[MUD-Dev] Striving for originality

Matt Chatterley matt at eldoops.co.uk
Wed Jun 12 10:17:29 New Zealand Standard Time 2002


On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Damion Schubert wrote:

[Snip]

> What I tell my designers is that different classes should be
> 'unequal' but 'balanced'.  Which is to say, if all of the classes
> are roughly equivalent, you've probably nerfed or cut the knees
> out of some really cool abilities.

I always figure the world would turn out pretty boring if everyone
who played in it was equal. I am to provide different play-styles
through different characters (and different play-styles for the same
types of characters, if possible). However, I also strive for
balance. That is to say; A Thief should not be inherently 'worse'
than a Warrior. They should both be fun to play. At the same 'level
of power' a Warrior would batter a thief in a fair hand-to-hand
fight. If the thief had the drop on him?  Perhaps not. Certainly,
the Warrior would have trouble catching the thief if he started to
run away and hide. :)

> A common example: charm.  I've seen many people describe 'charm'
> and 'mesmerize' spells as inherent imbalancers, that simply
> shouldn't be implemented at all.  I see it as quite the opposite:
> a great, different ability which is quite different from the usual
> spat of 'deal damage/ do damage' spells and combat effects.  You
> just need to know the limits of your charm spells going in, and
> ensure that it has achilles' heels which balance it out (too
> often, I've seen 'charm' implemented as an afterthought after all
> other combat systems were done).

Time for a potentially controversial statement.


No single spell or ability is inherently unbalanced, or
unbalancing. Only broken implementations or poorly thought through
designs cause imbalance.

Discuss. ;)

--Matt

_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev



More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list