[MUD-Dev] Chances of success (was d20 system)

[Daniel.Harman at barclayscapital.com]

Travis Casey on 16 August 2001 20:10 wrote:
> Thursday, August 16, 2001, 8:35:05 AM,
> Daniel.Harman at barclayscapital.com wrote:
 
>> I do have one issue with the system proposed in the linked post
>> however, and that is with having the arbitrary hit point cap of
>> 120.
 
> It's in how you define "hit points".  The D&D-style definition
> includes not just how much damage you can take, but also your
> ability to *avoid* damage.  That's why a D&D character's armor
> class doesn't generally get better with higher levels -- the
> increased hit points reflect improved defensive ability.

Doesn't this system take some of the drama out of combat? As I level
a character, I like to see bigger numbers not more 'You dodged the
blow' messages. Thus if I was in a fight with a dragon that could
hit hard, for the fight to be viable, he'd have to miss an awful lot
if I want him to be able to hit as hard as I'd like. Sad I know, but
it makes it more visceral for me to see bigger numbers and I can't
be alone. If after two years playing and 100 levels, monsters still
on average hit me for 10 hit points dmg where is the progress?

Perhaps I'm just over conditioned by games I've played so far.

I think I'm going to set up a spreadsheet to model this system we've
been discussing to try and get a better feel. I definitely like it
in principle if I can get over a few stumbling blocks.

>> Of course better armor will factor into the original hp limited
>> equation too I guess.  Balancing these multidimensional curves is
>> truly a nightmare. Just because computers allow you to make
>> complex systems doesn't make us any better at concieving and
>> understanding the full ramifications of our design decisions ;)

> It's more difficulty, but I'd hardly call it a nightmare.  Pencil
> & paper RPGers have been managing to successfully create and use
> more complex systems than the typical mud game system for more
> than twenty years now.  Of course, it's possible to go too
> complicated -- but I think there's a lot of room between a
> D&D-style system and one that's too complicated to be
> usable/understandable.

I'd contend that P&P systems don't need to be as robust as a
massively multiplayer system for obvious reasons.

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