[MUD-Dev] Crafting/Creation systems

[Damion Schubert]

>From John Buehler:
> Ron Gabbard writes:

> My suggestion was to provide a test for designers coming up with
> crafting systems to determine if their crafting system was
> entertaining.  If they only packaged up the crafting system and
> tried to sell it as a game on its own merits, would anyone play
> it?

The problem, of course, is that the self-worth valuation a crafter
is liable to come up with is largely based upon how much he adds
value to the economy of the world.  Which is to say: if you have a
core feature of the game (say: combat), then the best crafting
systems will tend to support that, as that is the way that crafting
really has an opportunity to gain value.

> I have an aversion to long hours of boredom punctuated by moments
> of entertainment.  My most fundamental tenet to crafting is that
> the boring part has to be entertaining.  If it can't be done, then
> don't have players do that part.  Have NPCs do it and have the
> players manage them.  I could easily imagine that harvesting could
> be made entertaining, at least for a while, but it's not by
> hearing the same chopping and cutting sounds and seeing the same
> animation on the exact same tree graphic over and over again.
> Every activity in a game that a player is invited to engage in
> must be more entertaining than current combat systems.  And that
> includes combat and forestry.

Um, why?  I don't think at all that the fun of crafting comes from
the complexity of the interface of crafting.  The fun of crafting is
more externally-driven.

  + The romance of setting up your own smithy.

  + The gathering of knowledge.

  + The need to make 50 swords by noon to aid in the war effort.

  + The acquisition of an extremely rare item, allowing you to make
  an extremely rare sword.

  + Being a master to an apprentice, or vice versa.

  + Experimenting with materials to try making new things.

  + The need to get to the Black Forge of Vulcan on the bottom of
  the Dungeon of Doom in order to make the UberAxe.
 
Overall, the one thing I'd stress is that one should recognize the
difference between making crafting more fun, and simply making its
interface more cumbersome.

>> The second stage crafters are the component makers... the
>> alchemists and metallurgists.  I went with an attribute-based
>> system instead of a recipe-based system.  [snip details]
 
> Doesn't that just delay the onset of a recipe system?  Same
> comment for 'final stage crafters'.

Yes.  A system like this will (a) be harder to balance, as designers
will have a harder time counting for all possibilities and (b) end
up being shared as knowledge.  Also, even though you have more
freedom, there will usually be a 'best', which people will
gravitate.

>> Increase the involvement of the crafting process and you have
>> given the 'core crafters' a much-needed competitive edge over the
>> trade mules.

I'll definitely agree that this is a worthy goal.

> If you end up with recipe-based crafting, those recipes will be
> published and all players will know how to make the stuff.  So
> that cannot be the discriminator to separate serious crafters from
> those who just want the end-result.

If recipes are limited by knowledge only, this is true.  Consider,
for example, the possibility that these recipes are physical objects
(didn't EQ have a 'words of power' concept similar to this?)  Using
real-world knowledge to create rarity is always a bad plan (although
its worth noting that this sharing of knowledge is a fun and
interesting design pattern in its own right and should not be
discounted).

Enforcing rarity of objects is a tried and true pattern, though.

>> Finally, just because someone likes making the items (regardless
>> of involvement) and enjoys the whole creation process doesn't
>> mean that they have the interpersonal skills to sell the items.

Agreed.  Just be sure that you don't short-circuit the 'salesman'
trade trying to help out the 'craftsman' trade. =)

>> The 'Crafter Experience' needs to be more than just repetitively
>> hitting a button and making generic products.  Imagine if the
>> combat systems were such that characters would run up to an
>> opponent and just hit <ATTACK> and the RNG would determine if you
>> win or lose based on the variance between character skill level
>> and difficulty of the target.

Aside from pushing the 'kick' button, isn't that what combat is in
EverQuest now? ;-)

> It's funny that you say this because I've presented this exact
> comparison in defense of how unentertaining crafting systems are.
> Designers do not 'get it'.

We get it.  It's just a lot easier to talk about some of these
things in abstract conceptual terms of 'what it should be like', and
much harder to actually create a system that is fulfilling on that
level.  And given it's hard enough to make ONE core game system
(combat), other systems end up getting less time and resources than
designers would prefer.

--d

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