[MUD-Dev2] What isagame?(again)was:[Excellentcommentary onVanguard's diplomacy system]

[John Buehler]

cruise writes:

> Thus spake John Buehler...
> > I agree that it's an improvement.  I'm a big believer in using NPCs to
> > provide a game context.  I just think that NPCs work best for
> players who
> > want to play the game the publisher's way.  Those who are bored
> or malicious
> > quickly turn to doing things that are annoying to other
> players, despite the
> > efforts of the NPCs to discourage them.  So I don't see NPC
> discouragement
> > as a sufficient disincentive.  Is it a disincentive?  Yes.
> Will it limit
> > disruptive play?  Yes.  It suffers from being difficult/expensive to
> > implement.
>
> Having the town guards physically throw your chracter out of town every
> time you try it would be a pretty good deterrent. Or imprisonment (which
> has been discussed before) - being unable to play the character for a
> time makes such disruption very inefficient from a time point of view.
>
> So, maybe they can run away from the gaurds when they see them coming.
> Now they're playing your game again - can they escape from the guards?
> Will other players help by blocking their escape route, casting slows or
> immobs? You've turned disruptive gameplay into something actually quite
> appropriate, just by having the NPCs respond appropriately.

And I create a new character and go right into town and drop my pants in
front the mayor for the Nth time.  Griefers exploit the holes that are
there.  Plug the holes and you restrict the rest of your players.  Greatest
freedom of interaction permits the greatest griefing.  As the freedom of
interaction goes up, so must the volume of NPC monitoring.  Not to mention
the volume of tweaking to that NPC monitoring as players insist on the
ability to do this or that.

Gah.

> > I'm just all becited about private instances for like-minded
> players.  It's
> > simple and it addresses all these issues very neatly.  I'd
> still like to see
> > the NPC context, but that's about artificial intelligence and rules and
> > such.  It's a high end feature.  Like multiplayer world physics.
>
> Well, yes, it is harder. But arguably better. To abuse the conversation
> metaphor a little, your suggestion is to put all same-language speakers
> together. Mine is to provide some translators...

I'd say that I was organizing forums by topic.

JB