Have you ever had any ideas for an RPG where the main "combat" mechanic is debating? Do you think it's possible to do in a "real" way? I.e. not completely railroaded like Danganronpa. I mean, I know a debate is gonna be somewhat railroaded either way, but I meant leaving at least some sort of freedom for deviation in how each individual debate might go depending on what kinds of arguments you present.And I mean without the cop-out of "just connect the game to an LLM", that seems like a huge hassle for relatively little pay-off, at least for now.
>>748894756>Call it the big faggot who free kills people
if you can win the debate using fallacies and dishonest tactics that don't actually reach the truth but convinces the audience then yes
Gnosia has this a bit but its more like werewolf single player where you influence npcs.The level system gives skills and stats to influence it more.Its not "topical" like a murder debate would be tho
it's impossible to "win" a debate because the very idea of a debate is a discussion wherein two parties bring in the entire sum of their life experiences to talk about a topic from their understanding, the only people who think a debate can be "won" are people without said internal world who don't talk to discuss, but only to convince an imaginary audience in their head and so they speak past their opponent to the proverbial crowd and "win" based on how many imaginary points they achieved to do with how cool they think they looked from the side, and those people are idiots who should not be debated witha debate cannot be won
>>748894756I'm so sick of this AI slop in every OP. Look at those veins on the guy in the middle
>>748894934anon, insincerely behaving like an idiot isn't going to convince anyone that you're an idiot for it except idiotshowever, you are nonetheless an idiot for attempting to do so anywayso i guess we've come full circle regardless
>>748895120Jeet trying to use big words to sound smartGo stand in front of a train. Do it at rush hour. Six o' clock on the DOT.
>>748895304...what?none of those words are even "big"are you an idiot?
>>748894756no, dialogue trees are inferior to an actual combat ruleset
>>748894934If you really need a (you) so hard just ask for it, Anon.
were people in ancient greece really this jacked?
>>748896002>eat healthy non-super-processes food>walk a lotIt's really that easy.
>>748894756Maybe a game where debate occurs, but instead of a judgement about who won or lost the debate, it's a judgement about who selected the topic. So, a 1v1v1, one player is randomly assigned as the judge, one of the other two is randomly selected to choose the topic of debate without the judge knowing which of the two it is. There's an arbitrary period for each player to prepare, then they debate, then the judge attempts to guess who chose the topic. It's a convoluted design that tries to address the problem of having the losing player feel upset or maligned (to an extent that ruins the fun of the game) in a more standard approach, while still maintaining the spirit of the original competition. The available pool of topics could be randomized/constrained each round to try to reduce the impact of pregame preparation and meta-gaming.
>>748896002>>748896128People underestimate just how healthy regular everyday life is when everything isn't automatedJust cooking, cleaning, laundering, going to the market, crafting things, gardening, etc, even the most minimal of work stacks up when it requires constant physical work, even if it's not hard or laborious, it's a small amount of effort that we lose everytime we start using gadgets or heating up premade food or ordering our groceries instead of going to the store, it used to be even more labor intensive when you had to spin your own cream or churn your own butter and stuff but even now there's every opportunity to do things manually which people give up on everyday
>>748894756It's called phoenix wright.
>>748894756You fight like a dairy farmer!
>>748894870Thanks for that completely useless reply that had nothing to do with what OP was referring to.
>>748894756I don't think this one is possible.If you wanted to present an actual, naturally flowing debate, with no concessions given for gameplay, that would require an utterly prohibitive amount of writing. Just for even one debate, the amount of choices you can make and the number of orders you might make them in would cause it to balloon in size exponentially relative the length of the debate.If you abstracted the act of debating down until such a volume of writing is no longer required, what you're left with likely wouldn't feel like a debate anymore, and certainly wouldn't look like one in writing.
>>748894756AA, and the indie flash clone based on philosophy come to mind. They don't really branch. >Do you think it's possible to do in a "real" way?Complicated VN mechanics like in Disco Elysium can do it. See how the various internal voices argue.
>>748896732How appropriate. You fight like a cow!
>>748894756Some of the Three Kingdoms games have "debates" that are basically just turn based battles
>>748896534You didn't read past the first sentence did you?
>>748900570Cows can kill a person
>>748905730Behold, a person!
>>748905917But that's just a featherless chicken!
>>748894756Possible without a doubt, not for for me though
