[MUD-Dev] Striving for originality

[caduvall at glue.umd.edu]

--<cut>--
Note: This message was written via the list web archives.  There is
no guarantee that the claimed author is actually the author.
--<cut>--
Original message: http://www.kanga.nu/archives/MUD-Dev-L/2002Q2/msg00970.php

Matt Mihaly <the_logos at achaea.com> wrote:

> To me, saying that something like magic, which doesn't exist in
> the physical world, should have properties Z and effects A, B, and
> C screams box-thinking. Surely magic can be whatever a designer
> designs it to be.

So far as I have kicked things around, if you use names with which
people attach certain expectations to mean something entirely
different, most of what you'll end up getting is grief and
frustration on the part of the player. If you have something in your
world which grows out of the ground, has petals, needs to be watered
semi-reguarly, etc, then it is a daisy, not a raygun.

I'm running into this in the game I'm helping to admin currently -
people reguarly bother the imms to tell them that vampires "should"
or "should not" have certain properties/skills/whatever. Likewise
for swordsmen, tailors. While some of the ideas they suggest have
merit, many are just intended to make the 'name' react more closely
to their preconceived expectations.

Admittedly, someone telling me that a raygun should or should not
have certain properties doesn't change _my_ view unless they've got
some rationale to back up what they say. But it does create a
constant undertone of 'This isn't what we know'.

--Chuck

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