[MUD-Dev] The Relationship between pkers andmonster AI?

Matthew Mihaly diablo at best.com
Mon Sep 13 12:26:55 New Zealand Standard Time 1999

On Sat, 11 Sep 1999, Mik Clarke wrote:

> No, the point is that after the first session or two it became accepted
> (and
> to some extent) expected behaviour within your group.  You cannot keep
> meeting and playing for 6 years if you do something that is not within
> the bounds of 'expected' play.  This concept of expected play - the
> unwritten contract of what a mud will supply is important as it affects
> players expectations of what will happen.  Wandering mobs are accepted
> as
> a part of them game.  Other parts are expected to be safe and PCs get
> rightly upset when the admins fail to keep them so (or at least to
> provide
> adequate warning that they are no longer safe).  People who do not
> expect
> to get attacked by other players (having done nothing to offend them)
> get
> more than a little upset when they are mugged or murdered for no reason
> other than simply looking like an easy mark.

*sighs as this discussion begins to take on tired airs of social contract

I don't believe in social contracts, I must say, and having been a mud
player for many years, I've never felt that there was any implied contract
that I wouldn't be killed by a player on a mud. The idea of
distinguishing, in that sense, between a mobile and a player is also silly
if you make any claim for roleplaying in your game.

What you say may be expected by _you_ but those are just one person's
expectations. I, and many others, do not expect such things, and I frankly
think it's extremely unreasonable to expect a mud admin to run HIS game
your way. Personally, I think that it's generally assumed that unless
something is specifically prohibited, it is allowed (that's certainly the
general way that Westerners think and treat issues like this).

MUD-Dev maillist  -  MUD-Dev at kanga.nu

More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list