Forum:Generic characters project

I recently proposed a new project idea to Ausir, and I will now proceed to quote myself so I can save my wrists a workout:

He seemed to like the idea, so I am here to discuss what the layout of the generic character pages should be with the good people of the Vault. Some simple ideas I have so far are included in the quote, and as a refresher I am proposing to list generic characters of one organisation or profession similarly to how creatures are now listed following the recent Fallout: New Vegas and Fallout: 3 creature projects. Also, I would assume that a new kind of stats box similar to the creatures' can be created for the cause.

Note that this would apply to all generic characters, not just faction related characters. This means it could include the likes of prospectors and townspeople. For townspeople for example a page could be created as "Mojave citizens" and different denominations could be listed such as "Novac citizen", "Primm citizen", "Goodsprings settler", "Gambler" etc. etc. It is up to you to discuss how effective you think this is and how it should be implemented.

To see the original conversation, see here and here. User Avatar talk.png
 * Finally!!!!!!! that whole topic irks, hell there isn't even a overview page for generic characters. But I dont like the idea of grouping similar npc's together. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 23:32, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * What would you prefer? --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 23:50, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well for starters we need to get a overview page in place to be able to work from and manage our efforts, move characters to named characters and create a generic characters overview page. As for generic character the pages themselves, defiantly need a overall layout policy that combines the current characters and creatures layouts to best suit the subject matter in question. But they need to be separate, I don't think merging them like creatures where would be a good idea. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 00:28, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * I created the discussion to talk about the general guidelines of the potential project, and I fear I would make a complete mess of the overview pages as I haven't done anything like that before. Anyway, are you suggesting characters like my townspeople example be kept seperate and faction characters merged or something else (i.e. all characters alone) because it's very early here and my insomnia isn't letting me function properly :P --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 00:52, May 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * Depends on the level of aggregation, I suppose. I think it makes sense to put e.g. all Chinese remnant soldier or raider variants on one page, but e.g. all town inhabitants on one page might be a bit too much. -- Porter21 (talk) 00:44, May 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I can see what you mean although it was simply the first example that came to mind. Ausir suggested including not only faction characters and townspeople seemed to fit the bill. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 00:54, May 18, 2011 (UTC)

Does this only go for New Vegas and/or Fallout 3? Or do you want to do this with nameless NPCs in all games?--RAM 17:46, May 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well this is why we're discussing guidelines here before any project is officially started. Also it might depend on what Ausir is interested in covering. It might be easier if this single project covers just New Vegas and 3, and the rest could be for another time or started simultaneously. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 19:00, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah it would probably be easier to just do NV/FO3 NPCs but at the same time if we're gonna take on a project we might as well work to get it done and not do it little by little.--RAM 07:44, May 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * What do you mean little by little? And we need a new stat box design (like the creatures) then this thing will begin moving sooner although I'm not looking forward to the overview page lol. And there seems to be some disagreement as to what we should be covering (see above). --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 13:21, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

What I mean is if we're gonna do this with NV/FO3 NPCs then at some point we're gonna do it with FO/FO2 NPCs too so we might as well start this project with all games and get it done as soon as possible instead of do a NV/FO3 overhaul now then latter on tackle the FO/FO2 NPCs. However this is a big project so we might have to do it game by game but I think if we do it that way it may take longer to finish. Also your right that overview page may be a problem.--RAM 16:10, May 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * We could do them both simultaneously then, although I'm slightly weary about splitting them up into each individual game as that could make keeping track of things a lot more difficult, and create unnecessary projects when we could just do a FO3/FNV project alongside a FO1/FO2 but it depends how people feel. I'm slightly worried however that we may conflict with the current FO1/2 NPC project though so we might have to hold off on this for now. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif [[File:User Avatar talk.png|x13px|User talk:Cartman!


 * link=User talk:Cartman!]] 17:03, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Lets see what some of the other members have to say before we do anything.--RAM 18:42, May 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course! --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 19:29, May 20, 2011 (UTC)


 * You'll have to start by discussing & creating a general layout for the generic character pages anyway, and that'd apply to all games. I wouldn't worry too much about it for now, getting the layout done and agreeing on things like what the stat tables should look like or what level of aggregation is appropriate is more important if you want to get this off the ground. -- Porter21 (talk) 11:43, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * I might attempt to make some kind of mock up page later on. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 13:05, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Here it is: Page test 1

Note that the inventory box is there as a placeholder until something far more efficient is thought up that can contain stats information and maybe other information such as karma? I've removed the interactions box aswell as I see it as somewhat pointless because unnamed non-unique characters very rarely fit into any of those categories. Also I mention it on the page and I'll mention it again, it is a very basic plan and isn't to be taken as the final product and anything can be changed if it need to be. I'm struggling to think of good titles for the pages and that is probably evident, although something like "Caesar's Legion NPCs" doesn't seem right to me though. We still need to discuss how this affects non-faction characters. --User Avatar talk.png 14:54, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, this may seem like an arbitrary point but as the creature stat box extends across the entire length of the page and essentially divides the individual entries it looks a lot better than the short and stubby items box. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 14:59, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * See here for an example of what I mean. To me it looks a lot better. And yes I've ripped off the creatures stat box, and no I'm not suggesting we use it at all; I've included the box just to see how it looks. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 15:09, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * I would treat them no different than creatures (ie: cross-game overview page and game specific pages), after all humans are creatures just like any others. The only real question here is due to the large amount of variants of humans, how far do we go to splitting them up into there own pages and how do we separate them (ie: by name, by faction, by location etc). User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 18:03, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

I say we seperate them by faction. If they are not part of one then seperate them by location. Also I like the example that Cartman! made. I think it needs a little work but its a start.--RAM 18:30, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Definitely their own game specific pages, grouping by location is probably a bit too far though unless they're named by that location, or you could give an example? I'm thinking something like "New Vegas residents" with Freeside citizens, North vegas citizens, Westside etc. And to simplify legionaries due to the amount of them a split could be created e.g. an infantry page? Or perhaps something like a contubernia including decanii and recruits, primes etc? Could be applied to other factions. It's just an example. And of course it needs work I've emphasised that a lot lol. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 19:01, May 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well first things first, for page splits you need to see what kind of scope you are dealing with. For example, gambler alone seems to have around 100 entries in the GECK, Kings gang member has around 50. So both of those have a potential of creating huge stat tables alone. Having both of those on the same page (ie: New Vegas residents) along with others that fall into the same grouping is going to make that one hell of a long page. Same for NCR soldiers, around 100 NCR ranger entries and 200 NCR trooper entries, plus all the other variants. I think looking at that, keeping them separate by name is the best thing if we are going to be including stats in the page. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 19:14, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Your right, faction and location splits would make for pages that are way to long. I was thinking of spliting them by faction or location because it would seem easier to find in a search. However listing them by name would be easier and with so many different entries thats pretty much the only way to do it.--RAM 19:29, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah you're right, that is definitely a problem. Maybe only group those with fewer GECK entries? Nah, this won't make things any easier. --User Avatar talk.png 19:42, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

I thought it was a great idea to group the factions non named chain of command or variation. It puts more information at a singel mouse click.

But I would still like to at least see Base IDs add to nameless faction underlings. i.e what is the Base ID of a Scorpion gang female leader ?

That was broke afore I got here! 19:13, May 27, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes that would be included, just like creatures. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 21:57, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

Not that I've done many edits so not sure if this would work out or not but for types of NPC's with many geck variations instead of listing every one you could just have ranges such as if looking at hp it could 200-350 and I don't see any point in putting all of them in so that I can find info on say a female NCR trooper with blonde hair and blue eyes as I'm assuming most of the variations just exist to create different appearances. Frantruck 00:40, June 2, 2011 (UTC)

My main concern with this is the question of where to draw the line on the different NPCs included. Are there going to be ten different versions of one NPC-type because there are minor variations in stats between the different NPCs? Since the actual choice is rather arbitrary, I suggest an agreed upon method for choosing the NPCs. For example, from the GECK, only choose the first Centurion and from then onwards, only choose the first of any NPC. The stats/inventory/etc. listed could be "Damage: from 1 - 10" or "Inventory: blah blah blah" (or something similar, you get the picture). This would allow for consistency throughout the project instead of people choosing a.) the particular NPC at random (and therefore giving a picture too specific) or b.) choosing 10 of the same NPCs overall.

Since people come here for relevant information, not complete-GECK-information (well, for the most part they don't), I suggest a pragmatic approach to the list of NPCs used. 3nexx 07:47, June 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Many generic characters use a "template" system - i.e. a lot of specific instances are based on one "template" character. Listing those template characters only plus the ones which play a role in an encounter/quest would greatly reduce the amount of variants to list. -- Porter21 (talk) 08:19, June 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Sure thing. As long as everybody adheres to that as a system it works well. That said, NPCs which are encounter-based don't always have the template character and the stats or equipment can vary slightly. Would the slight variations warrant separate listings for information's sake? (I'm not being sarcastic; I'm asking genuinely.) Perhaps in the case of a small variation only in inventory an aggregate would be used. 3nexx 08:45, June 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * This could potentially solve the GECK problem, and as for people adhering to the system, it shouldn't be a problem really as the information will be highlighted on the eventual overview page just like any other project guideline. I don't think the slight variations would warrant entire different entries but perhaps a seperate attached box as per the creature pages with the relevant information detailed there. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 20:47, June 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * Great Idea, I always liked the layout for the creatures page's, whereas you could simply scroll down to compare stats between beasties, however as 3nexx noted the issue between slight differences in stats may hinder the process of categorizing the NPC's, however a way to fix this problem would be simple, just find the most common version of an NPC type, say Brotherhood knight, and then add a +(2-5) or -(2-5) points to the end of whatever attribute is slightly different for other NPC's to the common version, or just link the other variations to the generic common version below it's stats, either way works really.---Autumn- 04:44, July 23, 2011 (UTC)