> My proposal is this: A builder creates a new MOB in OLC. While in OLC,
> the builder adds the MOBs name, short description and long description,
> level and any pertinent flags that make this MOB unique. The builder
> then exists OLC and types this: Rollmob <vnum of the MOB> The game then
> checks the MOBs level and rolls its stats (str, con, cha, exp ect.) and
> adds this MOB to the save list.
> >snip<
> I'm sure that I can do the same thing with objects.
> >snip<
The first thing I do when I see a new idea is say "What am I
trying to accomplish here?". I put that question to you now. Are you
trying to restrict builders to a range based on level of mob? Why don't
you just put a range in then, based on the level of the mob? (That's
sarcasm, I know I'm repeating myself.)
This 'roll' idea will just end up with a range, but a person has
to keep doing it till it comes out right like they want it. That means
either they will (most players already have a script to reroll for them
for their favorite muds, I'm sure they'd just need a bit of tweaking), or
they won't, because they don't care anymore, since stats are now pretty
meaningless, being near random afterall.
Was that the prupose of this proposed change?
Most muds which have a sort of restriction system built in like
that either have;
1) mobs receive a given set of statistics for their level. Builders can't
change em, but they're randomized at load time (so you get strong/weak
mobs of the same type).
2) mobs receive a given set of statistics for their level, but builders
have a certain range they can modify the points within (I liked one with a
point system, based on both the builder and mob level, you get a certain #
of points which must be 0 or positive when you're done. You get more
points by taking away stats/affects from a mob. However, this was not a
standard mud, it'd be hard to display textually).
> Now in most cases, anti-class flags will not be applied to the
> object, and so any player of another class will be able to use
> this particular object.
>
> Which brings me to another point. If a character can defeat a
> higher level MOB in combat, shouldn't they be able to use any
> eq found on it's corpse? We have object level restrictions on
> Euridia, and it will be interesting to try and code around this.
> Anyhow, I'm dropping this to the mailing list in the hopes of
> spawning a discussion about it.
Well, first, don't say 'if a character can defeat...' - most of
the time you'll find the majority of high powered players on a free mud,
especially where multiplaying is allowed, are simply new characters of the
same player. Even not, people tend to figure out the quickest way to
level their friends at least to the midway point without the newbie even
learning the basic commands.
However, I think, sure, a player can use any eq they want. The
usual reason there are level restrictions are because the power between
different weapons tends to sky rocket. In D&D (what diku was based on) if
you saw a dagger, no matter how powerful or magical it was, you could
be sure it would do a base 1d4 damage. Sure, maybe +1, or +2, and even
+4 for strength, but still, the base was there.
In most muds, I'm mildly surprised when/if I see that no weapon
has the ability to deal more than 50 hits in a single strike. Usually
muds top out around 100 per attack. Before damroll modifiers (usually
also around 100). It's annoying to see newbies able to destroy everything
in the game.
Why this difference exists, I can guess. Builders want their zone
to be harder, eq to be better, mobs to be bigger, than anything else, even
their own recent accomplishments. Personally, I'm a fan of the D&D base
weapon ability system. A dagger would be sorely pressed to do more damage
than a sword on a per-attack basis, no matter the quality of either.
The other bit of restriction - class based - I feel should be left
behind. The D&D rules that mages can only wield staves, wands, darts and
daggers, and only robes for armor is silly, so too are the other class
restrictions. They can wield anything they want. Of course, it's not a
bad trick to include logical reasons for not using these items; can't cast
spells with metal armor on, or a thief makes too much noise in anything
heavier than leather, etc. Certain specifc clerics aren't supposed to
draw blood - blunt weapons only, etc.
Don't forget though, there's a lot of necessary information swept
under the blanket of 'class'. It assumes things like innate skill in
battle (thac0, and ability to use armor/weapons) - which will have to be
turned into skills inorder for your system to be reasonable.
After all, being a fighter assumes that you've spent a decent
amount of time fighting in heavy armor with massive weapons. Being a mage
doesn't even include fighting. If they want to use that armor and weapon
though, they'll have to pratice too.
PjD
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://qsilver.queensu.ca/~fletchra/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/11/01 PDT