On Thu, 25 Sep 1997, David Klasinc wrote:
> Did anyone tried to hold 60 items in their hands and fight at the same
> time?!!? I find it a little bit stupid.. :))
I played on a MUD that did something to fix that and it really wasn't all
that playable. Here's what they had:
No inventory.
'Over the shoulder' location.
'Sheathed' location.
'Stuck in Belt' location. (Three of these)
Anyway.... You started with this big bag that went 'over the shoulder'
and that was, for the most part, your inventory. When you got something
(get rock), you have to have an empty hand to do it. You had to do:
sheath sword
get rock
put rock bag
wield sword
If you lost your bag that went over your shoulder, it was farily
difficult to get a new one, so you were screwed fairly bad. :(
Things like wands, scrolls, daggers and a few other things you could
stick in your belt. All in all, it was very difficult to play. It was a
VERY realistic MUD, but to make a game fun and enjoyably, you have to
have the proper balance of realism and playability. This MUD went
overbaord on the realism.
Another thing... If you walked past a gaurd on this mud with a weapon
wielded, the guard attacked. Before entering a city it was always best to
'sheathe sword'. :)
If something like this was to be done, I would suggest that the 'get'
command would get the item, and stick it in a container without forcing
someone to remove and rewield/rewear their weapon/shield. Possibly have
the put command recoded so that 'put rock sack' would get the rock from
the room contents, and put it in the sack.
John Evans <evansj@hi-line.net>
May the source be with you.
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/08/00 PST