[MUD-Dev] Character evolution

[Richard Woolcock]

Caliban Tiresias Darklock wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 17 Aug 1997 05:01:44 PST8PDT, Richard Woolcock
> <KaVir at dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> 
> >> Players will be at liberty to eat whatever they want - but if they don't
> >> eat SOME good food, they will eventually run into problems. Oh, and they
> >> need to eat things that won't make them ill, of course. Since you can cook
> >> corpses (after cutting off suitable sized pieces if necessary), finding
> >> meat is not too hard while adventuring - but if its kobold meat, and
> >> you're human, you'll be out of action for a while with gastritis.
> >
> >Hmmm I remember the previous conversations about having different types
> >of constition - being able to shrug of pain, being able to look at blood
> >and gore, etc...well how about another for eating?  Thus most people in
> >high society wouldn't be able to stomach food that wasn't cooked perfectly,
> >whilst a hardened survivalist would be quite happy to eat raw fish and
> >maggots and pretty much anything else that was actually 'edible'.
> 
> Additionally, someone with skill in cooking (common in tabletop RP, rare
> on MUDs) could make food out of damn near anything. While the hardened
> survivalist (survival skill, obviously) would take the kobold meat raw
> and just pig it down, a more sophisticated party might pass the kobold
> corpse on to their cook, who would then rummage in his bag of herbs and
> spices and proceed to prepare a tasty dish reminiscent of a strong
> sausage... obviously, this would give a reason for cooks in the party.
> If there is a high-society type in the group, then he can't very well be
> expected to pig down raw kobold meat -- he needs his cook along, to make
> the food palatable. Likewise, the cook would either be accompanied by
> some sort of valet, or be expected to serve the same purposes. ("Tie my
> own shoes?! What do you think I am, some common peasant?" "Of course
> not, your Grace. Most peasants don't HAVE shoes...")

Encouraging players to eat certain types of food could also bring the
art of assassination to another level...poisoning (which IMO is vastly
under-rated in all the muds I've ever played) could be a very simple
way to get rid of that "unbeatable swordsman".  Simply sneak into his
favourite cook's house and poison the food.  If many people were using
the same cook, this could cause real devastation - and a 'tasting' 
skill could prove very useful.

> I'd suggest an 'edibility index'. Any given type of food is X percent[big snip of edibility index]

Interesting idea!  Players should certainly be able to build up a 
tolerance for bad food given enough time.  However, this encourages
players to constantly eat the worst food they can find all the time.
How about adding some sort of 'happiness' or 'satisfaction' attribute,
which goes up when you eat good food?  This might give you bonuses in
any concentration-related situation, as well as possibly other 
situations.  This means a good cook could make a fortune by selling
their dishes to other players (as well as rich mobs, who would try
and buy the best food they could afford).

Another possibility would be an 'ettiqutte' type attribute, which 
be both good and bad.  Low rating would mean you had awful manners,
and thus be likely to accidently insult people, whilst high rating
would mean you could only stomach the finest of foods.  I like the
idea of attributes which are both good AND bad, because it means
there is no 'perfection' - just a matter of choice.  So for example
your 'strength' might actually be 'muscle' which slowed you down,
but made you more powerful.  But thats getting a bit off-topic.

KaVir.