I dunno dude they have a pretty well written claim:
"1. A method comprising:
controlling, by a processor, game events in a computer-implemented game, the game events involving an avatar that is operated in response to input from a player, and a first non-player character that is controlled by the processor to respond to and automatically oppose avatars based on first character parameters defined in a computer memory;
detecting, by the processor, occurrence of a predefined one of the game events involving an interaction between the avatar and the first non-player character;
changing, by the processor, second character parameters defined in at least one of the computer memory or a second computer memory for control of a second non-player character in the game based on the detecting, wherein the second non-player character is controlled by the processor to respond to and automatically oppose avatars based on the second character parameters defined in the at least one of the computer memory or the second computer memory; and
outputting, to an output device, an indication of the second character parameters that are changed by the changing."
So much so that many industry people are really kind of nervous about how many scenarios it can be applied to. How it is coded really has nothing to do with infringing, as long as it has the same effect.
Patents are invalidated by prior art. That is to say, if someone already dud it before the patent holder thought of it.
The Dragonborn expansion for Skyrim, featuring Solathiem island, had the Dragonborn opposed by the Dragon Priest Marduk, sending out Dragon cultists to kill the main character.
Also, in the base game of Skyrim, the Dragon/God Alduin resurrects dragons and sends them to attack the main character at frequent random intervals throughout the main campaign.
Prior art. Patent is invalid because it should never have been granted.