From: bkoike@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Bryce Koike)
Newsgroups: rec.games.programmer
Subject: Re: player interaction in multiplayer games
Date: 6 Oct 92 16:41:17 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1992Oct6.072443.26551@u.washington.edu> hamrick@milton.u.washington.edu (Mike Hamrick) writes:
>djohnson@cs.ucsd.edu (Darin Johnson) writes:
>
>>It's not that player-player combat is wrong, it's that if not agreed
>>upon by both sides, it is socially unacceptable.  98% of the people
>>who do kill other players end up complaining when players try to
>>prevent this (and how it's not fair that players are ganging up
>>against them).  It is extremely disruptive to players who are trying
>>to play the game, solve the puzzles, etc., to suddenly have someone
>>kill them, take all of their possessions, and lose a level.  In a

	Just slightly annoying.  :(  One way, I suppose, would have
the players during the creation of their character to determine
whether or not they wanted to kill other PC's.  If so, they get a
mark by their name.  They can ONLY kill PC's who also have such a
mark by their name...they cannot kill "pacifist" PC's (somewhat
hokey, but it would work)...
	Or perhaps an alignment thingy where you could only attack
those of opposite alignment...(actually, that probably wouldn't work
out too well either)

>>single-player game, at least you can restore a save game.
>>(Imagine a multi-player nethack, where high level players waited
>>on the first level to kill players just entering)

	And if the high-level character died, the player would just
hit "Load game"...ack!
	One simple solution would be to create "levels" to the
world.  The "Inn" would have universal access to all levels (some
generic place for people to meet, trade items, buy stuff at stores,
etc, etc, blah, blah) but once you move up to a new level, you
cannot go back down.
	Incentive for going up to new levels:  tougher monsters,
more money, bigger prizes, etc (and you get nearer to the ultimate
"goal" whatever that might be).  Standing around on 1st Level will
probably get a high-level character nowhere because he wouldn't be
able to bash in enough monsters fast enough...they'd just be too
weak.  (Perhaps "experience points" for monsters rated below a
player's level should be reduced...so while a 1st level character
gets 30 exp for killing a Dwonk, the 5th level character might only
get 5...)

>I am currently fiddling with the Diku source, working on my own MUD.
>I may or may not run it on my SUN 4/100 for people in local Seattle area.
>If I do decide to run the thing there will be the following changes:
>
>1.  One character per account.

	I definitely like this. (Other abuses are still possible, of
course, but some are unavoidable...)
	Perhaps some "waiting period" before a player who's just
been killed can play again.  (To stop the Player 2 goes to Player 1,
gives him all his stuff, then attacks Player 1 and dies.  Player 2
logs back in and does it again....and again....)

>2.  Death is FINAL.

	I don't personally like this, but it's your game...who am I
to complain?  (Sure could be painful sometimes...)

>3.  Computer enforced mourning period where a specific account may not
>    access the game after the death of their character for a certain
>    time period (depending on level).

	Ah, I should read the entire message before I start to
babble.  Guess I'm not clever at all :)

>4.  No restrictions on player killing.

	Well, I think I already stated my opinion on this.  Perhaps
a player-killer could be indicated as such and his location is told
to all people playing the game.  (Okay, so I hate player-killers...
that's evident.  Not everyone feels this way, but in an anti-player
killer game, I could accept this mechanic...)

>5.  There will be no Gods, Immortals, Wizards, or any support staff.

	Has its bonuses and its minuses (but almost all of the above
does...)

>I think I will call it AnarchyMUD.  I expect people to deal with "bad
>people" the same way they do in real life.
>
>I am not sure if people will enjoy playing this mud, but it will be an
>interesting experiment.  Oh yeah, gotta get more phone lines, sigh.
>
>mikeh

	Well, it certainly sounds interesting!  Perhaps at the "inn"
there should be a roster of "wanted criminals"...