Ok, so 'another brief' in the title in contradictory - as yet, most of my "ideas" and suggestions have been quite verbose; this one shall (with luck, and fewer interjections) by short... New Item flags: ITEM_BULKY ITEM_VERY_BULKY I came up with this after glancing through my AD&D DMG, under the armor weight table (pg27); different types of armor are easier or harder to carry and move about in. It should follow that other items are harder/ easier to carry. These flags would simulate this by having BULKY items count as two items, and VERY_BULKY items count as 3 items when figuring up how many items a player is carrying. This could also be applied to containers - a container with no bulky flag is not large enough to hold BULKY or VERY_BULKY items (or could just limit it to _one_ BULKY item); a container with a BULKY flag can hold both non-bulky and BULKY items, but no VERY_BULKY items (or just one...), and so on. When counting items under this system it may be advisable to also add one if the item is a container and has anything in it. For example - container and flags counts as: ------------------- ---------- empty, non-bulky 1 item used, non-bulky 2 items empty, BULKY 2 items used, BULKY 3 items empty, VERY BULKY 3 items used, VERY BULKY 4 items As far as BULKY and VERY BULKY armor and worn items go, a penalty to dex could be given if over a certain 'value' in items is used - this would simulate encumberance, imo, and could vary according to strength and perhaps also according to class. Thus, with 15 (?) possible equipment 'slots', a player of average strength can have a 'bulk' of 15 - roughly 15 non-bulky items. A very strong warrior could perhaps have an equipment 'bulk' of 35 before they suffered any dexterity penalty. Over-encumbering oneself by up to 5 would be -1 Dex; up to 10, -1 dex, -1 toHit; up to 15, -2 dex, -1 toHit; etc, are my suggestions, though playtesting would certainly provide better break-points and penalties. I'm not really sure if 'bulkiness' should affect weapons being wielded, as there is already a strength-min system in place. Any comments/ideas on this? Such an encumberance system would add another aspect of items for players to pay heed to - should they use the flexible and light elfin chain, or the weightier magic chain that provides more mobility? Should a thief wear BULKY armor and suffer penalties when trying to sneak, or backstab (as a sidenote, IMO, thieves should be successfully SNEAKing before they can backstab effectively; at least a penalty should be leveled against those NOT sneaking when trying to BACKSTAB, or their SNEAK percentage should figure into their chance of success. Also, SNEAK flags should be removed from players as soon as they are in POSIT_FIGHTING), or even if they are trying to pick locks in VERY BULKY (maybe limit penalties to picking locks to times when the thief is wearing other than non-bulky hand and arm armor). Likewise, mages and clerics should find it harder to cast their spells when wearing BULKY or VERY BULKY armor (see note on just checking arm and hands, as a 'nice' alternative). Using this system to affect class-related equip restrictions would be more "realisitic" than imp'ing 'NO_THIEF' and such flags, as well as cutting down on the amount of work for designers - if an item is BULKY, so be it - the games will handle which classes will be affected when. (Granted, this doesn't cover a system that limits illiterate players - warriors - from using scrolls, but the answer to that should be elementary to figure out and implement). That's it! In under 100 lines, in fact! Amazing.... Maybe this'll make it in v3.x? Whatcha say Jeremy :) Danny the Idea Guy... (gonna have to learn C, damnit!) +---------------------------------------> | Danhiel Baker // Derkhil CatSpawn /) /) Fade away | dbaker@dcs.uga.edu ( o o ) into the | dbaker@jb.ucns.uga.edu = x = ethereal grey... | Work: 542-0123 Pager: 369-2781 m m +--------------------------------> ***(=======-
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/07/00 PST