I apologize for the quote sectioning, I'm not particularly fond of it, but necessary here ...
The specific problem I dealt with today was: how do I RP a character that possesses enhanced mathematic/logic-based reasoning without actually being capable of processing gigabytes of information in a short period of time or just being super smart? Obviously I can't say "oh, my mistake" or "I was wrong" or whatever because a robot knows what they say to be true, they're objective creatures (albeit hypothetical).
The big thing is, don't engage in situations you know you cannot write enough to be convincing. If you must, master an ambiguous form to disconnect yourself until it passes. Recognizing conceptual traps or unfavorable positions is important, but so is being able to twist them to your advantage.
Running with that, have a reliable 'out' that fits in with your character. Ghost Hunter is an extreme cybernetic organism, but because he is mind-linked to the entirety of the Foundations, his cover up comes from that. He is mentally occupied to an unimaginable scale, so an error on his part can be attributed to 'preoccupation'. Similarly, if he doesn't perform to spec, once again he hasn't devoted his entire mental facilities to the situation at hand. If people press him to do so, that can be brushed off because, 'the Foundations needs his abilities more'. etc.
You can easily export that to your AI character, depending on their setup. If an error appears and others point it out, attribute it to a reasonable preoccupation that explains why the error could happen.
The truth is, I'm probably not the most intelligent person in the channel. As much as that is personally devastating for me to admit, its (probably) the truth. I'm also probably not the best at using logic. So what happens when someone who is either better at logic than you or thinks they are better at logic than you (for the amateur observer, the two are kind of hard to tell apart), ends up putting you in a position in which you are required to either a) look like an idiot or b) refute a core part of your character's backstory/beliefs/ideas?
The diplomatic word game is a crafty one to learn if that is what you want to do. My biggest recommendation for starting out is : engage on your home territory, and try to keep the subjects there. Speaking from an area you know about very well helps you grasp better ways of dealing with someone who is engaging you. A single point in their whole argument can unravel them if you can spot it because of your experience. Similarly, engaging someone on their homefront without being well versed in it will expose you to that very same tactic.
Arguing and debating with yourself is an effective way to plan for these encounters. I debate my character's ideology and positions all the time with myself to find where I am weak at. I've found holes others have rarely come close to approaching when they've engaged him in verbal debate. When he gets put into those corners where his position has turned against him, I have an out ready that stalls them 'winning' the debate. They think they win, of course, but the spectators have doubt in their minds still.
Thus, in this capacity, you must work with yourself to always have an option available even at your worst.
The other thing I've struggled with is how familiar and how unfamiliar should a robot or cyborg's character behave? When I first created Z-ARK, I tried to write him as mechanically as I possibly could. The feedback I got was: he's just generally annoying or boring or not fun to RP with. When I tried to adapt him to seem more "human" in nature so I could actually actively participate in more conversations, people seemed to immediately disbelieve his story or try to pick him apart to an extent that I didn't feel comfortable maintaining a conversational volley (except for Stitcher, Stitcher always thought he was a fraud).
This is a conceptual issue more than anything else, keep in mind.
A purely machine based character can be interesting to engage if there are hooks for others to latch onto. There needs to be something from the robot character that normal ones can find desirable to interact with. Perhaps its learning 'normal civilization' culture, or social interactions? So on, so forth. Any character without a hook for interaction is boring, first and foremost.
I have one character who speaks in a very mechanical way that is even difficult for me to conceptualize. Yet she is very popular internally, because she has hooks for interaction and thus is
interesting. Public spheres have long rejected her because she has no external hooks for them, but that is by design - to the places like the Summit, she is boring/irritating. Find a way to make hooks that fit your character and fit how you want them to go. The people who want to tap in will come, eventually.
So I guess what I'm asking for is, do you guys have any advice for cutting corners on all the minutia while still backing up the original concept? Ways of speaking or things to avoid, etc. etc. I want a logical person who has an open mind to be at least willing to believe the possibility that my character is telling the truth. I don't mind people thinking he's a fake and I don't even mind a certain level of ambiguity as to whether or not that is actually the case. I just want to be able to write him well enough that people both a) don't automatically assume he is lying unless that's the type of thing they would normally do and b) genuinely want to interact with him.
There is no cutting corners on a core character concept. If you have to cut corners, your core concept has changed from its original incarnation.
Tactfully engaging conversation, picking your fights, having reliable mannerism and behavior - all these contribute to a
consistently strong character image. If your character demonstrates they are consistent, people who are intrigued can examine them further to judge their worth to them. In seeing your character's mannerisms unfold, they can see how the character pieces together and operates in real time. Characters change, of course, but having visible reasoning and logic why they change is important. Being inconsistent in this area demonstrates an unreliable character, and people will avoid interaction to avoid the headache of guesswork.
There are other points I think I am missing, but this should cover the meat of it.
tl;dr have a strong idea of what you want to do, build it up and be consistent with the execution of that idea. You will attract people who like your idea eventually, and discover those who will not interact with you at the same time.
Author
Topic: You damn, dirty robots! (A Discussion About AI in Summit) (Read 6376 times)