From: cnc@balboa.eng.uci.edu (Christopher Christensen)
Subject: Re: player interaction in multiplayer games [was Re: <None>]
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games,rec.games.programmer,comp.sys.amiga.games
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 5 Oct 92 03:00:00 GMT

Wayne C. McCullough writes:
>Christopher Christensen (me!) writes:
>>my opinions:
>>
>>As for bullies beating up on new characters:
>>  A.  There should be a safe area (probably where they begin the game)
>>      where violence is not permitted.  (a temple or something)
>>      (just like in lpmud)
>>  B.  The player being bullied could give a "hue and cry".. basically
>>      shout for the cops.. so as long as the player is near civilization
>>      he can count on being pretty safe as long as the guards are about.
>>  C.  Player-player conflict should be discouraged by the sysadmin(s)
>>      (whoever is in charge of the thing)
>>      (just like in lpmud)

>I think you are missing part of the point.  Competition is desireable
>in this sort of game.  In most muds I have been in, player-player combat
>is actively discouraged, and instead all the competition you get is
>who can run to the monsters first after each regeneration.  If you don't
>have interplayer violence, moderated by gods and wizzards, you take out
>a major degree of realism.  Leave it in, and let it be moderated by players,
>not the dreaded "blue lightning bolt from the heavens punishing you
>for your sinful actions.  Tsk, Tsk" 

Well, I'm definitely against any sort of automatic punishment for
attacking another player.  On one hand, I don't think that powerful
players should have free reign to slaughter weaker characters at will,
on the other hand I don't think that all player-player conflict should
be forbidden.  Part of the problem is that characters can die pretty
easily and players who die are severely penalized.
Here's an idea:  how about a more "realistic" combat system..
instead of having hit-points and the player dies when they reach zero,
have 2 combat variables, energy and body.. different weapons inflict
varying amounts of damage to energy and body.  For example, a fist or a
boxing glove would inflict mostly energy-damage and little or no
body-damage.
When the character reaches zero energy, s/he collapses unconscious but
will rapidly recover as energy is quickly replenished.  Body damage is
more permanent and takes longer to restore.  If body reaches zero, the
character dies.  Body does not increase with experience, energy does.
With this type of combat system, players could fight each other in a
non-lethal way by using non-lethal weapons.  A thief could take someone
by surprize, knock them out and steal their stuff without having to kill
them first.
I think alot of enhancements could be made to the combat system
including targetting specific body areas and so forth.  The present
system used by most computer RPGs is based on the D&D system which was
designed to be simple enough to play quickly using paper and dice.
Computers can roll dice and take care of all of the combat
accounting-work much faster than humans can so why not make the combat
more complex and realistic?
The combat system needs to be carefully thought-out and fine-tuned so
as to be as realistic as possible.
I think many more statistics should be kept on each player, not just
strength, dexterity and intelligence.. and no character should be
perfect, each character should have different strengths and weaknesses.
More stats allows characters to have more "character"!
I'd also like to see a system where characters can sustain permanent
injuries.. blindness, deafness, brain damage, missing or damaged limbs,
fingers and toes and of course scars.
opinions?

--
|  Christopher  |  Computer Engineering graduate student, UC Irvine  |
|  Christensen  |  cnc@balboa.eng.uci.edu                            |
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games