[MUD-Dev] Classless systems

[Val Trullinger]

adam at treyarch.com wrote:
[snip]

> Which brings me to a point that I've touched on here and again: the list
> content, as a whole, is highly theoretical.  That's good - I certainly like
> it that way - but it seems that whenever someone presents an example of
> one of the theories being put into practice, everyone shuts up.  Are ideas
> only deemed interesting if they haven't been done before?

i posted a rather detailed example to this thread on monday, and got no feedback.
i was beginning to wonder if it was just me, but i suppose not.

[snip]

> In fact, one of the things I would be most interested in discussing would
> be "okay, we've got this cutting-edge <X> system pretty much working, now how
> can we make it nice and polished and generally up to the same level of
> playability as 'normal' mud features?"  Where <X> is "combat", "introduction",
> "object damage", "spell construction", and so on.

i too, would like to see this happen, with the additional discussion of how you
can add components to an existing MUD without throwing everything out of whack and
not startling the playerbase.

val




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