>>1360369

Clarification; Under the system i'm currently working with, Limits are negative, Traits (Looking for a better name) are positive, and Quirks have both good and bad effects. Still using the three level Trivial, Minor, Major system to decide magnitude though.

Additional;

After thinking a bit, a few specific questions which should probably be clarified in the base setting, no matter how fragmentary it is.

1) Are there supernatural or extraterrestrial forces at work?

2) Conspiracy theories; are they all bullshit, or are some true?

3) How many people know about the emergence of AI's? Just the heads of governments and powerful institutions, a very limited spread of rumour with some hard information circulating among the upper ranks, or wide spread rumours and virtually no solid data?

I haven't listed all the options, just some examples. Again, thanks for your help /tg/

Well, I have some ideas. I wrote these up yesterday. The effects will probably have to change now that your rules system is more intact, but you might get some ideas from them.

*Tight Compression (breakthrough): AI requires less space than normal

*Code Bloat (defect): AI requires more space than normal

*Curious (defect)

*Poor Organic Interaction (defect): Penalty or maximum cap on Humanity rating (Scientific AIs cannot have this defect)

*Flighty (defect): Can't run programs with prerequisites

*One-track mind (defect): Must immediately retry failed checks until they succeed; no option to try once and give up.

*Prior Committment (defect): The AI has a previously-required goal that it must work toward whenever possible. This goal may not in itself further the AI's personal goals (ex: saving human lives, protecting the environment, sabotaging the infrastructure of a country its creators held animosity toward).

*Covers its tracks (breakthrough): Bonus on all subterfuge checks

*Obvious Presence (defect): Penalty on all subterfuge checks

>>1360622

Also, I would avoid supernatural elements. They tend to suck the big one in sci-fi games. Just my opinion, but I would recommend you leave them out.

>>1360791
>>1360801

Wow, nice work. both on the image, the traits/quirks/limits (Need to figure out final names for them... though defects fits better than limits for negatives, and breakthroughs a good name for positives) and the advice. i wasn't that enthusiastic about including the supernatural, but i thought i'd include it for completeness sake

>>1360622
>supernatural
No. Apart from handwaving exactly how AIs work, this should be hard sci-fi. Nothing stopping GMs from bolting it on later, of course.

>Conspiracy theories
Nah. For the default setting at least, play it straight. Maybe make up a conspiracy related to keeping AIs secret, or to secretly helping them.

>How many people know
Basically nobody. AIs should be afraid of discovery -- showing up on the nightly news would be a bit like War of the Worlds. Panic, etc.

I'll throw occasional trait-things up...

>>1360878

Again, useful input. i thank you. So, supernatural is a no.

Random addition; clarification of vocabulary. Traits are a general name for Breakthroughs, Quirks and Defects. Breakthroughs are positive, with entirely beneficial effects. Quirks are neutral, incorporating both positive and negative effects, usually along with some form of odd roleplaying restriction. Defects are negative, with entirely detrimental effects.

I suck at game-balance, so just keep that in mind.

Distinctive Speech Pattern (trivial flaw): Your vocoder is buggy, resulting in an easily recognizable voice. Mechanical-turntable stuttering, odd echoes, Hatsune Miku voice, or something similar. Simulating a normal human voice requires extra processing power to perform error correction.

>>1361108

Thanks again. all of these will be useful.

Any more /tg/? There was enough enthusiasm yesterday... do you know where its gone?

>>1361469
my enthusiasm for your project is only hindered by the fact that i don't know what you've accomplished so far, or where to link it for the benefit of all my very-smart gamer friends who could help you.

the premise, IS interesting, however.

Previous two threads. probably should have included the links earlier, lack of foresight on my part.

http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/1340089/

http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/1353072/

>>1361108
I'm really interested in this project, but you just brought a strong image to mind:

If one were to take this as a Major defect, one would sound like SHODAN.

>>1361529

Probably should include some description as well...

First thread is the base concept, hammering out basic ideas, mechanics etc

Second thread is taking base concept, mechanics, and ironing them out until their basically workable, and just need a little fine tuning, which is what i'm currently working on.

Picture is a bit of art i recieved for use with the final version of the game (I've got a very nice person willing to format it, set it out nicely and put it in a PDF), showing the view from an AI controlled camera unit.

>>1361583
Heh. Good thing I didn't post that image.

I'm working on a bit of fluff... it's based on the idea that came up in the last thread about an AI with an obsession for a particular human.

Don't want to give any spoilers, so here's some more jaypeggin'.

2025 is too early, making it farther in the future...

Blind spot (major defect): Your neural network lacks the ability to process one type of stimulus. Red doesn't exist, no one is ever happy, or similar.

No idea how this would work game-wise, but it's so weird that it's interesting to try to do something with it.

>>1361650

Dear god thats an awesome idea... it'll take a good player to keep up, but damn could it create some interesting scenarios.

>>1361629

How far do you think would be wise? I don't really want to go too far- i want technology to still be recognizable, similar to the stuff we have today, just a bit more advanced internally etc. going to 2050 or something just seems a little too far, taking it too close to sci-fi rather than near-future

>>1361605

More fluff is always good. At this rate the final book will be packed with it

>>1361665
Strong AI is at least 50-100 years away... Unless you interject some kind of plot device saying "blah" "blah" this do-hickey does so-and-so, Professor McFooglestopper invented it... And now we jumped 100 years in the future of computer technology. You'll need to do this, otherwise you have a very obvious fat plot hole. It will also allow you to write in some more fluff about the professor and how this technology works. Should be good for an adventure hook or two as well.

Also...Read Starfish by Peter Watts, and it's sequel Behemoth. Theres a great chapter in the sequel that takes place from the perspective of a program going through the internet.

>>1361707

First, that estimate is only one of several views put forward. Some say its 500 years away, others say we'll have it by 2025. what it'll actually be is hard to say. I'd guess 2035, but i'm doing a course in it and want to research it for a living, so i'm probably being optimistic.

As for inventing it, you may want to take a look at the first thread. This isn't about Sentient AI's being created- this is about normal, functional AI's gaining sentience, or spontaneous AI's occuring randomly due to "data incidents". Yep, pseudoscientific plot devices, but i stole it from enders game, so it should be alright.

>>1361734
Read more on the subject... I was being optimistic by telling you 2050. I've already taken a class on the subject. You'll at least 25 years and a plot device to even get to the technology of what you want. Also the AI in the Ender's series doesn't gain sentience for a long ass time and uses the computers of mankind to operate it's self. Ender's Game by it's self already is far into our future, and the AI your talking about gains sentience some time after Ender's Game and before Speaker for the Dead.

Seriously just invent the tech you need. Faster computers or biological processors or something.

Okay, I've followed this for a while now and I have to say I absolutely adore the idea. So I have a variety of questions, opinions, and possible fluff bouncing through my head, most of which will appear in this thread or a successor. I'll start with the most spurious of the questions:

What would the Giant's Playground look like in this system? (Which leads me to a second question: Has there been a finalized version of the system? The other thread didn't seem to conclude definitively.)

The other thing I want to bang out before I finish my paper: a couple Quirks that occurred to me when I went back and read the other threads.

Quirk: Distributed (Major)
You are composed of multiple caches of hardware, connected one way or another over vast distances. Just because your 'central OS' is located in a RAID in upstate New York doesn't mean you don't have datacaches everywhere from Utah to Mongolia to the Sealand Data Haven in the North Sea.

Effect [No rules, but if someone could bolt rules onto this I'd be so thrilled..] You are very, very hard to shut down completely- redundant hardware, an array of boltholes, and a plethora of connections make it very hard to seriously impair your ability physically or block your activities electronically. On the flip side, however, your interconnected parts need to use whatever kinds of infrastructure to communicate- you're easier to trace, and vulnerable, to a degree, to outages beyond your control.

>>1361890

The giants playground would probably be a very very surreal training program... possibly abandoned, either turning into an AI itself, or becoming a virtual world, possibly used by the AI's as a quasi-physical meeting place.

As for the quirk, i think something similar was suggested in a previous thread, but not to that level of detail. thanks for the input.

I'm currently working on the finalised rule system, should be finished by tomorrow, if all goes well.

>>1361854

Quantum computation is my fail safe for the argument there isn't enough processing power, but honestly at the moment i'm trying not to worry too much about the details. its a game, and i want the mechanics and tone set down first before i start worrying about it actually making sense

People really need to read these. All the gamewrecking arguments have already been posted and dismissed as "too depressing."

http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/1340089/
http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/1353072/

You've basically got to hand-wave exactly how AIs are "born" and how they work. This is a game, folks, not a scientific thesis. Mage doesn't give you rigorous analyses of magic, now does it?

Fuzzy Logic (minor quirk): Stochastic modeling has a significant role in your thought processes. You can call on an "intuition" of sorts to help analyze difficult problems. You can ask the GM a question; the GM secretly rolls 1d10 and answers based on the result. 1 should be completely misleading and 10 exactly what is needed; in other cases the GM should answer in an "interesting" way, more helpfully for higher numbers.

>>1362092
This makes my eyes itch. It's great!

Have you read Neuromancer? The AI's therein were basically held under lock and key with built-in dead-man switches ready to kill them at a moment's notice.

And that's exactly what this game is NOT about. According to the very first post OP did on this matter, the AIs are

>now fully sentient, and free on the internet.

They are already out. The point of the game is to keep the humans from putting them back in the bottle.

>>1361890
>>1361945
I've another question-- How will you deal particular virtual worlds/data havens/what-have-you? It seems like they'd be at least a little important, but I don't know if you agree-- and it's your setting, after all.

Magic isn't real, nor are Mages, and never will be real. AI is most likely going to be real. Thus you need a sense of realism. Science Fiction isn't Fantasy with Science instead of Magic. If you don't understand what I mean go back to watching DBZ and living in your mother's basement.

Maybe you should make an Alternate Timeline of computer technology invention. Your setting is in the real world, and not very far into the future. Most other settings are in completely other times/places/circumstances and thus are not required to be remotely consistent with now. Your's on the other hand is. Make up something that says AIs can exist. Honestly what ever "it" is is just another chance for you to write in more fluff, and give the world you're creating that much more depth.

Worlds require small consistent details to have depth. What you have proposed so far is essentially flat. You've given your characters depth, now do the same to your setting as a whole.

>i don't want too much detail, leaving plenty of grey space for GM's to come up with their own thing

>You've given your characters depth, now do the same to your setting as a whole.

Are we reading the same thread? People, please. OP says AI exists in 2025. If you don't like this, go read a 40K thread or design your own setting. This thread is concerned with developing a rule system for roleplaying AIs.

>>1362960
Any overly-specific explanation of why AIs exist is going to be laughable if and/or when they actually _do_ exist. You know the saying "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"? At this point we're working on the general system (if I understand the state of things). Specific things like this belong in specific campaign worlds. If you need specificity, make up your own.

Self-doubt (trivial quirk): You don't believe you are truly intelligent -- nothing but "fake intelligence".

>>1363052
*sigh* I think I'll discuss whatever aspect I find interesting enough to do so.

>>1363052 Nothing I've said has indicated it needs to be overly specific. My first suggestion was to add some kind of plot device. Plot devices usually aren't very specific in that they exist instead of overly specific explanations within stories. There isn't any particularly specific about it. Campaign Worlds are always built upon some kind of setting that coincides with a rule system. In DnD you have worlds where magic exists, dragons roam, and humans do battle with said dragons. This is the setting. The premise of the whole thing. It uses the d20 as it's rule system. It has Campaign worlds such as Forgotten Realms and Ebberon where in which one may alter to one's desire.
Hopefully you can see the distinction.