[MUD-Dev] Playing catch-up with levels

[Kwon J. Ekstrom]

Amanda Walker wrote:

> For example, people arguing both for and against "buying levels"
> are often arguing based on hierarchy membership: "I have
> money--that should mean something" vs. "I don't have money--that
> shouldn't mean anything." Also its converse: "I have time--that
> should mean something" vs. "I don't have time--that shouldn't mean
> anything".  People who are used to getting leverage out of money,
> status, age, etc. have reasonable expectations of doing so with
> gaming companies--business is business, after all.  Often the
> people who are most adamant that "RL advantages have no place in
> the game" are the ones most hung up on keeping score in the game.

> I find it interesting that on many issues, people on *all* sides
> view themselves as arguing for increased fairness.  They just have
> very differing views of what constitutes "fair" in context.

I agree with these points, IMHO, a MU is the property of it's owner,
and their view of fairness is the one he/she should use.

While I disagree that money should be an issue, the time you put
into a game is valuable and should have some rewards.  I much prefer
an experience pool for restricting advancement than direct cuts and
limits... you can continue to advance but at a slower rate once
you've saturated your experience pool.  (I actually use a curve, the
exp gained is proprotional to how full the pool is, so the longer
you play, the gain is constantly going down...)

To me, as a killer/explorer/acheiver, knowledge of the game should
be the most important factor.  I am forever writing systems with
little subtleties... rolls against attributes, and whatnot... In
order to make knowledge more important than simply
well... hack'n'slash.

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