[MUD-Dev] Re: WIRED: Kilers have more fun

[Jon A. Lambert]

On  9 Jul 98, Till Eulenspiegel wrote:
> 
> It's my firm belief that player classes, high specialization
> and resource-driven economies are the answer.  I want any 
> given character to have to rely on the help of other people
> to really succeed. Magic should be the domain of mages, and
> be split into highly distinct but potent categories.  A 
> blacksmith with alchemy breaks this wheel, as does an 
> archer/mage/thief/bowyer/warrior in plate mail.
>

Agreed.  I think intentionally designing a system's mechanics to be 
biased towards player symbiosis is a step towards stronger community. 
Players must become social traders instead of casual chatters.  
 
> Systems with generic classless skill systems find they must 
> curtail the effectiveness of skills in general since their
> players will min/max each skill and be overwhelmingly 
> effective in combat.  Obviously if you put an overwhelmingly
> powerful character in the hands of an adolescent male they
> are going to run amok with it online (read: kill your
> kindler, gentler players.)

It depends.  I've seen games with very restrictive classes and still, 
if the primary game goals revolve around combat, your game disruptor
will gravitate towards the class that can force or bully cooperation.

> I'd suggest that the real solution is to have narrow 
> specialties of highly effective skills.  I wouldn't give 
> *anyone* healing except the 'healer' and healing mages. 
> The sorcerer could bring down fire and destruction unequalled, 
> but can't wear armor... the blacksmith can make and repair 
> armor, but his fighting skills are limited to the basic.
>
> The knight (warrior/knight) can learn advanced combat skills but 
> that's it.
> 
> The result?  Characters who must rely on one another to succeed.
> The lone problem player is much less effective than the group, 
> and once the lone problem-causer is a known peril he/she will
> find himself unable to work within the online community.
>

Still this doesn't give us any mechanisms for governance.  What's to
keep the physically powerful fighter (who has a symbiotic relationship
with the blacksmith and healer) from using force or threat of force to
obtain armor and healing.  Any presence of NPC blacksmiths or healers 
would further serve to undermine any dependencies.  The availability 
of natural healing, potions and whatnot would also.      
 
> The second curtailment is of course non-anonymity and 'newbie gantlet'
> which both lead to the building of community.  'Newbie gantlet'
> is the effort that it takes to bring a newbie to average 
> playing effectiveness.  This should be large and long enough to
> discourage making trashcharacters.  The restriction on making 
> new characters should be also curtailed by a review process or
> time delay.  

I'd agree with this last statement standing on it's own.  It 
alters the dynamics with administrator governance.  No?

But in regard to the rest... Isn't this scenario as likely to induce 
stronger tribalistic and clannish behaivor?  How newbie friendly
is such a system?    

> The goal here is that the player should feel the cost of 
> exclusion from the _player community_. 

 
--
--/*\ Jon A. Lambert - TychoMUD     Internet:jlsysinc at ix.netcom.com /*\--
--/*\ Mud Server Developer's Page <http://www.netcom.com/~jlsysinc> /*\--
--/*\   "Everything that deceives may be said to enchant" - Plato   /*\--