[MUD-Dev] Re: skill system
gryphon at iaehv.nl
Mon Jun 1 12:47:08 New Zealand Standard Time 1998
In <URL:/archives/meow?group+local.muddev> on Fri 29 May, Adam Wiggins wrote:
> On Fri, 29 May 1998, Jo Dillon wrote:
> > Andrew C.M. McClintock (andrewm at tiger.hsc.edu) spake thusly:
> > > I've been mulling over some ideas for the skill system in my mud (at
> > > this stage still no more than a fantastical whimsy) and thought I
> > > would bounce the ideas off the list.
> > > For each skill there would be:
> > > Knowledge (book learning/education) -
> > [snip]
Why not call this theory and
> > > Practical application (experience) -
> > [more snip]
call this practice?
And then arrange things so that these ar partially interchangeable. You
could have a minimal theoretical knowledge and a minimal practical know-
ledge and a total that is higher than the sum of these two. The more you
exceed the required total knowledge the more skilled you are.
> > Presumably you would want to limit the influence of book learning
> > over practical application for some skills; trying to learn swordfighting
> > from a book would likely not get you very far, the only way to learn it would
> > be by practical experience (or would tuition by a fencing master go under
> > education? It seems more logical to me to use the same mechanism for
> > a fencing master's training bouts as for real fights). Rather than
> > using book learning to set the maximum you can learn by actual practise,
> > I'd probably have a default maximum value for each skill which would exist
> > without book learning, and then allow book learning to give you a small
> > amount of practical skill (depending on the skill in question) and raise
> > that maximum by certain amount (again depending on the skill in question).
> > So for instance, swordfighting would have a high maximum, and learning
> > from a book would give minimal practical experience and wouldn't raise
> > that maximum. Alchemy, on the other hand, would have a very low initial
> > maximum, and book learning would raise actual experience and maximum
> > experience by large amounts.
> Lotsa good stuff in the archives about this. Search for "applied
> knowledge" or maybe just "practical".
> In our system (which has components very similar to the above), we store
> not only a difficulty for each skill but its major and minor stats. So if
> you don't like the above effect (becoming a knowledge swordmaster from a
> book), you can look at the major stat (probably agility) and the minor
> stat (probably strength), you can limit how much you can learn of a
> physical skill without actually doing anything. Herbalism, on the other
> hand (which would probably have a major stat of wisdom and a minor stat of
> perception) could be much more readily learned from a book. Of course,
> it's generally always wise to try to limit how large the delta is between
> the two skill values.
> Another option you could try but that I've never found a need for is a
> "vicerealness" (is that a word?) of the skill. Meaning, how much do you
> really have to get hands on to learn it? Combat skills would have a high
> value. Arts like cooking would have a medium value, and
> knowledge-oriented skills like written languages would be low. Or
> whatever values you like; you could adjust them to your preference if you
> find that it's too hard or easy for players to learn from books.
Yes - at last - You. I Choose you. Out of all the world,
out of all the seeking, I have found you, young sister of
my heart! You are mine and I am yours - and never again
will there be loneliness ...
Rolan Choosing Talia,
Arrows of the Queen, by Mercedes Lackey
More information about the MUD-Dev