[MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #142 - 4 msgs

[Matthew Mihaly]

On Sat, 21 Aug 1999, Marian Griffith wrote:

> Part of the problem is that in muds there is only a single problem to be
> solved: combat. The variables to optimise are equally simple: +hit, +dam
> and speed. If you can balance those right you get what is the best char-
> acter in the long run.  (Of course  some muds may have systems  that are
> more or less complicated). What if, as a player you had to worry about a
> lot more than just combat. Suppose that if you want to run a campaign it
> is important to bring soldiers along  (non-players).  These must be fed,
> armed, transported, and so on. Suddenly, as a player you have a lot more
> things to worry about and the local ecology is going to be -very- impor-
> tant all of a sudden.

Ok, I really hate this. If you're going to say this, then say "Part of the
problem in one-dimensional muds is that there is only a single problem to
be solved." Of course, complaining about a one-dimensional mud is a bit
redundant. We call ourselves a "mud" but player vs. monster combat has
never been the focus of the game, and player vs. player combat plays a
smaller and smaller role as more things get added. I recently added basic
(to be greatly expanded) military capabilities to cities, which force
cities to, over many rl weeks, expand themselves, fighting border wars,
etc. This, in turn, led to the Druid and other foresty types getting very
ticked off at the armies in their forests, and forming the Oakstone
council, with the power to really screw with anyone in forests. They are
clashing politically at the moment with a city that is located IN a
forest, and thus has to capture forest territory to expand (revenue is
gained by capturing territory). My point is that monster bashing (yawn)
was never the focus of the game, and combat itself is becoming
increasingly less important (though our players love our combat system,
which is to what you described above what Finnegans Wake is to Dick and
Jane). I just HATE being lumped in with stock muds, which are a joke,
creatively. They're still using the same model for gaming that they took
20 years ago from D&D. Please, have some respect for those of us who have
pushed muds just a bit beyond that sort of simplicity. Sorry if I appear
too hostile to stock muds, but quite honestly, I don't see why I should
feel any differently. If you were a painter, you'd have utter disdain for
a hack like Thomas Kinkaide (no matter how many people like the trash he
labels art), whose paintings are fundamentally just copies of every other
painting he's ever done. Only some of the details are different.


--matt




_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev maillist  -  MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev