Refusing NPC Quests

[Faldred]

Probably thinking ahead to Layo 3 here...  For certain character classes/backgrounds, it makes sense to allow characters to refuse a particular NPC's quest if such a quest would conflict with the character's nature.  However, this puts their character at a (metagame) disadvantage, from the lack of XP and the often useful item granted from completing the quest.  E.g., a Druid generally opposed to hunting and skinning defensless (for the most part) animals is not going to want to complete a quest to collect a variety of animal pelts.  A preist/priestess of Grannoch isn't going to collect giant heads for a reward.  As such, I can think of off the top of my head three (not necessarily exclusive) approaches to encourage a bit more staying in character for NPC quests:[list=1]Modify NPC conversation options to allow a character to permanently opt out of the offered quest.  The character would receive half of the quest XP and no gold or items.  (Ideally, this would require petitioning the DMs for the roleplay credit, but that would likely be too much of a burden.  And, annoying as it would be, refusing a quest should require replying to an "are you sure?" kind of question to avoid problems with mis-clicks.)  
Offer a larger variety of quests within each level range more tailored to specific classes and alignments.  To prevent characters with more... um... flexible world views (such as a CN character who will do just about anything for a decent enough reward) from gobbling up extra XP, gold, and/or items from the added quests, find some way to limit the number of quests a character can complete at each "level".  
Allow certain quests to have alternate solutions, e.g., the tax records quest could have an alternate ending where the accountant is turned in to the Hlint authorities for her lack of diligence.

[Eight-Bit]

I am almost 100% certain you can say no to every Scripted quest out there. I do, however, like the idea of more complex quests.

[Faldred]

I know for certain that you get no choice to refuse Johan's quest once he asks it.

[Dorganath]

Just break from the conversation. I think that should have the desired effect.
  Granted, the option should be there, but canceling the conversation should serve the same purpose.

[Hellblazer]

actualy I see something good from this. In the single player game you would receive points toward good or bad depending on the choices you made in a convo. What if instead of receiving points for good or bad you would receive points for refusing to do a quest that would go against your class convictions and alingment?
  So lets say that, for the druid, they would refuse to go and you have that option, to refuse the quest, it would give you a certain amount of xp points for the choice you made folowing your class dogma.
  the same way that if you have a quest that calls for exterminating a whole village or cave, a paladin with a good dogma should not do the quest, and by refusing to do so with the option would receive a small amount of xp for rping properly his character dogma.

[Eight-Bit]

Hellblazer - 11/21/2006 9:11 PM   actualy I see something good from this. In the single player game you would receive points toward good or bad depending on the choices you made in a convo. What if instead of receiving points for good or bad you would receive points for refusing to do a quest that would go against your class convictions and alingment?
  So lets say that, for the druid, they would refuse to go and you have that option, to refuse the quest, it would give you a certain amount of xp points for the choice you made folowing your class dogma.
  the same way that if you have a quest that calls for exterminating a whole village or cave, a paladin with a good dogma should not do the quest, and by refusing to do so with the option would receive a small amount of xp for rping properly his character dogma.
 

 I don't really like the idea of Xp for not preforming a task. I think, instead, there should be an alternative, or several. Think about something as simple as the Bard's Necklace quest. There could be a lot of depth to it. For one, the option to refuse to -return- the necklace for a less-than-noble character could arise. The second could be that the little Bard whose name eludes me could record the name of the person who refused to return the amulet, and then send the next person who bugs her about it after the person who kept it.
  Johan's quest to find his missing cow could be changed to a quest where a PC or a group of PCs defends his livestock from a few griffions attacking. The number of livestock that remain could then be used to determine just how much of a reward is given.
  Because there is a possibility of more evil characters in the v3 release, the idea of assassinations comes to mind. Say an NPC in the Temple of Branderback gives out quests to gank certain people, npcs only of course, through a very rogue-intended dungeon or estate. With guards that will catch you and lock you up on a touch attack. Things that could not be completed fast enough to make it an easy way to level, but something that is very fun, very interesting, and adds a new level of things to do on Layo questing downtime.
  These are just a few ideas. Hey, I'm going to go look for that quest submission thing Forsettii posted a while ago.

[Hellblazer]

i agree, but i do also think that for certain class a quest could not be done du to their dogma, like the druid should not be going on killing animals for johan. By refusing to do so they are rping their character, in doing that they should receive something for rping them accordingly to what they are.

[Dorganath]

RPing one's character is what should happen in all cases, whether XP is involved or not.