[Home] [Groups] - Message: [Prev in Group] [Next in Group]

nu.kanga.list.mud-dev

7430: [MUD-Dev] FW: [MUD-Dev] Re: let's call it a spellcraft

[Full Header] [Plain Text]
From: "Peck, Matthew x96724c1" <x96724@exmail.usma.army.mil>
Newsgroups: nu.kanga.list.mud-dev
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 22:18:39 -0400
Organization: Kanga.Nu
> From: 	Andy Cink[SMTP:ranthor@earthlink.net]
> At 10:55 AM 9/25/98 -0700, "S. Patrick Gallaty" wrote:
> >
> >Stop!
> >The 'leveling' concept amonst adventuring muds is a 
> >tried and true concept.  You are doing what UO did, imo
> >which is to confuse playability.  There's a very good reason
> >why levels and level concepts work, and that simply is 
> >because it's an unambiguous marker of accomplishment.
> 
> If everyone stuck to the tried and true concepts:
> A) Very few of us would still be on mud-dev
> B) There would be little in the way of innovation in muds
> 
> Level is really just a stereotype. Stereotypes make our
> lives easier, it helps us "understand" other people with
> a minimum of expended effort. If you type who and see
> "Bob is level 15" and you know it's a 50 level mud, you
> have a good idea who Bob is already. You know where Bob
> stands in relation to you. You know if Bob could likely
> kill you or not in battle. This is a powerful advantage.
> 
> 
> I personally prefer to take levels off of the who list.  That way you
> still know who is on, but not what their capabilities are, unless you
> have met them already.  But I disagree with the stereotype comment.
> They are not a stereotype, they are a model for adventurers.  I'm sure
> that you also have some model by which players gain abilities.  
> 
> Further which, you have a clearly defined "end" to the
> game. I always hated the end of a "career" on a mud that
> I liked to play. It does give a sense of accomplishment,
> but then again.. what have you REALLY accomplished? The
> next time they do a file wipe it counts for jack anyways.
> 
> 
> For many players, gaining levels is the end.  All they really desire
> is recognition.  There are no concrete rewards for leveling, no real
> life prizes.  It just makes them feel good to be above someone else.
> 
> So what it boils down to, is that level is really just a
> way to measure progress along a continuum. Wouldn't it be
> more fun to have a large continuum, with slow continual
> progression and lots to do in the meantime? Relative
> power levels are all that really matter anyways, right?
> If a level 15 can kill a lizardman, and my levelless char
> on a levelless mud can kill a lizardman.. then what is the
> difference?
> 
> It seems to me reliance on level is just sort of a
> carryover from old muds and AD&D. I know on my mud,
> I've fought major wars with the immortal staff over
> doing away with experience points and levels. I still
> don't quite understand their totally irrational FEAR of
> not having levels anymore. It's like a psychological
> dependence, or something.
> 
> 
> I have a question for you, did you get rid of hit points as well?  Is
> there some method for your players to gain them as they proceed down
> the course of the game?  If not, how do you explain that a person who
> has just started has x number of hitpoints, where a player who has
> been there a week has 3x hitpoints?  When I think about hitpoints, the
> concept seems absurd.  The ability for certain people to take more
> damage than others simply doesn't exist (for the most part) in the
> world.  Granted, some people (boxers and the like) can take large
> amounts of physical abuse.  However, there are limits to that.  And a
> gunshot to the head will kill the boxer just as much as a "normal"
> person.  This gunshot does the same amount of damage to both, so where
> do hit points come in?
> 
> Before you or anyone explains to me the necessity of hit points, allow
> me to explain my own position.  My mud has both levels and hitpoints.
> I consider both to be models used to simplify "real" behaviors.  For
> example, a person who is level 10 might have twice the number of hit
> points as a person at level 1.  I explain this to myself by saying
> that the level 10 person really can't take more physical damage than
> the level 1, but he is simply more adept at handling himself to
> minimize the effects of a blow.  So while a thief's backstab might
> kill a level 1 person, the level 10 person (since knows more about
> fighting) might have heard a pebble kicked behind him and turned in
> such a way as to cause the blow to be less damaging.  It is easier to
> do it that way, in my opinion, than to have blows do less damage as
> the victims level increases.  (fractional hit point loss, etc.)
> 
> Levels are the same way.  A person who is level 10 will have a
> generally more alert stance than a level 1 person, allowing him to do
> more with the same abilities.  So he might hit harder, ride a horse
> better, etc., than the poor newbie.  Going back to my example with the
> gunshot to the head.  Someone of high enough level could theoretically
> judge that someone with a gun aimed at them is about to shoot (seeing
> their stance, seeing the muscles tighten on their  hand) and take
> steps to evade, allowing him to survive a gunshot.
> 
> I consider hit points, levels, and all those other things to be
> abstractions.  They don't exist in real life, but they make the lives
> of many people easier.  It also gives the players a sense of
> accomplishment.  People can point to certain benchmarks of their
> character and know that they are getting somewhere.  When I play a
> mortal character, I become heavily involved in role-play, to the
> extent where I will not step out of character to fight a mob I know
> has something I want or can give me some experience.  Yet, I still
> find gaining levels to be strangely satisfying and rewarding.  
> 
> I would like to point out that I have nothing against level-less MUDs.
> If you can come up with some kind of model that allows people who are
> generally more wise in the ways of the world to have greater
> abilities, then more power to you.  But for me, they make my life
> easier, so I retain them.  and the end result is nearly the same.  A
> level 50 person can still kill a level 15 person (under normal
> conditions) and someone on a level -less mud who has spent time
> developing their character can still kill a newbie.  Its just a matter
> of what you prefer.
> 
> 
> Matthew Peck
> No Homepage to speak of
> x96724@exmail.usma.edu  or valatar@mb2.betterbox.net
>