Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: Introductions and descriptions

[coder#ibm,net]

On 30/11/97 at 09:37 AM, Adam Wiggins <nightfall#user2,inficad.com> said:

>Nods - you've just hit the key to this issue, I think.  It's simply a
>mater of ratio.  If we consider a 'full' model to be 100%, a system which
>models 50% of the elements of the model needs 50% randomness. A system
>which models 100% of the elements (like, say, the universe) does not need
>any pseudo-randomness at all.  So, as you increase the amount of detail
>of your system, you can reduce the level of randomness, which is IMO a
>very good thing.  The system is still unpredictable by human standards,
>since there are a lot of factors to keep track of, but they are real
>factors.  I find it both more immersive and less annoying to know I
>failed my backstab due to a sneeze rather than because I didn't make a
>dice roll.  Plus, this adds so much more potential for strategy into the
>gameworld - a thief refusing to attempt any stealthy maneuvers because
>he's currently got a cold, for example.

This could be argued as the base explanation fo heisenberg/quantum
mechanics -- the Universe is an imperfect model of itself and thus relies
of randome effects for its micro-modelling.

-- 
J C Lawrence                               Internet: claw#null,net
----------(*)                              Internet: coder#ibm,net
...Honourary Member of Clan McFud -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...