[MUD-Dev2] [DESIGN] What is a game? (again)was:[Excellentcommentary on Vanguard's diplomacy system]

[Dave Scheffer]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean Howard" <squidi at squidi.net>
>
> Would it be better if the games never made a claim of right or wrong,
> better or worse, smarter or dumber at all? Since we certainly can't
> improve the simulation to the point where designers can answer every moral
> or physical question that could potentially come up, maybe it would be
> better to abstain altogether?

I'm reluctant to view that any game "world" have an overarching imposition 
of right and wrong.  Consideration: When I played Ultima III it was fun that 
I could wipe out entire towns and more or less get away with it.  Then 
Ultima IV came out and made that much less feasible.  But U4 was always my 
favorite of the series.

I think a "world" should be textured.  It may very well be that one town or 
region rewards creative use of nudity/props dancing, or rewards banditry of 
tavern weddings.  While another region for religion/cultural reasons is much 
more likely to ostracize "the mad" or "ruthless".

Sticking to my main conviction, the world should have very basic mechanics 
that let more complex NPC behavior "emerge" as the developers add more depth 
to their product.  "Garb Sum" is a very simple mechanic that can be applied 
to gender, title, and role values to permit complex NPC behavior.  A very 
low garb sum intersecting with "Female" "Fertility Cult" "High Priestess" 
can be interpreted differently per a scale of threshold values enforced by 
any number of town overlord agents.  Possibly holding a Rubber Duck tilts 
that equation enough to be rewarded in a region known for its Mardi 
Gras-like behavior.