[MUD-Dev] Re: PK's: A solution?

[John Bertoglio]

-----Original Message-----
From: J C Lawrence <claw at under.engr.sgi.com>
To: mud-dev at kanga.nu <mud-dev at kanga.nu>
Date: Thursday, April 30, 1998 3:20 PM
Subject: [MUD-Dev] Re: PK's: A solution?


>On Tue, 28 Apr 1998 10:26:48 -0700
>John Bertoglio<alexb at internetcds.com> wrote:
>
>> Remember, I said this was *a* solution, not *the* solution.  I have
>> read thousands of messages lamenting the problems of PKing. When
>> compare the PK messages to the MK (killed by a monster) messages,
>> these complaints begin to develop a pattern.
>
>I find it more valuable to examine a different facet.  The single key
>source of the upset related to PK is that of intent.  They are upset
>because someone intended to harm them, and did.  Without the intent,
>the upset disappears.
>
>Consider the case of a character walking along beside a high castle
>wall.  A rock falls from the castle wall and splits his skull.  Bop!
>He is dead.
>
>If he dies because Bubba stood atop the walls and dropped the rock on
>his head to kill him, he is likely to be upset (yes, I know some
>souldn't be).  If conversely the rock fell because of in-game
>system-derived reasons, such as the fact that the castle is gradually
>falling down and he happened to be standing in the right place at the
>right time to catch the next rock falling off the collapsing castle
>walls...then he unlikely to be upset (comparitively).
>
>The key distinguishing factor seems to be that there was no actual
>concerted _intent_ to harm him.
>
>This also resolves the ccase of getting killed by a mobile:  The
>mobile is machine run and has no "intent".  It is merely operating
>on its preset course and has no concept of who or what the player's
>character is other than byte values in the host machine.
>

I disagree here somewhat. The *intent* in the byte code is every bit a
brutal as the worst PK. Many mud mobs are wanton, killing machines. I
suggest that is the fact that the killed player knows that the AI is not
snickering behind his back and the PK probably is that exascerbates the
anger. The mob is not overheard OC talking about "those newbies I killed in
the forest". If the mob *cheats* to make its kill (i.e. programming was
flawed or mob made too tough) a few keystrokes can fix the problem forever.
Players exploit flaws which are much more subtle.

Now if we consider intent to upset, anger, etc., of course you are correct.

>> So what is the solution?
>
>> Have player killers play monsters. And don't let those players speak
>> (or at least don't let them have control of the language
>> used).

Note here: Until they get comfortable with their new forms, create instant
say macros, 1 to xx. Type say 1 and the war cry is uttered...ect. If they
are a *good troll* let them graduate to the system JC proposes below.

>
>Cute.  I like.  First thought on implementation:
>
>  Characters have a "karma" stat.
>
>  The karma stat controls what range body types a character can
>control (cf any of several eastern standard re-incarnation
>cycles/wheels models where the next lifetime's body is selected on the
>basis of the previous live's karmic balance).

Already in the system.

>
>  The selection of body style selects the range of *other* body styles
>that can be communicated with.
>
>Ergo.  In the game there is a range of, say, 20 different body types,
>ranging from a lumbering mould beast at the bottom to some sort of
>enlightened super-being at the top.  Each body type can speak to and
>be understood ONLY by bodies withing a range of 2.  Outside that range
>and the attempted speech becomes gibberish...

The gibberish could be refined by keeping the stucture of speech mostly
intact and doing random replacement of characters with the amount of
replacement dictated by the level of understanding. This could lead to
"Bubba says: Drup tha fools" Did Bubba mean, "Drop the tools" or "Stop the
fools"...you decide. If you can get him to repeat it, you have a better
chance of putting together the truth. Of course NPC Bubba might womp people
who ask to many questions.



>
>Variation on the model:
>
>  Each body type can understand the speech of all body types of its
>own level or higher.
>
>This one has a more intereting result.  Bubba the Troll can then
>understand all Trolls or higher, but can be understood only by other
>Trolls or lower....

Cool idea. Never thought of doing it that way. No problem to imp.
>
>(In)direct mappings to levels are also possible.

Character Level? or Map level?
>
>--
>J C Lawrence                               Internet: claw at null.net
>(Contractor)                               Internet: coder at ibm.net
>---------(*)                     Internet: claw at under.engr.sgi.com
>...Honourary Member of Clan McFud -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...
>
>--
>MUD-Dev: Advancing an unrealised future.
>

John Bertoglio




--
MUD-Dev: Advancing an unrealised future.