Just a really basic idea of being able to summon logged out friends in the form of a spirit and having them fight with you.

_______

Depending on the skills that they have equiped at the time affects the form of the spirit they appear as(healing and transport type spells taking the form of a unicorn and similar).    You would also be given "limited" control over how this ally works, but it would mostly be controlled from genetic scripts that learned from how players act(having old FinalFantasy type random encounters, meaning a genetic script while still difficult is practical).   Also for each spirit you summon this way you half the amount of experiance you earn, and the summoned spirits would also level the offline players a little bit(no other costs associated except for the summoning time).    Each offline person can only be summoned by one online person.

I see this as a way to provide alts with a bit of extra power(flat power curve so it is small when compared to just adding an extra player).   A unique way of socializing even while both players aren't necessarily on,  I mean you are making people talk with each other and sharing to an extent.   As a way to fill parties even if at the start of the fight you're going to have to start it with using the summon abilities.  Of course also an emergancy type ability if you stumple accross something and would rather not die.

______

Downside even with a "flat power curve" new players are still weaker from not knowing anyone.    Makes avoiding death reletivly easy when you can end up doubling your party size with just a little bit of effort(not necessarily a bad thing).

Could even throw in a few other mechanics like PvPers when "forcing" an egagment can't summon while their targets/prey can.

This is really an interesting idea, kinda reminds me of the .hack games where you were playing with online friends that were just NPCs. I think it's very practical, beyond the question of "what happens if they log in when being used by someone else?". I try to see any reason for people feeling like they are "being used" while offline, but can't see it - it's just like lending an NPC version of yourself to a friend when away, but of course, this function would have to be something you allow them to through a negotiation window... and it can't affect and standings, like deaths/killcount - any recorded figures, even XP and levels, though that would be an interesting approach... "hey, I leveled and twinked your dude out while your where off", well, maybe that much is an invasion of privacy.

The new question I impose is, what settings could this best be used in? Spirts like you say? Clones? Data versions?

I can see tons of uses for it, and it's really a better alternative to GW's NPCs for hire. At least you can feel like your with someone you know, maybe they can input a text macro system so your buddy NPC can say things you expect him to, heh.

Hmm, mind if I take the idea a bit further?

I got this GDD I would really like to apply the idea to. Basically it's like .hack - really, it inspired me to great ends and I came up with something I consider mindblowing. Remember that thread I made a while back about "bringing games to life"? In it, I gave an idea about this concept where the forums and game are intrisically tied, and players play the game in the roles of testers in a perpetual beta of an MMO by a company that did work simulations for the military and the game itself becomes a semi-sentient AI and tries to corrupt itself and leak outside, that is where players come into a conspiracy behind it and be heroes etc - see the similarities to .hack?

Well the fictional dev team of the game in a game are characters you meet and they post in the forums, doing crowd control and locking things down in character... but it's just the CS team taking roles to further the act from the game to the forums. The forums will get you missions via PM from these CS people and devs, then you meet them in game and do the story, etc. I love it.

~but your idea gives me another on how to handle the rogue-like instances of nearly all mission content - there is open world zones, but it's used for local event things and mission interiors. Within the instanced private dungeons though, I could totally see your idea employed to help players out with a buddy that can compensate for his weaknesses... 3 classes, many specs, best ot have something accompany you outside your specialty.

I think there is a way for either the player using the NPC, or the one granting it, to [program] it using drops from the game. Everything in this setting is based on data, it's an MMO in an MMO going berserk... you should really see what I have in mind to emphasize that; things that are buggy in games I want to emulate. Like when a boss comes in, the walls assume an "exploded polygon look", and normal worl mobs that warp into monster "balls of exploding polys" or missing entire planes of geometry or texture on them. Got a good idea how to handle a dynamic shadow from an object and superimpose it onto a 2d half-cylinder put upright as a sprite you always face - would be like fighting an upright shadow that's going nuts...

...oh ya, programming (sorry). Well figure there are drops in the game as something that has certain actions tied to it; the various support skills, melee attacks and ranged dealies. You could collect them and put them in a number of slots your buddy's NPC has and set it to a preference. I think you know what I mean without deeping out any more on that.

I think it's G.

Completely off-topic thought.

Your game idea, GTwander, reminds me (for reasons unknown to me) of the Armored Core MMORPG I wish existed.

If a machine can play your character effectively, what point is there in playing?

The problems are simple enough to be automated, so a human wouldn't find it fun. The basis of this system you're proposing seems to attempt to further justify the linear progression model, which is admittedly boring.

This may have been an awesome idea 5 years ago, but I think (I hope) levels and experience points are on their way out.

Well you won't be summoning your friend in human form, while just artsy stuff the shape that your friend takes is based on which skill they're equiped with.   So someone with a lot of healing spells would be a "unicorn", buff spells some kind of angel, passive skills some kind of lesser dragon, and similar.    So there is some "forced" disconnect even if the thing you're summoning has a friends name, skills, and likely play style.    

Also battles are based on something more similar to FFIX than anything else.   So if your friend is logged on there's only a short period of "wierdness".   In a normal MMO you could do something like summons only lasting around 7 mins for the same type of effect,  could even have a bit of fun showing your buddy what they look like with a rule like that.

______

Linear progression I has some.    Need I repeat yet again that for ideas posted here I almost always adapt them so that they're useable for "world of everclone" so that it's easy to discuss.

Since you're soo interested in the advancement system I'll share it:    Players start the game picking and choosing a class(3 to 4 sets of skill sets that work together nicely)  from there they're "about" as powerful as an experianced player(2 newbies would almost surely beat a 1337 with minimal problems or loss).    This is from getting 3 skills maxed out at "player" level then another 2-4 at an "average" level.    Due to EVERY skill having gear requirements this means that any player no matter what can only bring in around 6-7 skills at "leader" level(insane grinder and teacher),  along with another fixed requirement of only being able to bring 5 charge and 5 action tokens(you mix one charge skill and one action skill to make an ability you use in combat).    And another balancing factor that skill levels don't affect power in combat(some quest, and social requirements factor in) but rather how much you can learn in that skill.     Skills also only have 15 levels:   1-5(average, most learning potiential), 5-10(some learning potiential, and the abilitiy to use some things outside combat) , 10-15(no learning potiential, but you unlock guild management abilities related to this skill, and the ability to teach tokens you've made with this skill).      So yes I have some "linear" progression even in a system where people can learn any and every skill in the game, and mechanics to keep such a factor from getting insanely unbalanced.

It's also worth noting that I don't think plasuma can play any game,  I mean shooters AND tetris both have bots for them that follow rules identical to players and still kick their ass at "play"/"skill"/"abilities".   As for a bot being able to play my game, that's by design because ALL AI in the game will follow the same rules as the player in combat, but be tied to a working but lazy but working genetic AI that records how sucessful a particular "strain" was then at the end of the day take the best strains and mutate them.   The combat is designed to be interesting with some dynamicism while still being useable by AI.

_____

This is a post about the social, and game factors of being able to summon friends that are offline as an ally that aids you.    What kind of limits do you see as a requirement for being able to do so and similar.    I have no idea why a game being "world of everclone",   "total hell progression", "FPS not a MMO", "amazing sandbox perfection" or "instance fest" should have any bearing on the fact that I'm curious to how people interested in game design take to the idea of being able to summon people you know, and those summoned players being an AI that plays somewhat similarly to other players.

So enough tower built of jade, it's just not cool.

This is a pretty cool idea, even though I generally do not like NPC involvement in pvp, this is an interesting idea.  It is better than developer  stat set NPC's, I see this would  at least be an improvement from that. 

I  personally prefer only having real player interaction in pvp, but this could be an interesting feature if implemented properly.

What if your friend's character sucks? :) 

I think the idea of hirelings is worth more exploration in MMOs. You could select which ones you want, train them up and always have access to them. Hirelings in GW works well. That, or a system like Sword of the New World or Atlantica Online.

Originally posted by LynxJSA

What if your friend's character sucks? :) 

You're not going to pull a unicorn out of your...  everytime,  sometimes you get that uncooperative slime beast.    That and there's nothing wrong with helping a buddy out to be better,  remember it's also there to encourage some social interaction.

When setting up a summoning pact you're going to ask the other person what they do most the time,  when things change you're going to have to get in contact with each other some time or be very surprised.   Basically it makes it your business to know people you're close friends with a bit better.

___

As for AI affecting PvP I can see that becoming a pickle.   Especially if you have someone who does nothing but summon up new people over and over.    I can see adding mechanics like in some arreas summoning takes a really really long time, and events as tramatic as human on human(well adventurer) shocks spirits link(presummoned spirits unspawn).

But I personally see an aggressor not being able to summon while a defender can, a decent mechanic in areas that are "low risk PvP"(at least for defenders).

Originally posted by Plasuma!!!

If a machine can play your character effectively, what point is there in playing?

The problems are simple enough to be automated, so a human wouldn't find it fun. The basis of this system you're proposing seems to attempt to further justify the blah blah blah blah...

The problems for the rest of the game should not be simple enough to be automated. The reason for playing the game would be because you find it 'fun'. I hate grinding, some of my friends enjoy grinding (why is beyond me.) This system seems like it'd just be something set up to bridge that gap. Keep my friend and myself the same or relatively same levels while he stays up all night wasting his life. When I get back online, we can enjoy some of the more intricate things that the MMO would have to offer. ...like killing other players, or joining groups with other players... or playing... with other players.

This system could even be at a slight cost, like... an overall exp reduction. Forces to you grind longer for the same effect, but your downtime is also less because you have more firepower, or healing, or whatever.

So, all in all.

It's a good idea that is somewhat situational to what you're trying to accomplish with your game.

Originally posted by paulscott

Originally posted by LynxJSA

What if your friend's character sucks? :) 

 

You're not going to pull a unicorn out of your...  everytime,  sometimes you get that uncooperative slime beast.    That and there's nothing wrong with helping a buddy out to be better,  remember it's also there to encourage some social interaction.

I won't touch the part of using another person's character while they are offline being a system designed to encourage social interaction and I I WILL SAY that if someone built an MMO where I could pull a unicorn out of my ass, I'd be a lifetime subscriber.

Overall I like the concept and would be ok with someone summoning my avatar or variant to help them and get free xp. However, I think you may want to have an option to change how much xp is shared between 50-50% and 75-25%. Also both players should know if the offline character is in use or is wanting to log on. I assume the offline avatar will despawn shortly before the player logs on even if it is in use and in-combat- that could be a problem whoever is using it.

In the senario where a group is doing well in a dungeon but the healer or tank really needs to go, he can give consent so he can be used while offline, is the most appealing feature to me. But beyond that, I don't think players will go beyond their comfort zone so they can summon someone they don't know to absorb a portion of their XP. And friends that do play together in a guild would probably not use it (esp. if they usually play at the same time frame), except for only difficult fights when nobody is on because they rather play with real people anyway. To make the best use of it is to know someone that plays on a completely different schedule, so you can always summon him when you need to. For a way to get people to interact more I don't think this is it but it is something friends might would use.

Originally posted by paulscott

What kind of limits do you see as a requirement for being able to do so and similar.

All falls down to what is an invasion of privacy, and what isn't.

People can argue up and down that they would rather play with real humans, or people they know from the game, but the fact is that sometimes a good group is hard to find - and AI will never do what a person can... unless you allow that. I mean Left 4 Dead's AI was better than having players with you on the survivor side. For any kind of system where this is a "fallback" and not a "mainstay", I recommend them being slightly useless if it weren't for being extra targets. I think being able to customize them is the right route to go, but how is the question.

One thing to keep in mind though, is that you might be able to set the NPC version of your buddy's skills for usage, equipment and distance to keep from you or enemies - a ton of things - but none of it should affect the guy lending you his copy. I think leveling and gear getting for the offline player is a stretch, it's definitely worth a test run on something, but I am sure it would prove invasive overall as characters advance behind the scenes while the owners have yet to learn how to use them. At some point the NPC version might be preferred to the useless owner.

So in the end, I think all changes made should only affect the online players, statistics/gain/advancement of any kind should not be given to the offline ones because it gives incentives to whore thier NPC likenesses out and not play till max level (assumption). I think that the player using NPC help should be able to outfit and equip these NPCs, but they should be stuck at where the owner left it in terms of available spec and base model looks, and not transfer over in any sense... though it could totally be seen as a gift given while offline that both the NPC and Player can use. I guess that works, but it should be a one-way trade if that's the case.

Having this in game might affect more things than group mentality though. Figure the loot tables into this and you can see how an offline player can get rich on drops, or the online ones can get more than they deserve. Factor in inventory limits or drop ratios (as well as XP) to be [lowered] when with an NPC group.

As for "your friend's character sucking", I'd have to say they would prove useless to you then... unless you employ some system where the NPC version levels alongside the Player-used one, but then you would definitely see the issue of the NPC being of more use than the player at some point.

As for PvP applications... I wouldn't dare unless it was a 1v1 scheme with an equal group size of automated bots. If you had an essence of tactical customization then the game would shine as a bit of a collection device here as you make the "pact" for NPCs with kickass players that will have kickass copies... if only there was a way to recycle all this into a pet-based game.

Well I orginally intended for the real player to get half the experiance, while the summoned player only gets somthing like a sixth.    No loot or similar involved.

The summoned person getting experiance is just a "treat" to let the person know,  I was summoned and can guestimate how much so.     I doubt anyone would try to max their leveling potiential with so little experiance involved since the intention is to just be a treat.

____

As for invasion of privacy.   I can see it and no one would force you to take up summoning pacts, it wouldn't be too difficult to have a few that are NPC controlled/born.

However it's worth mentioning that you're only bringing in a name and a skill set.   You don't see the "human" form of the person but rather a form that is choosen based on their skill set.   Which I feel is a large enough detachment so that there is a bit less "personaliness"(especially if you could summon a pure NPC type summon).

Let me point out a couple more issues;

1. Even at the lowest possible form of XP gain for "offline play", without limitations on how many people you can lease yourself to in this way, you can figure a way into maxing out without playing for sure by spreading yourself around to enough people that play often.

2. How would the system treat your own alts? A given, or left out to promote making ties and not working on all your chars at once?

Originally posted by GTwander

Let me point out a couple more issues;

1. Even at the lowest possible form of XP gain for "offline play", without limitations on how many people you can lease yourself to in this way, you can figure a way into maxing out without playing for sure by spreading yourself around to enough people that play often.

You're going to be meeting a lot of people, a few of them will likely end up friends of some sort or another.   So if someone does decide to max themself out this way they're more likely to become "socially" linked to your game(which is a good thing).   And they WILL have to be pretty darn social to max themselves out because at any time there will be A LOT more people offline than online.   If you're worried about it you could even add mechanics that inorder to form a summoning pact the two people must be near each other for 20 mins(of doing anything, preferably some form or grouping), and that when a person is summoned they become locked out to other summons.

2. How would the system treat your own alts? A given, or left out to promote making ties and not working on all your chars at once?

Alts have contributed to the community, they don't "really" affect the gameplay negatively if summoned by a main,  and most importantly the person has "paid" for their alts.   I see no downside towards letting people use their own alts, and would rather work against alts by having mechanics where you're better off with just one character.

Originally posted by paulscott

Well you won't be summoning your friend in human form, while just artsy stuff the shape that your friend takes is based on which skill they're equiped with.   So someone with a lot of healing spells would be a "unicorn", buff spells some kind of angel, passive skills some kind of lesser dragon, and similar.    So there is some "forced" disconnect even if the thing you're summoning has a friends name, skills, and likely play style.    

That's what I'm saying. If you can quantize a person's play style into the game, why bother playing in the first place?

Having allied NPCs implies that the gameplay can be automated effectively. This means you'll eventually get bots playing for players, as with every game that relies on the traditional MMORPG model.

What are some things bots and machines can't do in games? Let's start there and design a game around that.

Originally posted by Plasuma!!!

Originally posted by paulscott

Well you won't be summoning your friend in human form, while just artsy stuff the shape that your friend takes is based on which skill they're equiped with.   So someone with a lot of healing spells would be a "unicorn", buff spells some kind of angel, passive skills some kind of lesser dragon, and similar.    So there is some "forced" disconnect even if the thing you're summoning has a friends name, skills, and likely play style.    

 

That's what I'm saying. If you can quantize a person's play style into the game, why bother playing in the first place?

Having allied NPCs implies that the gameplay can be automated effectively. This means you'll eventually get bots playing for players, as with every game that relies on the traditional MMORPG model.

What are some things bots and machines can't do in games? Let's start there and design a game around that.

Not quite.

Having allied NPCs implies that you don't need a manned group to do group content, the usefulness of those NPCs are totally question. As well as how controllable they are, and therefore, how they can be put to use through a botting program. If you can't issue commands to them, then you can't bot them, but I still recommend a way to customize how they fight with an in-game feature that doesn't let the player have full control; it's just a list of preferences for combat. As for the player being botted, and the rest following suit - this all depends on other points of the game; like how easy it is to survive without too much needed attention. The twitchier, the less likely there will be a bot to do that player any good.

~and I still say regardless of how you cut it, XP gains to an offline player will be abused. All it takes is a guild leader to enforce all his members to use his alts whenever possible, or any highly ranking or respected member. An organized group could work in a plan to do exactly what you consider improbable (since it's not impossible).

Originally posted by GTwander

Originally posted by Plasuma!!!

Originally posted by paulscott

Well you won't be summoning your friend in human form, while just artsy stuff the shape that your friend takes is based on which skill they're equiped with.   So someone with a lot of healing spells would be a "unicorn", buff spells some kind of angel, passive skills some kind of lesser dragon, and similar.    So there is some "forced" disconnect even if the thing you're summoning has a friends name, skills, and likely play style.    

 

That's what I'm saying. If you can quantize a person's play style into the game, why bother playing in the first place?

Having allied NPCs implies that the gameplay can be automated effectively. This means you'll eventually get bots playing for players, as with every game that relies on the traditional MMORPG model.

What are some things bots and machines can't do in games? Let's start there and design a game around that.

 

Not quite.

Having allied NPCs implies that you don't need a manned group to do group content, the usefulness of those NPCs are totally question. As well as how controllable they are, and therefore, how they can be put to use through a botting program. If you can't issue commands to them, then you can't bot them, but I still recommend a way to customize how they fight with an in-game feature that doesn't let the player have full control; it's just a list of preferences for combat. As for the player being botted, and the rest following suit - this all depends on other points of the game; like how easy it is to survive without too much needed attention. The twitchier, the less likely there will be a bot to do that player any good.

~and I still say regardless of how you cut it, XP gains to an offline player will be abused. All it takes is a guild leader to enforce all his members to use his alts whenever possible, or any highly ranking or respected member. An organized group could work in a plan to do exactly what you consider improbable (since it's not impossible).

@Plasuma

Considering I've seen the Jabberwacky chat bot pull off some pretty impressive conversations,  I'd have to say that there is very little that a bot can't do atleast some of the time.   So I don't consider designing a game so that it's 100% unbottable something worth doin.    However by having enemy AI server side adapt to what players are doing(a primary feature), I'm doing a lot to combat to keep it interesting if the player comes back to an area(which they will on the same character by design).   

Combat is also set up that if you have a real person behind it they can adapt to the situation even while in a bad position(changing how they combo their Charge and Action combinations, using a summon,  out of combat being able to change their set up anywhere),  Where as an AI will just follow what players "statistically" do in ALL situations rather than their current one(so if people always remove really bad status effects first thing the AI wil dol, if it becomes a less than optimal idea to use a skill in X situation they'll still use that skill,  Summoned players will be stupider than enemies because their neural net could barely even be called such).

@GT

As for people abuse it, I have a feeling that most players will laugh at those that try to.   "So your guild leader wants you to take the summoning penalty when you don't have to, and then when taking the penalty forcing you to use a build that isn't optimal for your situation".    The develper probably wouldn't have to step in at all after the first few times such drama hits the forums.

As for such abuse over the course of an hour the person could probably get more experiance in a newbie area than over a few hours of being summoned.

If someone can use a mechanic better than you thought they could doesn't always means you need to put an end to it.   If a guild sets up a few "alts" that will always have healing skills equiped, I'll be sad to see it but it's there to be used.   Of course not going to do anything to stop guild members from summoning each other since they'd still be the most likely to if there were no advantages aside from the summon.

____

Note:   It's my idea so I'm liable to think it's a good one.

Originally posted by paulscott

Originally posted by GTwander

Originally posted by Plasuma!!!

Originally posted by paulscott

Well you won't be summoning your friend in human form, while just artsy stuff the shape that your friend takes is based on which skill they're equiped with.   So someone with a lot of healing spells would be a "unicorn", buff spells some kind of angel, passive skills some kind of lesser dragon, and similar.    So there is some "forced" disconnect even if the thing you're summoning has a friends name, skills, and likely play style.    

 

That's what I'm saying. If you can quantize a person's play style into the game, why bother playing in the first place?

Having allied NPCs implies that the gameplay can be automated effectively. This means you'll eventually get bots playing for players, as with every game that relies on the traditional MMORPG model.

What are some things bots and machines can't do in games? Let's start there and design a game around that.

 

Not quite.

Having allied NPCs implies that you don't need a manned group to do group content, the usefulness of those NPCs are totally question. As well as how controllable they are, and therefore, how they can be put to use through a botting program. If you can't issue commands to them, then you can't bot them, but I still recommend a way to customize how they fight with an in-game feature that doesn't let the player have full control; it's just a list of preferences for combat.

 

@Plasuma

Considering I've seen the Jabberwacky chat bot pull off some pretty impressive conversations,  I'd have to say that there is very little that a bot can't do atleast some of the time.   So I don't consider designing a game so that it's 100% unbottable something worth doin.

____

Note:   It's my idea so I'm liable to think it's a good one

Jabberwacky is programmed to recognize phrases and correlate the correct answers to it, and also ask hopefully meaningful questions about things it doesn't recognize. The answer you give it is stored in a database and referred to algorithmically as the subjects resurface. Much like a highly efficient human brain.

However, the database is accessed precisely... too precise to be human. In a human brain, there are crossed paths everywhere, our brains constantly jumble random ideas together to come up with new ones. We can fail at doing what we intend to do because of this pathway confusion. In Jabberwacky, there are no crossed wires, so "random yet meaningful creativity" is impossible. It cannot fail at what it does, because it is programmed to respond in a precise and calculated way.

That aside, I'm probably being too vague about NPCs.

If the game has NPCs that can play with players, then players can automate their own characters in similar ways. Really, just having NPCs do generally the same things as players implies that humans can be replaced with an AI. So why not do that? If a robot can do it, why not just have a robot do it in the first place? It's far more efficient that way.

Can you really not think of anything a bot can't do better than a human? Think harder. Just look around at what jobs people have... architects, engineers, designers...

Can a robot write a unique and engaging story? Can it compose meaningful music? Can it cook unique and flavorful delicacies? Can it tell us funny, improvised jokes?

Can a robot experiment with aesthetics and find something it thinks will be visually appealing to humans?

Can robots complete non-linear problems for which they were not designed?

Can robots make accidental discoveries?

Can robots fail in inventive ways?

Can a robot design games?

I believe the answer to all these things is "no." Or at the very least "not yet."

Our games right now revolve around this concept of failure and success being measurable in a binary state. It is either a success with rewards granted, or a failure with punishment to follow. There's nothing in-between. Robots are made for these kinds of tasks because human error is inefficient in linear roles.

You can't "sort of die" and you can't "sort of kill that mob and loot it" in a linear game.

But you can do sort of well on a pencil sketch of your cat or dog, on a story you've written, on constructing a wooden chair, on a magic trick. You don't fail completely at it, but you tried and it turned out alright. Humans can fail in many degrees.

A robot can't do "sort of well," because if it does, it gets repaired or replaced. Humans are not good robots, and we know this (which is why we have robots in the first place). But what can humans do that robots can't? Creative stuff... stuff that we don't know how to automate or get the answers to: problems without definite answers.

So why not try to design a game that robots cannot be made to do: a non-linear game with no extrinsic failure or success, one that rewards creativity, rather than punish it? Something people can do "sort of well" and get better at without the temptation of a macro, bot, or hack to streamline it (because the temptation should not exist in the first place).

But if you've had enough of my babbling about non-linear game design, feel free to ignore the first portion of this post.

The summoning thing is a great idea. I think it would be neat to summon a friend in some form or another to fight alongside you; it would certainly encourage you to have powerful friends.

But I think if certain friends are more powerful than others, generally only the most useful ones will be appreciated the most. It might also create a strange kind of cultural thing... "you were more useful offline, log out so I can do this quest real quick." People might also add their alts to their friend's list and double up on soloing.

it doesn't really change much, I think... but it's a neat idea.

Most the skills a Bot Can't do aren't relevant 99% of the time after a human has prodded and mapped out the system(the only place this stat changes are in an insanely small handfull of games and in real life).   While not related to this idea improvision is rewarded in large ways by having NPC mobs that change behavior over time, and having a mix of behaviors active at any one time.    Summoned AI doesn't "learn" in the same way as other AI but rather tries to poorly mimic human behavior.

Jabberwacky is still a bot even if it is a massive crowdsourced database.

_____

The summoning idea is there to purposfully trigger social implications, so it's looking reletivly sucessful in that aspect.

If someone would rather play twice as long for the same result as someone who parties with another person(Lets say by design when we group we don't start to reduce experiance till the third person).   Then they made their choice to do so.

Though to be perfectly honest the idea is spending way too much time on advancement than is really needed for the game that I had this idea for, since advancement is a lot more freeform than typical.