[MUD-Dev] Permadeath or Not?

[John Buehler]

Madrona Tree writes:

> Brad stated elsewhere in this thread that they want people to "go
> through" a dungeon.  Problem being that you can't, really... because
> when the mobs at the beginning are blue/white to you, the mobs in
> the middle are Red... and conversely, when the mobs at the end are
> the "right" level for you to fight, the mobs at the beginning are so
> low that they don't attack you.  So what happens is people find a
> spot that is right for them, and sit there and wait for mobs to
> spawn.

If you go sortof sideways through a dungeon, in a particular band of
difficulty, you can 'do' a dungeon.  But you're right, of course.  Too
soft at the beginning, just right in the middle and too hard at the
end.  And that's when you start a train and clear everyone out of the
dungeon.

Which brings up another point in these games that involve only lethal
interactions (kill or be killed): the inability to experiment.  I once
begged from my guildmaster one too many times.  What happened?  I got
killed in about a second and a half.  There was a single verbal
warning prior to that that I missed.  I had been begging in order to
get my beg skill up and wasn't paying attention.  One too many begs
and POW.  I walked into the Iksar city as a half elf, not knowing that
I was 'kill on sight' to all Iksar NPCs.  POW.  Dead again.  Has
anybody ever heard of forcible ejection by guards?

> What might help this problem is to allow mobs to "group up" the way
> players do -- so that if a group was fighting two level 12 mobs at
> the same time, it would be as if the group was fighting one level 18
> mob -- since two mobs at once are harder than one at a time.  They
> implemented this in Sierra's Realm (which has similar gameplay), and
> it seemed to work fairly well.

Well, in EverQuest, that's not really true.  The spells are set up so
that a crowd of bad guys can be controlled such that the group
actually only engages one at a time - even though the mobs might be
physically right next to you.  Actually, I believe that the
'experience' model is hopelessly muddled and that skill advancement
should be the focus of any activity.  What you challenge, you improve.
What you don't challenge slowly atrophies.  No extra hit points, no
levels, none of that.

>> I'm lucky.  I'm in an outstanding guild that takes care of its own.
>> No bickering, no infighting, just help when you need it.  My only
>> problem was having taken an 8 month break put me many levels behind
>> the rest of the guild.  They're in their 50s and I'm at 45.
>
> Which is ~10%, which is hardly a difference.  Imagine if a 90 skill
> archer could not group with an 80 skill archer in UO and have it be
> profitable...  or imagine if a level 15 could not group with a level
> 13 in EQ.  It's tough when you make friends, and then can't play
> with them two weeks later because your playschedules aren't exactly
> alike.

If you consider 45 versus, say, 58, it's closer to 30% higher or 20%
lower, depending on how you want to look at it.  Further, there is a
significant jump in quality of gear available once you reach level 45
- the planes, the dragons and such.  Having just reached 45 I'm now
eligible to join in on some of those hunts, but I'm at the end of the
line for fancy gear.  The people who are at level 58 are more than 30%
more effective than I am.

Yet another reason that I just want people to enjoy going into battle
with medieval armor and weapons.  The challenge would be development
of skills, discovery in the world, and tactics applied in various
situations.  It's just a different game.  It would be loved and hated
just like EverQuest, but it is my hope that I would be in the camp
that loved it.

JB


_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev