Inventions, technology and knowledge

[diavel]

In short my idea is that before you can make/build/tailor something you have to have a certain knowledge of making it represented by some artefacts/objects/blueprint/plan.

These objects can be obtained in various ways:
1. Invented. This takes very long time and costs some resources. It takes so long that it's more reasonable to go to the other side of the island. Not so long though to be more reasonable to go to other side of the World (balance needed). When someone invents technology he/she can put short term to the invented object name. For example somebody invents bone knife. He/she acquires knowledge (represented by some object, blueprint/plan) and is able to add some term, like "Zulu bone knife". There would not be any problem with translations, simply: "Zulu kościany nóż" or "Nibylandzki bone knife".
2. Learned from others. Character meets other character that already have such blueprint and asks for it. It can be copied and given away. It's instantaneous and it's the best way to acquire it although when you get "Zulu bone knife" blueprint any bone knife you make using it is seen as "Zulu bone knife", you can't change the name of it. To do that you must invent it again.
3. Reverse-engineered. When a character have something in his inventory (usual objects), is inside it (buildings, vehicles) or have access to it (machines) he can inspect it. It takes less time than option 1 and only allows to copy technologies (so the name Zulu stays). This is important for actual implementation of it in existing game. Unfortunately every thing will have to be reverse engineered assuming it's implemented. So it has to be pretty fast method.

- blueprints can be stored in inventory, on ground, inside buildings, etc.
- can be copied, given away, dropped, picked up
- are not notes - to avoid OOC copying
- are weightless
- can be grouped in well... groups (like notes in envelopes) and copied as whole groups
- every object (machine, vehicle, tool, weapon) has blueprint type (not actual blueprint, because blueprints can be deleted after creating objects) attached to it (to know that this bone knife is Zulu type)

Imagine lone nude guy sitting in a middle of a forest. He cannot do anything besides hunting animals. So he gathers some bones (food first of course) and uses it to invent bone knife. In building menu player can see every object (as it is today) and info if he/she can make it, if player cannot make it then it's shown how much resources is needed to invent it.

What would be cool about it is to see how technologies spread, make more diverse cantr-world, motivate wars and travels.

It's been probably suggested before although I've failed to find it.

[Gran]

I have a grudge againt synthetic knowledge: that is, knowledge without words, interpreted mechanically by characters. Is knowledge interesting? Yes. But when it doesn't require abstraction from the player it becomes, pardon me, ugly.

But all of this might spawn a nice discussion about the matter.

[diavel]

Well... I don't know how to make a car but my character does. It's synthetic knowledge already. The difference is - it's inborn instead of acquired.

[Gran]

Yes, innatism is synthetic in it's own way. But two wrongs don't make a right either. Do you have any idea on how the 'inventing' process would work? As a project, puzzle, something else?

Mind you that this issue is quite complex to overcome: Some of us tried to adress it, but none of us had sucess. So we need new ideas.

[diavel]

It won't be actual inventing - rather discovering things that are in game. Inventing from character's point of view.

I imagine inventing as a normal project that consumes a lot of time and some resources and outcome of it is a blueprint. For objects that need tools to be created you just use them on invention project the same way as on creation project. "Bone knife" creation project for example would need bones and blueprint for it - bones will be consumed but blueprint stays in inventory. Fur loincloth invention requires needle as a tool and fur as material. Then fur loincloth creation requires blueprint (tool?), needle (tool) and fur (material). When character dies he drops blueprints. I don't really see any disadvantages besides the need of some game mechanics changes.

What do you mean by "two wrongs"?

PS. I don't really see it being implemented, too many changes I think.

[gejyspa]

It's been probably suggested before although I've failed to find it.

It's been suggested several times before:
viewtopic.php?p=424635#p424635
viewtopic.php?p=108200#p108200

[Gran]

• 'What do you mean by "two wrongs"?'
• 'Well... I don't know how to make a car but my character does. It's synthetic knowledge already. The difference is - it's inborn instead of acquired.'

You mentioned that the innate knowledge our characters have is synthetic, true. But it seemed to me as you said it as to justify your own model, whereas that statement dos not have apologetic value. That fits in the loose definition of a certain fallacy, I believe. I'm talking fancy today, gents.

PS. I don't really see it being implemented, too many changes I think.

But don't get me wrong; I want to see this proposal all tied in it's ends and ready to go, even if it doesn't.

http://forum.cantr.org/viewtopic.php?p=424635#p424635
viewtopic.php?p=108200#p108200

HOLOLOLOL!

Really, I don't see how an 'invention system' could be seen by anyone as even possible to implement, let alone desirable. Who's going to process and screen the requests that'll be pouring in? Who gets the final decision? And who's going to deal with the inevitable b****ing and complaining on the forums when something unbalancing slips through?

If it was really him. I can see people spoofing him on his own implementation of birth in FTO. Actually might be just a matter of a word.

Back-on-track!


So summing up:

1. If one has no knowledge of a project( represented as a blueprint), he'll need to go through a debutting project, which has efficiency pelnalties.
2. Transfer of ideas occurs instantantly through copyable blueprints.
3. Reverse-engineering, self-explanatory.

Well, I'll do my best counter your points. Weak dialetics follow:

1. An inventing project is understandable. However going through it more than once isn't so: people are able to maintain a memory. As such, an opposing model would be one where the ability to make an X project is maintained after you invent it with no need to other objects other than the memory of your debut project and the building materials;
2. The concept of blueprints being used to transfer knowledge seems weak, as I complained before. On that matter all I can say is that the now late game "Generations" tried to implement a learning system and I believe it had sucess to a degree before it vanished. But it's also needed to honesty tell that such system used skilllearning, not the learning of a single idea. So my position is not strong by now;
3. No problem with knowledge being extracted out of objects. That is reasonable and also necessary.

On blueprints:
I know they seem necessary as a way to have indirect transfer of ideas, but it might be more interesting if notes could be used as a medium for such, with the implementation of a code by which players will be able to generate an idea, maybe as a browser renders an object: The implementation of knowledge tags. Thus ideas would be embedded into the written media and could be absorved after study. Take a look at what I propose( shit I cobbled together through the night):

Knife
Of all of cutting objects, the knife is the simplest and most useful. It can be made out of bone, with mere 100 grams of bone.

Code: Select all

[object][name]Knife/[name]
Of all of cutting objects, the knife is the simplest and most useful. It can be made out of bone, with mere [materials]100 grams of bone.[/materials][/object]


Steel Longsword
A sophisticated blade, the result of sturdy blade and hilt, assembled together with a peen hamer against the heavy anvil at a forge.

Code: Select all

[object][name]Steel Longsword[/name]
A sophisticated blade, the result of [materials][object=steel long sword blade]sturdy blade[object] and [object=medium steel hilt]hilt[/object][/materials], assembled together with a [tool]peen hamer[/tool] against the heavy [tool]anvil[/tool] at a forge.[/object]

P.S. Do my ideas sound disconnected? I feel so.

[diavel]

You mentioned that the innate knowledge our characters have is synthetic, true. But it seemed to me as you said it as to justify your own model, whereas that statement dos not have apologetic value. That fits in the loose definition of a certain fallacy, I believe. I'm talking fancy today, gents.

Yes you're right, although I don't think character's knowledge being synthetic is a bad solution, as you seem to assume this. It is how it is now with one difference I mentioned.

On blueprints:[/i]
I know they seem necessary as a way to have indirect transfer of ideas, but it might be more interesting if notes could be used as a medium for such, with the implementation of a code by which players will be able to generate an idea, maybe as a browser renders an object: The implementation of knowledge tags. Thus ideas would be embedded into the written media and could be absorved after study.

I'd prefer that solution too as it is more interesting and sophisticated and has more potential. Problem with knowledge being on the player's side (as I understand your idea) is that it can be easily used OOC. There is no such problem with artificial blueprints. Blueprint idea is imho simpler - it can be implemented using existing "projects" and "tools" entities.

I want to see this proposal all tied in it's ends and ready to go, even if it doesn't.

I agree that's why I posted it here.

[list=I][*]An inventing project is understandable. However going through it more than once isn't so: people are able to maintain a memory. As such, an opposing model would be one where the ability to make an X project is maintained after you invent it with no need to other objects other than the memory of your debut project and the building materials;

I think I didn't explain it clearly enough (explaining half baked complicated ideas in my second language isn't easy for me ). Inventing "bone knife" is only done once, at least once for "Zulu bone knife". If character has blueprint for it he/she can make as many "Zulu bone knives" as desired. Blueprints are used as tools not as materials. Once acquired they can be only removed by manual "delete" operation (like notes). If you mean that there can be "Zulu bone knife" and "Mesopotamian bone knife" well I see it that there are some slight differences in technologies or decorations (but described only by term "Zulu" or "Mesopotamian", not in description as it would require translations).

[*]The concept of blueprints being used to transfer knowledge seems weak, as I complained before. On that matter all I can say is that the now late game "Generations" tried to implement a learning system and I believe it had sucess to a degree before it vanished. But it's also needed to honesty tell that such system used skilllearning, not the learning of a single idea. So my position is not strong by now;

Yes I only meant learning single ideas without further complications. It's weak but it's relatively easy to implement and it's quite simple to understand. I actually would like other people to think about something even simpler that would be achievable.

There is one problem with discussing this. I have no idea how (awesomely) DB is designed and how big of a problem would be adding it. Is there any way of reviewing DB schema?

[Gran]

If you care for such things, you might aswell want to edit your post later.

My criticism on Synthetic Knowledge is that it limit's the semi-cultural and rp value of written knowledge. Today, the only notes which have some importance other than maps are newsletters and historic chronicles. Having tool-like information transfer would be the last handful of dirt over the grave of in-game literature.

I'd prefer that solution too as it is more interesting and sophisticated and has more potential. Problem with knowledge being on the player's side (as I understand your idea) is that it can be easily used OOC. There is no such problem with artificial blueprints. Blueprint idea is imho simpler - it can be implemented using existing "projects" and "tools" entities.

Yes, I understand that people could simple form that object withous making it if the code was implemented solely. It must require that before writting down, a character must execute a project which has all the characteristics described on the paper. Execution takes place before written record. If a person tries to write a project without making it, some solutions are possible:

1. The elements become scrambled, thus the project cannot be iniciated;
2. As a parallel version of above, any project arbitrarily made without previous experience will yield waste instead of it's desired item( though to be fair, wasted projects should be all deletable as to avoid silly sabotaging);
3. Just plain disallow it to happen, mechanics won't let.

I think I didn't explain it clearly enough [...] Inventing X is only done once, at least once for X. If character has blueprint for it he/she can make as many X items as desired. Blueprints are used as tools not as materials. Once acquired they can be only removed by manual "delete" operation (like notes).[...]

Well, I think I understood it quite well: BPs are tools, needed to make that project, thus needed everytime you want to execute. But what I concluded from this was, clarify if wrong, that if a person looses them, like one loses a hammer, a new BP will have to be crafted. If so, what I maintain is that knowledge is not easily lost like that. Instead of a BP what I suggest is that the ability to execute a certain project, once aquired, is stored inside that character's mind and becomes inalienable. For easy player access, it could be shown to him in his own character's page.

There is one problem with discussing this. I have no idea how (awesomely) DB is designed and how big of a problem would be adding it. Is there any way of reviewing DB schema?

Few of us do. We just suggest and let the little ProgD people work during the night.*

*Disclaimer: I'm not implying that the ProgD is staffed by elves, but it just aswell might.

[diavel]

My criticism on Synthetic Knowledge is that it limit's the semi-cultural and rp value of written knowledge. Today, the only notes which have some importance other than maps are newsletters and historic chronicles. Having tool-like information transfer would be the last handful of dirt over the grave of in-game literature.

I really doubt it would limit the semi-cultural and rp value of written knowledge more than unified generic technological inborn knowledge that it is today.

Yes, I understand that people could simple form that object without making it if the code was implemented solely. It must require that before writing down, a character must execute a project which has all the characteristics described on the paper. Execution takes place before written record. If a person tries to write a project without making it, some solutions are possible:

I don't understand why one would have to write it down anyway? Could you please rephrase your idea?

(...) if a person looses them, like one loses a hammer, a new BP will have to be crafted.(...)

Ah yes that would be true. Loosing blueprint would be similar to forgetting. Simple solution - make it non-removable from the inventory. There is no reason to delete learned blueprints anyway.

To play Devil's advocate I see a few problems with "my" idea:
- there would be a lot of blueprints everywhere if not properly organized
my solution:
force organization, take the tree structure from tools/weapons/cloths and always display blueprints in organized tree-like fashion, sorted by type ("Mesopotamian bone knife" before "Zulu bone knife"); make separate sub-page for blueprints after buildings, objects, people, location and sub-sub-pages for blueprints on the ground and in inventory
- how to gradually implement it not to cause major player outrage catastrophe
my partial solution:
First make all existing things not to require blueprint for creation; implement blueprints as copyable, movable objects (non-removable from inventory?); implement reverse-engineering; then implement inventing existing things with possibility of adding prefix to the name "Zulu", "Mesopotamian", "Nibylandzki" - this would let rich towns to spread their name at least with marketing; then add already suggested and planned things but with blueprint requirements; finally make all things require blueprints. Final part would be most awkward - it's like mega total memory loss epidemic.
- is it possible to make blueprints behave like tools (using on project), notes (copying, moving, weightless) and totally new thing (new sub-page in interface, influence on all other object creation process) without too much changes in existing mechanics? idk, probably not, too many changes for too little gain?
- yes, blueprints would be unrealistic abstract representation of ideas...
- it would make Cantr even more difficult for new players and possibly discourage existing players (?) or would it?

I don't really want to call it "my" idea and I invite others to present solution for aforementioned problems.

[Gran]

I really doubt it would limit the semi-cultural and rp value of written knowledge more than unified generic technological inborn knowledge that it is today.

I would be unsatisfied with both, so I'm proposing a third way. If one is worse than the other is a subjective matter, I admit. And one which will add few thing to this discussion;

I don't understand why one would have to write it down anyway? Could you please rephrase your idea?

Well, I don't really know how many commas I can jam into my text before it becomes an unintelligible mass of words. I'm sorry for it. Well, the way a process is executed would be recorded so that it can use a note as a vehicle of propagation, we've gone through this before when I talked a bit about BPs. In case you didn't understand the point I made on the balancing of the code against abuse, here I rephrase:

• The problem you posed to my Codified Model was that people could abuse it*, which I admited that could be an issue if no conditions are estabilished.
• I suppose you imagined that one could simply codify a project on a note and use that knowledge-bearing note to gain access to that project. That's why I estabilished these conditions:

Execution of a project is a prerequisite to its codification into a note. No note can be made without previous experience. Attempts made without "a priori" experience will fail. Either of these will happen: (Notice I merged items A and B into a single new A)

1. Elements may randomly appear or dissapear, a representation of skipping ingredients or certain stages of the project: The project will thus either result in no yield, or it will fail and waste some of the resources. An example would be one trying to forge a blade without previous experience or a note describing the necessary project: if the crafter spent 100g of iron, the project will finish as failed and yield back 80g of iron;
2. The project will not be iniciated, mechanics won't let.

To add fairness, I think projects which are doomed to fail should be possible to delete at any times. But possibly the best solution if no improvement is made would be B, since projects only yield a single resource at a time.

(...) if a person looses them, like one loses a hammer, a new BP will have to be crafted.(...)

Ah yes that would be true. Loosing blueprint would be similar to forgetting. Simple solution - make it non-removable from the inventory. There is no reason to delete learned blueprints anyway.

What you talk about is arond the same of what I proposed here:

I suggest is that once aquired the ability to execute a certain project is stored inside that character's mind and becomes inalienable. For easy player access, it could be shown to him in his own character's page.

See? We're actually agreeing.

Also, this whole idea seems to be getting complete and presentable in it's brainstorm side.

ADDITIONS:

How to gradually implement it not to cause major player outrage catastrophe [...]

Well, if the listing of all projects that people are alredy doing starts before the implementation of actual need of knowledge it would be less of a harm and avoid the possible societal collapse from the rediscovering all things. It only has to start in secret, so no one will try to do every single project they can to enlarge their "known-projects-ist";

Is it possible to make blueprints behave like tools, notes and totally new thing without too much changes in existing mechanics? [...] Too many changes for too little gain?

Well, listen to yourself. It'll need a rehaul of the game structure, certainly. But the gain in RP and diversion could be considerable;

Yes, blueprints would be unrealistic abstract representation of ideas...

That's the reason why I proposed a sort of a markup language to merge it with notes. Also why I refer to BPs as the "ability to execute a project";

It would make Cantr even more difficult for new players and/or possibly discourage existing players?

Well, given that subsistence projects are innate (harvesting and collecting), new players wouldn't have much of a problem. Just because now they have to glance upon a note/BP to know how to make a boneknife instead of glancing upon the Wiki it doesn't means things will get harder. As for existing players, I cannot say. I personally have no quarrels with it;

I don't really want to call it "my" idea and I invite others to present solution for aforementioned problems.

Well, I call dibs on the markup language idea. Because I think it's a friggin' brilliant idea and I wonder why I never had it before. You can take it and use it as you like though, be my guest.

Really, no ego worship. It's just sweet.

[diavel]

I've been trying to understand your idea. I'm not 100% sure if I have though. If you could describe this using an example that would be awesome. What is the process between (character) not knowing how to make a bone knife and (character) knowing how to make it in your model? What would prevent me from copy/pasting note content? Or looking thing up on wiki and manually entering it? Do you propose different kind of notes that cannot be edited manually?

[Gran]

I've been trying to understand your idea. I'm not 100% sure if I have though. If you could describe this using an example that would be awesome. What is the process between (character) not knowing how to make a bone knife and (character) knowing how to make it in your model? What would prevent me from copy/pasting note content? Or looking thing up on wiki and manually entering it? Do you propose different kind of notes that cannot be edited manually?

Just the narrative effort to mount an example would probably divert what I'm saying, so I'll stay out os large examples. The principles are basic:

• All things need knowledge to be build or transcribed into a note;
• Knowledge can be aquired by invention or through an object transcription.

Knowledge is stored in your character as a list of all objects you can produce. One cannot produce or transcribe into a note an object which is not in that list.

A character who wants to produce a bone knife will have to invent if he has no other means of acquiring that knowledge. Once the has invented it, he'll be able to build it normally and transcribe it into a note.

Understand that copy/paste will have null value because before you stop editing that note and store it back into your inventory it'll check your list of known objects; if you do not know what you just wrote, shit will happen to prevent the note from working properly, which in turn will spoil your work entirely. Shit can be scrambling of all your text, elements, simply blanking it or writing a big CHEATER on it.

I do not propose any type of new note or sorts. Notes remain what they are. They just gain the capability to store knowledge.

[diavel]

OK. Thank you. I like that idea about notes instead of wiki or existing object tree we have in-game. Now, how do you propose to store information about which technologies are known to the character? How one character could share this knowledge? Does this meet with what I proposed about blueprints here (not originally, I've just found it proposed in some variations before, even using word "blueprint")?

[Gran]

Now, how do you propose to store information about which technologies are known to the character?

[...] as a list of objects you invented or learned how to make. One cannot produce or transcribe into a note an object which is not in that list.

That list is jammed in your character's page, only for you to see.

How one character could share this knowledge?

Other than notes? Oral transmission should be possible aswell. It can be made, with the same limits that apply on notes.

Does this meet with what I proposed about blueprints here (not originally, I've just found it proposed in some variations before, even using word "blueprint")?

Well, both ideas met because they seek the same: introduce knowledge as a imaterial object needed to accomplish all projects.