From: namhas
Date: 2001-12-06 09:43:39
Now for something different. Does anyone want to join me in designing the actual gamesystem, how the game work, what does the players do there? Exp and eq or what? And how? What keeps the players playing the game? See testplatform for some initial design mumble.
From: hook
Date: 2001-12-06 10:37:38
In-Reply-To: 66
Im a bit confused with the final solution to the exp problem. Do we have a globel set of skills and some are related and some are not. Example woodworking might help with house building so those skills help each other...but say fighting orcs helps none of the two mentioned. Is this the solution? Should we be making a list of "skills" and drawing conections so that those that are related help the other skills develope?
From: hook
Date: 2001-12-06 10:53:09
In-Reply-To: 66
I just read the subguild explained artical and i have some critisms and suggestions. First off there should be no guilds "coded" into the game. If players want to start a guild that is fine but PC's should not learn stuff from NPCs. By making learning skills a PC to PC interaction we force the players to roleplay. It should be more of a master aprentice system. this way power can be acumilated a master can have students and students of students and thus gain power by having all these ppl beholden to him/her. also it should not be imposible to gain skills from just doing. A player can "discover" how to make a building but by being tought they learn the skill at a far acelerated rate then a player who goes it alone. Thus it is advantages to learn skills from a master. I feel by having no NPCs we create a real but organic hirarcy sytem that is flexible and dynamic and related to the world the players live in. "master Choi tought me the skills that i am able to sell to other players i will help him to work on his quest etc"
From: namhas
Date: 2001-12-06 11:46:14
In-Reply-To: 66
I'm enthusiastic about the new idea I came upon when coding Undermajik, so that you can have "n times per day" stuff and that gives you the carrot I've been looking for all this teaching stuff and to other similar probelms. If there is no limitations the master could just teach everyone he wants to, unlimited number of players. Why would he need to ask the students any favours or money. The master could give all for free, if the teaching doesn't take anything. Perhaps, we could make it so that all teachers would have variable amount of "teaching points". The master could gain these by utilizing the skills he is teaching daily or then he could just gain them once in a day up to a certain limit. Then, when student appears and whines teaching the master will lose those teaching points and thus can't be master to too many students at the same time and it will also limit it so that students can't just go and train their skills to max straight away.
From: hook
Date: 2001-12-06 12:19:05
In-Reply-To: 66
My impression is that the problem would be the other way...no one would want to teach...but I have had less experience then you with being a wizard in a MUD. I feel that human nature will simply take over. If the player has a choice between giving something away for free and selling a service most will take the money. A teacher will want something in return for teaching. It doesn?t have to be that tangible of a thing just a simple thing like allegiance. I also feel that if we make it a time dependent thing. Not necessarily it will take 10 min to train but it will take several sessions and it must be on different days. But even then it could be given for free but nothing is stopping an organized group of carpenters from hiring an assassin to kill the master who gives his training out for free.
From: NULL
Date: 2001-12-07 20:15:22
In-Reply-To: 66
I like the idea of the killing carpenters... But we are forgetting the principles of learning: theory associated to practice. We can imagine a system where before being able to use a skill, the PC has to learn some theory from a teacher, and also a way to practice. It could enable the skill, or just accelerate the evolution of the skill untill a determined point. Then by practicing, the PC rise his skill. When the theory limit is reached, the skill become harder to learn, but more effective (kind of specialisation/expertise). Then you can train a lot to rise your skill, or look for a master/expert to learn you more on a skill (and then it could become a light version of magic learning, hard to find, hard to learn, but very effective). We can also say that having been taught a skill rise a little your skill because knowledge and theory provide you a good way to use it with a minimum of efficiency) So?
From: yorkaturr
Date: 2001-12-10 10:19:37
In-Reply-To: 66
I do not know what the actual point of your ranting is, but to point out a few things (just for clarification): - Skills can only be improved by using - One's potential skill level is raised by training with a teacher, and that potential skill level affects the efficiency with which one can learn the skill practically (by using) - Skills are not the most important way to advance a character. They only offer solutions for rather specific tasks. I would imagine that the true motivation behind gameplay is in gaining power among players by, for example, gaining higher positions in a church, or conquering land areas. I would hence leave the character advancement or exp vs. skill discussion out - N times per day limitations are highly artificial and hence are not suitable for our purposes. Teaching would be better limited by a system where one can learn skill potential only if he has a certain practical skill level. Also, how well a character is taught is pretty much dictated by the teachers experience in teaching. Other limitations would be very easy to come up with. For example, a system where one couldn't master a skill from a single teacher, or it would be much more difficult, would be smart in my opinion. This would require the players to wander around as well.
