[MUD-Dev] Re: Less numbers, more roleplaying.

[Derrick Jones]

On Thu, 27 Nov 1997, Richard Woolcock wrote:
> Derrick Jones wrote:
> [snip]
> > > I'm sure the novalty would soon wear off.  However I do think mistrel's
> > > would be a nice touch (for some reason I keep thinking of Robin's Minstrels
> > > in Monty Python's Quest for the Holy Grail).
> > Yeah, they were a hoot.  To recreate them, you'd have to set the players
> > minstals singing whenever the player took a good whuppin.
> You could even have minstrels follow players around - depending on the 
> outcome of a battle, the song might vary...thus it could be about X defeating
> You could even have a similar reaction coded into town citizens...
> 
>    The baker says 'Look out, Sir Robin, its a beastly fido!'
>    The baker roles on the floor with laughter.
I like this.  Sort of gives character a form of noteriety.  Especially if
the baker could be seen telling his barber how Sir Robin runs away from
Fidos...
> 
> > Maybe use a town crier instead.  "The town crier exclaims 'Let it be known
> > that on this day Joe defeated the mighty troll, releasing the princess,
> > Latvia'." would be heard in the streets.  And for several months
> > afterwards traveling bards will add to their collection of stories how Joe
> > singlehandedly slew an army of trolls with his mighty sword FireBreether.
> > Joe would then most likely be approached with a book deal on his life
> > story, which would make a wonderful addition to the library...
> 
> Who would write the story out of interest?

Town crier's announcement would most likely be automated.
Joe would write the book in the library.
The Bard's tale...Hrmm...Maybe the IMM who designed the 'stop the army of
trolls' quest could pose as the bard and interveiw Joe.  Thus, the Imm
would write the story while adding a few of Joe's "emelishments".  I would
like to automate the Bard, but I doubt anything automated (by me) would
sound...Bardish.  Also, The automation would have to be complicated enough
to interview several witnesses and incorporate the differing versions into
one story.  As much as I hate to burden my imms with any more work than
the will already have to do, these stories will be one of the lasting
results of the quests they design...part of the muds folklore.

> [snip]
> > > > or those creature who attack only for food.  Undead creatures hate
> > > > everything living, and will attack regardless of victem's stregnth
> > > > (Although an intelligent vampire might choose no to attack Buffy the
> > > > Vampire Slayer, unless Buffy's already hurt and the vampire has a chance
> > >
> > > Hmmm not the same as my vampires then ;)
> > Not really too different.  Your description of vampires sets them to be
> > much stronger than normal(mortal) men.  Concider an intelligent vampire
> > walking up to a Zeus or some other particularly strong being.
> 
> I'm not sure that I understand the comparison.  In my mud, most players
> ARE the vampires, and the mobs (and new players) mortals.  Strength is
> dependant on each particular vampire - some are no stronger than a mortal,

Read 'strength' as 'attack ability', not physical strength.  Can't think
of a better word, except maybe 'level', which also doesn't directly apply.

> > > > of winning.).  A T-Rex just sees 100-200 pound of fresh USDA grade A
> > > > human.
> > >
> > > So called 'Intelligent' mobs should go for the weakest opponent.
> > 
> > Yes, or bypass an opponent completely if its too tough for them.  Usually,
> > the problem of who to attack occurs when a group tries to swarm a single
> > target (or group vs group).  I try to weight danger level vs difficulty
> > level when picking an opponent.  Usually my 'intelligent' mobs try to pick
> > out the mages in groups, as they can't cast spells while defending
> > themselves (can't concentrate while dodging swords/claws), plus an ignored
> > mage can _really_ pack a whallop.  After the (obvious) mages are gone,
> > mobs then try to even the odds a bit by picking off the weaker players,
> > then concentrate lastly on the well-protected fighter-types.
> 
> That must make group fighting tactics somewhat unusual.  Do you have combat
> formations, to allow players to protect their mages?

Not formations as such, but Warriors can auto-protect mages, using the
'guard' command (guard Raistlin) where the warrior makes an attempt
(according to his 'rescue' skill, level, reaction-time, and the direction
mobile,warrior and mage are facing) to step in front of the mage and take
attacks for it.  Mobiles are free to switch back on the mage after a short
bit, but the warrior then again tries to intervene (this time with a
bonus).  Basically, initial attacks are directed upon the first character
into the room (if the mobile is going to auto-attack on sight), or the
most desirable kill (if the mobile has time to sum the party up).  Not
sure how I'm going to handle 'guard party' or 'guard everyone'.  Might
lower the percentage chance of protecting each round f the warrior is
attempting to protect multiple characters.

> [snip]
> > > > Dunno, the temple is probably the first place to get sacked when the town
> > > > gets invaded.
> > > Perhaps it is protected by Divine power?  Maybe the swordsmans guild would
> > > be the best place to hide.  Regardless, I wouldn't enjoy logging on to a new
> > > mud, only to find I couldn't leave the temple for an hour because the town
> > > was under attack.
> > 
> > True.  Seems that by having weak players hide in the temple/guildroom
> > you're restricting them even more than a single newbie zone.  Perhaps
> > sliding down into the sewers under the town will give weaker players both
> > an escape route and a place to explore while a battle rages overhead.
> > Maybe even suggesting that the weaker players take advantage of the giants
> > activities to raid the (momentarily abandoned) giant's keep.  Trick here
> > is to provide the weak characters an escape (without too much loss of
> > face) without obviously herding them.  Perhaps a wide-scale evacuation of
> > the town's non-combatants/unconnected PCs thru the sewers will give weaker
> > players an idea of how to escape the fray.
> 
> Hmmm yes, you could even code in special mobs to appear during battles...
> something like:
> 
> An orc charges in from the south.
> An orc leaps towards you, its sword upraised!
> (combat would normally commence at this point, but because you're a newbie...)
> A cityguard charges in from the west, knocking the orc from its feet.
> The cityguard yells 'Quickly, go three west, then down!  I'll hold off the orc!'
> The cityguard leaps towards the orc, his sword upraised!

I did something like this as DM in AD&D.  Once my players did something
that didn't occur to me that they would try (wandered into a cave I had
previously populated with Hobgoblins) following a sequence of strange
events (losing the map which warned them when their boat capsized,
deciding that the cave seemed a 'safe' place to wait out a rainstorm) made
the cave seem like a good place to be.  Anyways, since they didn't do
anything stupid, and I needed the hobgoblins to be in that cave for a
later part of the adventure, I allowed the players to be taken prisoner,
only to be rescued by their contact in the town they were looking or when
their boat capsized...

However, I see players abusing the cityguards presence if they _know_ its
going to jump in.

> Perhaps if the newbie insists on just wandering around and
> relying on cityguards, an orc might bash them on the head, at which
> point a cityguard rushes in, and carries them (stunned) to safety.
> 
This is an improvement, but still subject to abuse.  A newbie learns from
another player that the orcs keep a golden statue deep within their lair.
There's a (small) chance that the newbie can sprint by the orc guards,
grab the statue and get out unscathed.  Normally, the very likely result
of death would be enough to deter the attempt.  However, if failure meant
simply having to return to town to try again, I might get a few more
takers.

> [snip]
> > > I dislike the whole concept of 'safe' areas... Surely there must be some
> > > better alternative?  Admittedly, preventing undead from entering the
> > > Temple of Light would be quite reasonable, but to simply have an area in
> > > which people cannot fight just doesn't seem quite right.
> > 
> > Me too.  I started a thread a while ago about how to enforce a
> > non-violence law within certain towns.  The gist of the outcome was that I
> > needed to put an NPC police force in place and provide reprocussions for
> > violating the law and being caught.  Hopefully, as most players will
> > desire such areas to enjoy themselves, an unwritten 'rule' will be made
> > and avoiding violence within the area will become the acceptible norm.
> > 
> > By 'safe' I meant areas not populated by aggressively violent NPCs.  A
> > player can well get into a fight there, but the disposition of the locals
> > is such that the player can walk around the area freely without worrying
> > about things constantly jumping out and trying to eat them.  Midgaard on
> > the old DIKUs was a 'safe' zone on this token, as was most of the mudworld
> > on many of the derived muds.
> 
> Hmmm but how would you avoid safe rooms in a PK mud?
> 
Well, an automated justice system.  Have violence be outlawed in certain
areas.  (For example, a guildmaster would never tolerate one of his pupils
being attacked)  Violence isn't magically stopped, but if you attack
someone in these areas, you're most likely going to get caught by the NPC
police, and most players will have enough sense not to get on the bad side
of the law.  I could even use the 'big brother' cityguard example to
protect these areas, but let the attack begin, then have a cityguard
wander in, breaking up the fight, and punish the offender (if the start
was witnessed).  Perhaps even assigning a guard to each of characters
within the zone(they're outsiders, not to be trusted).

Gunther