[MUD-Dev] Re: evil - good realism

quzah quzah
Thu Oct 22 02:14:19 New Zealand Daylight Time 1998

From: Brandon A Downey <badowney at sprynet.com> on Thursday, October 22, 1998 at
1:46 AM
Subject: [MUD-Dev] Re: evil - good realism

>Vladimir Prelovac wrote:
>> Most of the items in the game that evil folks wear and use are marked
>> !GOOD (for those not familiar, it means that good aligned people cant wear
>> or use that item). And the other way around. For reality's sake, I would
>> certainly prohibit good people killing good people, and evil killing evil,
>> forcing the war between good and evil. Thats nice. But most of the things
>> good players would then get would have !GOOD flag on it! And the other way
>> around. How ironic!

[snip a bit]

>It's odd that you're willing to stop good players from killing other good
>players (some sort of nod to roleplaying, but not really the way to do it,
>imho), but you are considered about the utility of items. If the mud was just
>roleplaying, your paladins should probably just take heart in having slaying
>foul necromancers, rather than plundering their material goods - but then
>again, why do you have the playerkilling? Is it just to give a tangible sense
>of your player's roles being carried to their logical conlusions, or is it
>also, as you imply, a means of redistribtuing in-game wealth?

A solution to the player killing aspect. Allow players to gather bands
of (things/people/creatures) that pal around with them. They can exert
control over X number of (t/p/c), and can gain loyalty with those in
question. (ala the afore mentioned groupA rating)

How does this fit into player killing? Have you ever watched one of those
shows, or played one of those games where person_X always gets away?

   "I'll get you next time, Gadget! Next time!"

This solves your player death problem. In a major brawl, your chaps against
your enemies, when the leader is about to get axed, they make their quick
retreat, while their chaps block persuit for a bit, then, if able, they
scram also.

Yes, I know this leads to some problems. What happens when you're alone?
And so on, and so forth; but it's just a thought... (besides, it will
give you something to keep persuing.)

>Someone mentioned sacrificing these items to the gods - why not make that a
>formal in-game gold. High-powered good/evil mobs would give out quests for the
>most powerful good/evil items in the game, giving a sense of both in-character
>and out-of-character reasons for wanting to nail your opponent.

>One thing that always troubled me as a player was the preponderance of
>good-only objects on good-aligned monsters. How should a good player go about
>trying to get these things? A solution I like is a 'request' system, where
>every so often, a player can request an item off of a good monster ("I truely
>need your sword, sir knight") - with limitations on how often you can do it,
>and the power level of the monsters/items in questions (Sure, you can ask that
>little boy for his sling shot, but what about Merlin for his wand?). You could
>take a system like this, and couple it with built in bounties on the items
>evil people carry.

Or perhaps, "the holy bat smasher" has been stolen from out monistary by X,
(X cannot be harmed by "the holy bat smasher", however, the bats want it
removed, and if it is removed, will do a favour for the thieves; the bats
are now safe to go hide in the bell tower because "the holy bat smasher" is
gone from the monistary, and those that stole it, were given a bunch of fruit
from the fruit bats, and thus are fed. -- Sure, it's a stretch, but hey, it
could explain why the giant rats have "the holy bat smasher", and also it
produces a quest for would-be-heroes.


More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list