 different formulae for a posion so player isn't exactly encouraged to find out the answers from get-go. Another possible solution would be complete randomization of things, e.g. herbs, ingredients and formulae here, but that might break consistency and reasoning to a degree.
Remember again, this is but an example. I've come up with many different situations, from mundane to common, making use of many types of skills (diplomatic, social, military, roguish etc.) where this type of system would be suited to (and not the other way around, ie. coming up with situations specifically suited to this system), all with their own problems, and despite still having a long way to go, I know these can be overcome in meaningful ways, which is also why I'm describing the system here.
In addition to all of these, there are a number of ever-present dialogue options for changing the communication style (think Daggerfall; blunt, gentle) and other possible actions, all of these, everything tied to skills.
Without going into detail, it goes like that. Turn-based, or "tactical" dialogue. I've been wanting to write about it to get input, ideas and opinions from Codex for sometime, but have been hesitating. The part about dialogue in the OP in that other thread (about "immersion") fueled me for some reason. Sounds complicated perhaps, but it really is not. It has some flaws and issues, but nothing unsolvable I think. Hopefully, I'll go somewhere someday, making use of that.