[MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev's DevMUD: a word of caution

[Jon A. Lambert]

On 31 Oct 98, ApplePiMan at aol.com wrote:
> At 10/31/98 4:20 PM Chris Gray (cg at ami-cg.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA) 
> altered the fabric of reality by uttering:
> 
> >DevMUD isn't really a MUD. DevCore might be a better name. What is
> >being discussed has virtually nothing to do with the higher level
> >game-related issues of a MUD. Hence, any discussion of that sort of
> >stuff in relation to DevMUD is irrelevant, in my opinion. That sort
> >of discussion is relevant to some modules (authentication, character
> >control, presence/absence of combat, type of socials, etc.), but we
> >haven't been discussing those things. We all know that those things
> >are needed, but they are just not relevant to this discussion.
> 
> I have to agree wholeheartedly here, even though I fall squarely in the 
> designer's camp and simply following this thread, much less contributing, 
> has been sorely taxing. DevMUD, as I understand it, is intended more to 
> provide the tools for those of us who are designers to build our ideal 
> MUD than to be something that's fun "out of the box". As such, deep 
> discussion of what is the minimal core functionality that every MUD-like 
> game shares in common is exactly what *should* be happening, IMHO. Once 
> that's done, it's time to hash out the higher-level stuff (the modules), 
> and at that point I would agree a more structured top-down approach would 
> be more appropriate. But for now, I feel the discussion (or *most* of it 
> anyway) has been right on track.
 
I also believe this is exactly what DevMUD technical discussions are 
addressing.  The "hard" issues of some very basic and perhaps 
novel mud architectures are being hashed and thrashed about.   I 
would agree with Chris about the high-level game aspects.   I would 
call them the "soft" issues.  If all that comes of this is an 
interesting and usable foundation of DevCore modules/architecture, 
then I find that satisfactory.  

Personally, I would be very unlikely to use any of the soft game 
components like magic modules or combat systems as I have some very 
specific ideas about how these things should be done.  And I believe 
that very few people working on the project would hold those in 
common.  

I think it would be "a bad idea" for someone to introduce or 
attempt to deal with the concept of a "character" in a network module 
for instance.  Many existing hardcoded servers have done this because 
they are specifically targetting a mud.  Or should I say a mud "as 
they see it".  

--
--/*\ 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   /*\--