RTJEBADIA | 19 Sep 2014 3:12 p.m. PST |
Anyone considered using these: link In a way not unlike the morality system in DnD but for personality for NPCs? |
McLaddie | 19 Sep 2014 4:41 p.m. PST |
I know the Myers-Briggs. [I've worked with them at their Gainsville, Florida offices] but determining how those traits translate to behaviors in command for a NPC in a wargame is the issue. Having designed games to simply teach M-Bs to peopel, I think it would be rather complicated to use in a game. Perhaps the reduced Keirsey-Bates version with just four categories might be easier to use. |
Extra Crispy | 19 Sep 2014 4:45 p.m. PST |
Once upon a time I bought an RPG product for D&D. It had tables for generating random personalities. You rolled a D20 to get a chapter, then a D20 to get a section, then a D20 to get a result. It gave you a paragraph describing the character. In the end we just cut the book up and made them into cards and drew them out of a hat. But that was 30+ years ago…. |
RTJEBADIA | 19 Sep 2014 5:11 p.m. PST |
I'm more thinking of the applicability of this to an RPG than a straight war-game. That said you lead me here: link Which seems even further in the right direction. |
TNE2300 | 19 Sep 2014 6:52 p.m. PST |
the GDW House System introduced the NPC Motivation Table draw two cards from a standard deck of playing cards quick, easy, workable chart reproduced here link |
etotheipi | 19 Sep 2014 7:31 p.m. PST |
|
RTJEBADIA | 19 Sep 2014 8:46 p.m. PST |
I like the NPC Motivations… but some of them feel more like extra traits (things like Brutal) where I'm more interested in a more general basis for personalities, almost like a class or stat system. Definitely something to consider, though. |
McLaddie | 19 Sep 2014 9:12 p.m. PST |
The NT NF SP SJ are the Kersey-Bates melding of the Myers-Briggs given on that link. The rest of the stuff is simply breaking out into Myers-Briggs sixteen types again. Four are far easier to deal with than sixteen. The Harry Potter chart is forced just a mite to get all sixteen types portrayed. For instance, there is nothing in Hermonie Granger's behavior in the HP books to suggest she is a INTP but you can't have her profile the same as Malfoy's… |
RTJEBADIA | 19 Sep 2014 11:33 p.m. PST |
Would it perhaps be a better to direction to think in character archetypes from fiction? Maybe I need to look through TvTropes… Then again a quick scan suggests that a lot of those can actually be traced back to Myers-Briggs concepts, anyway. Because I'm thinking about designing an RPG-ish type game that focuses more on personalities than other elements I'm fine with having a wider range than 4 types. In fact I'm thinking of taking the 4 spectrums and treating them as such, not as a simple binary. After that there is still ability (two people might both be "rational" types but one might be a greater thinker than the other) and perhaps also codes of morality which will say what their higher ideals are. Of course where things get really complicated is how those would interact. Is it really possible to have someone who is very extroverted but also completely uncharismatic? My personal experience says yes, but maybe those folks were actually just introverts being 'forced' into very social situations… |
Caliban | 20 Sep 2014 8:06 a.m. PST |
The book Exatr Cispy mentioned is called 'Central Casting' by Paul Jaquays, and is available as a free download here: link I have an original copy of this one and the second in the series, for Sci-Fi RPGs. There was a third for modern period/horror, but I didn't buy that at the time. I haven't been able to find either of these online, although they are probably out there somewhere… |
McLaddie | 20 Sep 2014 10:03 a.m. PST |
Of course where things get really complicated is how those would interact. Is it really possible to have someone who is very extroverted but also completely uncharismatic? My personal experience says yes, but maybe those folks were actually just introverts being 'forced' into very social situations… Sure, introverts can be charismatic too. A good book describing the interactions of the four Keirsey types is his book "PLease Understand Me" [Get the first addition, Please Understand Me II isn't as good] link Another book that might help, which is for novel writers is; "Heros and Heroines: The Complete Writer's Guide to Heroes and Heroines: Sixteen Master Archetypes" which includes men and women, along with their interactions. link |
RTJEBADIA | 20 Sep 2014 2:31 p.m. PST |
Thanks for the links! I didn't mean to suggest introverts couldn't be charismatic… its more that, when you look at the Keirsey types, they seem to interpret personality into proficiency in different fields. Which tends to mean certain personalities are implied to be better at certain things, such as persuasion, but that doesn't seem to be case when you delve deeper. |
ravachol | 20 Sep 2014 7:34 p.m. PST |
how do you deal with characters bearing equally both sides of a question or nonne of another ? |
McLaddie | 20 Sep 2014 11:40 p.m. PST |
Which tends to mean certain personalities are implied to be better at certain things, such as persuasion, but that doesn't seem to be case when you delve deeper. Actually, the Myers-Briggs [and after the legion of later variants] were attempting to find the work that different people gravitated to rather than necessarily were better at,but had a temperament for… which implies but doesn't promise better performance. The mother-daughter team of Myers-Briggs came up with their Temperament Sorter/type indicator for the army at the beginning of WWII. So an ESTP might gravitate to sales, but that doesn't mean they would be really good at persuasion, which is why when you delve deeper that being better as certain things seems to dissipate. how do you deal with characters bearing equally both sides of a question or nonne of another ? Not sure what you mean. |
RTJEBADIA | 21 Sep 2014 9:25 p.m. PST |
I think he's saying how do you deal with someone who isn't particularly extroverted OR introverted, for example. I've only just started reading websites and books about this so I can't say for sure… though if all the additional stuff about primary/secondary/tertiary modes of thinking is accurate then presumably whichever one someone leans toward will still determine their basic structure, but its just that they're more likely to switch over in some circumstances. I figure having some random element should pretty much cover that (i.e. if a character is extroverted they're likely to go to the party, if they're introverted they're unlikely to go, if they're in between they'll go sometimes). |
McLaddie | 22 Sep 2014 7:29 a.m. PST |
Oh. Well, the traits are given as strengths of more or less. When you have someone with fairly weak preferences [that is what they are, like whether you enjoy apple pie or not], you will find that they tend to show both introvert and extrovertish behaviors, but neither particularly strong. I figure having some random element should pretty much cover that (i.e. if a character is extroverted they're likely to go to the party, if they're introverted they're unlikely to go, if they're in between they'll go sometimes). Actually, both introverts and extroverts would go to the party and enjoy themselves. However, the introvert would go knowing when they were going to leave, whereas an extrovert might be the last to leave. Introverts often find group activities enjoyable, but energy draining. Extroverts find group activities energizing. An introvert does something alone to recharge the batteries, the extrovert finds being alone energy draining even while doing something enjoyable. They seek company to recharge. |
Weasel | 22 Sep 2014 10:56 a.m. PST |
What I've found is that introverted people tend to be more interested in the reasons for going to the party (will friends be there? Is anything specific going on) while extroverts are more likely to be drawn by the fact that there is a party. |
OSchmidt | 25 Sep 2014 10:17 a.m. PST |
I don't know how the utility of dragging these more generalized tests into the hobby stacks up. We really are concerned with a narrow range of personality behaviors in war games and war. How much will introversion / extroversion count in a case of a fight for your life? Awareness and situation will also produce different things. I'm very much an introvert for example, but in social situations and at work I frequently have to masquerade as an extrovert for various purposes. There is always a difference between what we wish to do and what we must do. |
McLaddie | 26 Sep 2014 7:20 a.m. PST |
OSchmidt: It's true. As I said, I'm not sure how such traits could be used in a RPG, let alone a wargame. While we all do what we have to in social and work situations, 'masquerade' is a good word. It's like eating pumpkin pie when we really wanted apple. We can do it, but we wouldn't enjoy it as much, and if we cook, be much better at cooking an apple pie [from practice] than a pumpkin pie. Having said that, I can answer the question below: How much will introversion / extroversion count in a case of a fight for your life? An introvert is far less likely to communicate instructions in detail and operate separately. If you've seen NCIS, Gibbs is the penaltiment introvert. Everyone wonders what he is thinking because he doesn't talk, and uses very short sentences to communicate, if at all, even during a firefight. But he obviously gets the job done as a team leader as well as any extrovert. [such as Tony DiNozzo or Abby Sciuto] |
RTJEBADIA | 28 Sep 2014 11:01 a.m. PST |
I'm thinking for an RPG this could be pretty useful for npcs. One thing I'm starting to look into is how group dynamics are related to individual personalities. It can also be used to determine whether a character wants to do one thing or another, to some degree. Ultimately if you combine a system for measuring different personalities with a way of measuring moral priorities and motivations, you have a pretty good way of determining most of the "big decisions" that aren't simply following tactical orders. Might not be useful in a military wargame but for a fantasy or SF or old west skirmish campaign I think there are a lot of things that aren't simply soldiers following orders or failing to do so due to morale. |