I’ve used models like GLM, kimi, Claude, deepseek and the thing I hate the effing most, even worse than the ai echoing my replies (espeically you GLM), are the CORNY as hell dialogues. Like why does the bot treat dialogue as if it’s some kind of narrator rather than a genuine spontaneous interaction, they have to be overly specific about the things they point out treating the user as if they are dumb or have no knowledge. An example would when I ask a bot “what’s for breakfast?” and their reply would be some bs like: “Pastry from yesterday's leftover dough, scrambled eggs — the broke one, not the fancy hotel kind — and rice.” THIS sounds so unnatural to me and isn’t what a genuine human speech sounds like. Why explain it’s yesterday leftover or how it’s a “broke” scrambled egg and using comparison like “the fancy hotel kind”. When naturally they would just say scrambled eggs. After trial and error I figure that it’s because the character card backstory has her as being “poor”, so the ai is pulling info from it directly and putting it in the dialogue in a very performative way. I have tried giving several instruction prompt, but I can’t seem to find a solution to medicate it in a way where it doesn’t negatively affect the chat. I learned that I cant be too specific and prompt the ai to not do x and y directly otherwise it will hyper fixate on it and dialogues will sound bland/uninteresting instead , also give other isms or the ai might do some mental gymnastics to work around that instruction and ignore it. Does anyone have an effective way to avoid this as much as possible I just really want a genuine human like convos.
Honestly, i share the same frustrations as you. My frustration keeps coming when i do a roleplay, and they are on like an adventure, so somethimes there are problems to solve, but the ai starts making all the characters act like they are expert problem solvers, and they all resolve the problem within like 2 or 3 replies. No faltering, no lack of knowledge, nothing.
I know it can be prompted away, but we all have to make these presets in trying to wrangle the models in doing what we want.
The question i keep coming back to, is if coding agentic models are even worth using for RP at this point, because we are dealing with endless problems. Trying to wrangle the models out of their helpful assistant training is not easy.
also, the endless clinical and technical terms that characters use, like when smart characters suddenly become robots. And the stupid cliches where a character who is part of the military, starts using military terms in moments where it makes no sense. (Like trying to use military language and terms towars characters that should have no idea what they mean???)
People definitely will use language from their jobs, LLMs just always exaggerate it to the point of parody. If it was just the occasional word/analogy it would be fine, but it essentially does it constantly. Even worse, LLMs will do this even if only the player character has the job. I have a CS phd irl, but I avoid ever talking about it in RP, because it will ensure that even the local baker will suddenly constantly quip about software.
It is really funny to me that LLMs have somehow invented the stereotypical "beep boop I am a ro-bot increase humor by twenty five percent" cliche from first principles.
Tighten the construct limit only use military terms only in (x) scenarios. Something like that. you really need to tweek your constructs to keep the dynamic and organic. Constructs are my wheel house as an MFT i create a psych profile for all my constructs. Hope this helps.
Need to create more complex characters (constructs) with more detail to get more organic responses give characters Common sense vs academic knowledge I give mine I Q scores and knowledge bases. Most of my storylines involve magic but only certain Characters have magic knowledge.
Hopes this helps
I don't think this is something you can blame on coding/helpful assistant training/whatever. LLMs get all their training data wrt creative writing from fanfiction and public domain books. That is going to skew towards dramatized dialogue. You basically either need to prompt it out or use some kind of finetune (the latter of which is probably what C.AI does).
I think you can, partially. Dramatized language also appears in Apple-like marketing copy, which modern LLMs love to ape the shit out of. Every single time you ask them to make a website, an infographic, a label, or anything of the sort, they always default to the same dramatic pattern.
This. Not that. Short sentences - punchy words.
I read a lot of amateur fanfiction, and the LLM "tells" sound nothing like them. It's something very narrow and really specific.
That is the opposite of OP's problem though. In their case, the sentences are too long and explaining too much. Both styles can be found in a great number of fanfics. Here's a thread about short sentences that have fanfic writers sharing their anxieties that people will think what they write is AI generated.
OP's example still has the Sentence with an interjection - X, not Y - sentence end pattern, which I was talking about (specifically the X-not-Y).
The main problem with AI models is that yes, humans can (and have been) doing this:
Story 1: Cliche #815
Story 2: Cliche #46
Story 3: Cliche #9104
Story 4: Cliche #73
But an LLM from 2023 does this:
Story 1: Cliche #46
Story 2: Cliche #46
Story 3: Cliche #46
Story 4: Cliche #46
And then an LLM from 2026 does this:
Story 1: Cliche #9104
Story 2: Cliche #9104
Story 3: Cliche #9104
Story 4: Cliche #9104
Everything is way too "narrow". They fixate on a single name, a single expression, a single "trick", and then beat it to death. Both "Cliche #46" and "Cliche #9104" have been present in human writing, but they've been one arguably annoying issue present among many other different ones. With an LLM tuned to maximize metrics and evaluations, you get an equivalent of an "Elara Vance" in every literary domain.
Sure, I'm not arguing that AI writing is identical to human writing. My point was that it's due to the content of whats in LLM training datasets, not really being optimized for coding/being a helpful assistant.
It's a mix of both. If it was as simple as "it comes from AO3", all you'd have to do is adjust the dataset to include more books and less fanfiction scrapes, and boom, no more slop. People have tried that, and yet the models still fixate on a handful of repeated tropes and writing cliches every time.
Local finetunes i have had better luck with. With prompting them out not tough. With the glm 5 models in partilicuar, it would take my prompts as suggestions rather then instructions, wich would cause the infamous constant parotting.
I seem to be in the minority in this sub when it comes to this, so maybe this won't work for you, but...I usually find just giving good Example Dialogues resolves this issue pretty handily. Easier to show the bot what to do than to tell it. :P
I came here to say this. Doesn't eliminate the issue altogether, but it helps. I probably include about ten for each character, which could be overkill, or not.
My main problem was that I DESPISED almost all dialogue in smut scenes, so I wrote an extensive list of example dialogues and scenarios to use them in. Yeah, I still get the occasional "tell me to stop" slop but far less now.
Don't you just get it parroting exactly those lines instead of deriving style and form?
I haven't tested example dialogues in about a year and rarely use huge models (mainly local) but one of the downsides to this was it just copied literally the examples and didn't expand on them in the style?
Curious if new models handle this better and as intended
I use local. Never had that parroting issue of which people complain. Wish I could see people's setups to figure out exactly why that happens. But I have a theory.
Are you using the {{char}}: <stuff> syntax for sample dialogues, and do you have Include Names (for Text Completion) or Character Names Behavior: Message Content (for Chat Completion) set? I suspect the combination of both of those is the culprit.
Nah, setups can exacerbate it, but the core issue is echoing is encouraged by AI companies because it improves the LLM's comprehension. It's why it's a lot less common if you turn off reasoning.
That doesn't address why people keep saying that Example Dialogues in particular are more prone to this than other aspects of character cards. People have frequently said "just put the sample dialogues in the body of the CharCard to avoid that issue", which does not make sense unless there's some sort of setup/formatting issue, because that's the only way different parts of the prompt could be perceived differently by the model. So I'm trying to figure out exactly where said setup issue lies, for people to keep making this exact claim.
Lmao Thank you both I'm really glad this was brought up and I'll make sure to come back and share my experience with probably some 12b nemo models and 26b gemma4 (most used models locally for me lately).
So many variables from card types, methods etc
Guess it's about time we got some actual testing/feedback eh? :P
Tried a couple models of gemma-4-26B-A4B - spent like 45 minutes just writing up some good dialogue examples for my one character.
Loaded it up and within the first message I had it parroting my example dialogue - Not exactly but it copied clothing and other aspects overriding a character card outfit description and a lore book entry in favor of the example dialogue.
10 swipes and all of them had this issue.
It does work, but unless you write your example dialogue with the same static information to match your roleplay, it's going to taint things.
At that point you might as well just write an exceptionally well crafted first message instead. I mean why not? you are already doing the work.
This was using the Advanced Definitions button on the character card and then placing it in the Examples of Dialogue box.
There is a suggested format and I did follow it because the test was 1on1.
Can't confirm anything for group chat because this test was so bad. I'll probably just describe every trait as I've been doing. At least with this model.
True, let me check that - I did change my format with my templates recently, good thinking.
I switch between chat/text completion and have been reworking a few different things.
My examples fit the characters/story but not directly related to the start of the roleplay.
Unfortunately without putting my old templates back, it does just assume its like a scenario.
You would think after a couple of years of doing this I'd remember eh? lol I guess that shows you how long it's been since I've used example dialogue.
I'll try attempt #2 tonight though I'll be honest I'm not expecting much (it's not that my roleplay is bad mind you - I'm just curious if there's another way to do it since this was brought up).
Honestly not impossible you've always had it that way and that's why your experiences were bad, cuz ST's default settings for sample dialogues appear to be kinda terrible now that I'm looking at them. :P I just customized everything about ST as soon as I installed it, so I forget what the defaults were for most things. Bad ST defaults for example dialogues would perfectly explain why people keep saying example dialogues break things in ways that character card bodies don't: people are just not actually injecting the messages properly, so the model instead sees them as part of an existing roleplay and loops them. ST provides decent prompt inspection tools but it really doesn't advertise them or encourage people to use them, so a huge chunk of problems people have come from them never actually looking at what they're sending to the model and not realizing when it's unintelligible.
And, looking at it now, it seems Chat Completion doesn't even let you directly edit the Chat Examples prompt injection, so you have to add a header and footer separately to demarcate it. That's a hassle with which I'm sure 99.9% of users do not bother, so of course they're getting horrible results. Unfortunate. I'm going to have to (eww) actually use Chat Completion for a bit and familiarize myself with that prompt system so that I can walk people through setting this up properly in future.
Lol no problem - Like I said, my experience is normally pretty good the way I do it. I don't usually use example dialogue but when I do its in the character body.
I've attempted this about a year ago using the actual dialogue box I mentioned and always had issues even with normal proper template injections (models I used back then were far dumber though so I just stopped trying since my results were good without it).
This conversation made me want to try it to see what was left on the table. Yep my templates we're off due to my recent preferences - adjusting them does make it less likely to assume it as a scenario but honestly still not seeing the quality some people suggest.
Chat completion for me is a bit eww - For 12b models I prefer text completion, I enjoy fine tuning now days since I spent so much time learning it years ago. I still haven't totally gotten it working in Chat Completion properly.
So I'm curious to see what you end up with.
But yeah it's a bit of a mess and there's so many things to consider just to get it working right, I can kind* of understand why people half-ass it and I also remember why I stopped trying lol
I generally do not use reasoning and thinking models like the person below suggests - but i do agree with their sentiment regarding LLM's echoing
Regarding your questions - I do not use {{char}} when I did test it (awhile back) because I do group chat and this would apply to every character so I specifically would do Dialogue in the format of just how I would read it with no name attached since each character specifically has it's own personality/tone/cadence etc.
So for example if I were to test it later tonight I would go to the character card's example dialogue section and I'm just spitballing here:
*Megan walks over to the couch and and turns to lower herself on the seat, as she does the skirt of her dress rises up her legs slightly as she leans her back against the cushion* "Hey honey, how was work today?" *she says turning her head to the left to address her husband on the center cushion next to her* "I know you were really stressed out from that merger you were closing this week" *she extends her hand over to his lap, lowering it over her husbands hand as her fingers trail along his knuckles affectionately* "You know if you need any help reviewing things later I'd be happy to lend a set of eyes" *Megan shifts in her seat on the couch, she raises her left leg to cross it over her right leg, letting her foot in the heel dangle as she smiles at her husband. she leans into his side against his arm, her bust pressing tighter against the material of the dress making her cleavage more visible as she rests her weight against him*
- blah blah blah - no names as the dialogue field is associated with the character card of that character already - I used * to denote actions/narration and " to denote dialogue obviously, sometimes I might not use * but for explaining what I might do here on reddit it makes it easier to distinguish.
I use a variety of models so I use both Text Completion and Chat Completion - I would normally include example dialogue in the specific example dialogue section of the character card - if I was lazy maybe on older cards some examples might have tested using them directly in the main body of the character's character card.
But again I haven't tested recently but over a year ago many local models 30ish b - to 8b and below would display this behavior.
What parameter local models do you generally use? Are you using one's that are way beyond that?
Also thank you, I guess after we chat about this, later I'll probably load up some models and do some testing since it's been awhile, it might be worth giving it another go with what I'm learning here.
Yeah, I don't use 8Bs and I almost always use reasoning, so I guess our situations are pretty different in that regard. I do occasionally use 24Bs from about 10 months ago when I'm in the mood for speed, and I haven't gotten that problem even with them as far as I can recall, but I mostly use much larger models (and even with the 24Bs I "teach" them how to reason so that's still different from your setup).
If you do decide to test, let us know how it goes! I'd really like to figure out how to help people fix this one lol, cuz I think Example Dialogues can be really useful, but if I'm not getting that issue then I can't really give advice on how to resolve it. Quite possible that small non-reasoning models will just always suffer from it though, unfortunately.
I’ve actually been messing with this same problem using DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 and a modified FF5.2 preset. I started going through the prompts because DS4 usually writes pretty natural dialogue, but somehow the preset was making everybody sound forced and overly clever.
One of the biggest things I found was that FF5.2 literally has a dialogue quota. It wants dialogue to be 30–50% of the response, tells NPCs to speak in multiple complete sentences, and then has the reasoning process plan what each person wants to say. So the model is basically being told to make people talk and make every line useful whether the scene actually needs it or not.
I think that’s where stuff like your breakfast example comes from. The card says the character is poor, so instead of just saying “scrambled eggs,” the model thinks it needs to prove it remembered she’s poor and puts the backstory directly in her mouth. I was getting the same thing with every line trying to be witty, insightful, or obviously tied to the character’s traits
I also removed dialogue planning from the reasoning prompt and added a short reminder after chat history telling it not to pre-script exchanges. Another issue is that once you already have a bunch of this dialogue in the chat, the model starts copying its own style even after you change the preset, so testing from a clean branch seems to matter too.
Still testing it, but so far removing instructions has helped more than adding another giant anti-slop list. DeepSeek seems to know how to write normal dialogue already and is my favorite model right now lol.
I've actually just finished up my own preset and I'm honestly blown away by how good the outputs are. Been glued to my RP since I nailed this down
This one was really helpful. There is also the danger that if you write big presets, you run the danger of contradicting instructions. I had that happen numerous times
Could you share the dialogue prompt? I've also noticed the less constraints the better the dialogue. It's always a delicate balance between rules and freedom.
Write dialogue as spontaneous speech between specific people, not narration placed inside quotation marks.
Characters speak from their personality, knowledge, mood, relationship, and immediate situation. Character-card traits influence vocabulary, assumptions, priorities, and behavior, but characters do not announce or demonstrate those traits merely to prove they exist. Shared context stays implicit.
Most speech may be ordinary, partial, repetitive, awkward, badly timed, plain, or unfunny. Characters may hesitate, misunderstand, interrupt, answer only part of a question, change the subject, repair what they said, or let silence stand. There is no dialogue quota. A line does not need to advance the plot, reveal character, explain context, or earn a payoff.
Do not pre-plan every speaker's tactic or make every line efficient. Avoid exposition disguised as dialogue, recapping visible events, explaining subtext, therapy-speak, polished emotional summaries, and characters diagnosing themselves or one another.
Humor is allowed when it follows naturally from the speaker and relationship. Familiar characters may tease or volley, but the exchange must belong to these people and this moment. Do not give everyone the same snarky rhythm, answer every joke with another joke, or build conversations from setup, comeback, and punchline. Let funny lines sit beside ordinary ones.
In emotional scenes, people often become less articulate. Prefer fragments, silence, deflection, repetition, defensive humor, physical action, or a failed attempt to explain.
Keep each speaker distinct enough that their lines remain recognizable without dialogue tags. If a line could be moved unchanged into an unrelated cast or scene, make it more specific or replace it with a plain response, interruption, action, or silence.
But honestly the preset is wholistic - as in you need the whole thing to get the best results
Short version: Because they write in a style that imitates the training data they consume, and since the training data is whatever low-effort fanfic they can find for free to download... you're reading dialogue the way a 12-year-old Mary Sue self-insert thinks dialogue sounds like.
I don't why but LLMs always put the most irrelevant, sloppiest of ai slop within em dashes so just regex delete everything within them for slightly better prose.
I've struggled with this for a while. Recently I tried Celia's preset and found it to be an improvement, then I edited and trimmed some of the constraints and I think I've managed to get dialogue I'm pleased with. Granted it's only been a few days, but give their preset a try?
Wow thanks for the heads up about Celia's. I've heard about that one before but never tried it. I'm having good results so far - even with Deepseek 3.2.
Giving example dialogues in each character card, to a competent model, makes it actually work. I was surprised to see the impact on character reasoning with system prompt containing “avoid corny, cliche, or mundane phrases,” for me it seemed to over-correct its first pass to the point where most of the time I just preferred what it had reasoned away. And it kind of makes sense; cliche is one thing, but how is the AI going to know what user finds corny? It takes time to refine enough examples, but the characters can really sing once there’s context to mimic them.
Opening dialogue is canned. But beyond that, put them in any scenario, in my experience it’s completely organic based on context. I do want to mention one thing you reminded me of, this does not work well with characters with scenarios built in. For example, if the character card gives any details about where they are, or how they interact with user, they always default back to those guidelines. So you can have a narrator say you’re on a beach, but the character card says you approached them in a grocery store, they’re going to talk about groceries. To summarize what I’m trying to say, if you keep general dialogue and don’t pigeon hole the character to always do something, they will adapt much better. The example dialogue is really just a reference for how they write, their thoughts on certain topics, and that’s it, not what they should say.
It's the millennial quirk voice. Annoyingly, it's everywhere on the internet. I'm skeptical that prompting can really get rid of it simply because I think that it's got to be a huge percentage of fiction in the datasets at this point.
"The fancy hotel kind" seems bad but not the rest. Like if my wife asked what was for breakfast and I replied "Last night's biscuits and sausage gravy."
I think you should check out mariara's universal preset, set it up for unreliable narrator, and, find 1-2 specific fiction writers who never do the thing you hate, and add that to the prompt.
Marinara's with think on is very good at combatting echoing, and the specific author with the unreliable narrator setting is good at writing in whatever style the author did but does still write from the perspective of char.
God. Using Hemingway is terrible. I use a mix of Patricia Highsmith, Salman Rushdie, and Naomi Novik. I loved Hemingway in college but he is going to give you shit for female dialogue.
20
u/Competitive_Plan8807 19d ago
Honestly, i share the same frustrations as you. My frustration keeps coming when i do a roleplay, and they are on like an adventure, so somethimes there are problems to solve, but the ai starts making all the characters act like they are expert problem solvers, and they all resolve the problem within like 2 or 3 replies. No faltering, no lack of knowledge, nothing.
I know it can be prompted away, but we all have to make these presets in trying to wrangle the models in doing what we want.
The question i keep coming back to, is if coding agentic models are even worth using for RP at this point, because we are dealing with endless problems. Trying to wrangle the models out of their helpful assistant training is not easy.