Re: New rules for CircleMUD?

From: George Greer (
Date: 08/14/01

On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Jeremy wrote:

>And I thought my code was bad...

It's very impressive if you compile it and run it.

>I don't think the rules should change simply because there's a new
>version of D&D out.  That said, I don't think D&D rules are particularly
>well suited to a mud.  They have a lot of weird special cases (str_add is
>one that jumps to mind immediately) that make life a bit more confusing.

Have you played 2nd and 3rd edition D&D? 3rd edition makes so much more
sense than 2nd.  "You're hit by a fireball, roll a Save vs Spells." So what
does that Save represent? If it's your ability to dodge, why isn't Dex
factored in? If it's your ability to soak damage, why not add Con?  How
ability ability to disbelieve in magic, Wis?

>IMHO there have been so many alterations to the standard D&D rules
>(particularly in the magic system) that there is no longer any need to
>follow them.  If I was updating the rules I'd leave them mostly the same
>(don't fix what isn't broken) but I'd make AC go upwards (3rd Ed style)
>and I'd get rid of the strength hack.

My inclination was to update all the rules to 3rd edition and leave the
more grossly different systems, such as Magic Points.  A lot of the feats
in 3rd edition can be either commands or automatic.

It'll also let people do arbitrary multiclassing, which people on MUDs
frequently seem to want to do.

George Greer

   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/06/01 PST