31 Jan, 2009, Scandum wrote in the 21st comment:
Votes: 0
30 rolls is more than enough, especially when the standard gain is less than 1d12.
31 Jan, 2009, Sandi wrote in the 22nd comment:
Scandum said:
With repeated pseudo-random rolls it averages out leaving little to luck.
But that's my point - if it averages out, why bother rolling?
31 Jan, 2009, Scandum wrote in the 23rd comment:
Sandi said:
But that's my point - if it averages out, why bother rolling?
Scandum said:
With repeated pseudo-random rolls it averages out leaving little to luck.
But that's my point - if it averages out, why bother rolling?
To create the illusion of diversity, when there is none. I've seen people trying to level at specific times and even while sleeping in the odd belief that it would create better hit gains. It adds a little mystery to the game at zero cost.
31 Jan, 2009, Omega wrote in the 24th comment:
Illusions of Diversity. Ahh.
Character creation on my mud:
When you start character creation, it randomizes everything, race, class, subclass, sex, leaves stats at the base of the racial stats.
Creation is entirely menu-driven, (nice layout) so you can always go back and change things.
so you adjust your stats, then you choose you want a different race, you change it, it resets the stats. (simple to racial stats)
You can log into my game, and have a completely random character waiting for you, with nothing more then stats to train. And if you don't want to customize during creation, you retain the trains when you enter the game. So you never lose out.
Balance/Diversity, every race has its own unique skill. And every class has its own base design.
A medic is not the best at combat by any means, but a combat-arms class pwns at it. The entire mud was based around the belief that every class needs to have its own specific purpose in-mind. Creating a completely unique feel for the mud. Sure a medic can go out and kill, it just has a much harder time then a combat-arms class.
Damage Displays. Getting into mechanics of combat. I always believe it is in the best interest of the player to see how much damage they deal. Be it my time playing d&d or just being curious. I feel that it is a gameplay factor. Not seeing how much damage you deal makes players think too much about the mechanics of the game. And will find fault where there is none.
Sleeping for hit-gains. Interesting concept. (peers at his mud code) Yup, sleeping makes you heal faster. But only if your not poisoned, plagued, infected with radiation sickness. Or a bleeding wound… Also don't gain health in combat.
Removal of Thac0: Since I'm here, customization of characters is great. It gives great options for what todo with the ancient systems, like most muds that use the Evil Thac0 code.
I just moved to the d20 system. For those whom don't know it, it works more like.
Roll 1d20 + modifiers
vs
Victim AC + Modifiers
if roll >= victim-ac hit occurs.
else failure.
I know its not really a customizational thing, but at the same time, it is, most muds using thac0, being set by class. This gives an option to revamp the entire way things are looked at on the hole, ofcourse, it also means porting all weapons/armor…… (holds his head from that headache)
Health gains (on level) I use a algorythm that takes your level, and spits out how much 'base' health you have for that level, and then we add on the constitution bonus.
So level 20 has 400 health. Your con is 19, you get +2. So your health would be 402.
Your bonus doesn't increment your total health per-level. Its just an 'added on top' bonus. Works great for balancing the mud.
I have other balance and creation modifications to help uniqify the mud. All worthy of noting here, because this is all about character creation.
* Note, back to the original question, what would make 'you happy with char creation' Honestly, at character creation, getting an option to pick a 'bonus' item from a list, such as a potion, food, magic ring, something small, but worthy of getting during the creation process, I feel it would help make the player feel more unique if they didn't all show up with the exact same gear. Sub Issue whatever for the merc/rom users. Giving the option to have alittle more then the norm is great.
– Perhaps based on class/subclass/race having completely different equipment after creation.
Something like that would make creation alittle more interesting. Perhaps giving the option of what outfit they'd like to wear, and ofcourse, it would have its own set of gear to give. Whether it be just naming conventions that change, or full on whats worn. I feel that would help make a more unique atmosphere during creation, and help create a difference in the way the mud feels at new character.
Hell, I think I'll put that into my mud, why not, makes the mud more interesting.
Character creation on my mud:
When you start character creation, it randomizes everything, race, class, subclass, sex, leaves stats at the base of the racial stats.
Creation is entirely menu-driven, (nice layout) so you can always go back and change things.
so you adjust your stats, then you choose you want a different race, you change it, it resets the stats. (simple to racial stats)
You can log into my game, and have a completely random character waiting for you, with nothing more then stats to train. And if you don't want to customize during creation, you retain the trains when you enter the game. So you never lose out.
Balance/Diversity, every race has its own unique skill. And every class has its own base design.
A medic is not the best at combat by any means, but a combat-arms class pwns at it. The entire mud was based around the belief that every class needs to have its own specific purpose in-mind. Creating a completely unique feel for the mud. Sure a medic can go out and kill, it just has a much harder time then a combat-arms class.
Damage Displays. Getting into mechanics of combat. I always believe it is in the best interest of the player to see how much damage they deal. Be it my time playing d&d or just being curious. I feel that it is a gameplay factor. Not seeing how much damage you deal makes players think too much about the mechanics of the game. And will find fault where there is none.
Sleeping for hit-gains. Interesting concept. (peers at his mud code) Yup, sleeping makes you heal faster. But only if your not poisoned, plagued, infected with radiation sickness. Or a bleeding wound… Also don't gain health in combat.
Removal of Thac0: Since I'm here, customization of characters is great. It gives great options for what todo with the ancient systems, like most muds that use the Evil Thac0 code.
I just moved to the d20 system. For those whom don't know it, it works more like.
Roll 1d20 + modifiers
vs
Victim AC + Modifiers
if roll >= victim-ac hit occurs.
else failure.
I know its not really a customizational thing, but at the same time, it is, most muds using thac0, being set by class. This gives an option to revamp the entire way things are looked at on the hole, ofcourse, it also means porting all weapons/armor…… (holds his head from that headache)
Health gains (on level) I use a algorythm that takes your level, and spits out how much 'base' health you have for that level, and then we add on the constitution bonus.
So level 20 has 400 health. Your con is 19, you get +2. So your health would be 402.
Your bonus doesn't increment your total health per-level. Its just an 'added on top' bonus. Works great for balancing the mud.
I have other balance and creation modifications to help uniqify the mud. All worthy of noting here, because this is all about character creation.
* Note, back to the original question, what would make 'you happy with char creation' Honestly, at character creation, getting an option to pick a 'bonus' item from a list, such as a potion, food, magic ring, something small, but worthy of getting during the creation process, I feel it would help make the player feel more unique if they didn't all show up with the exact same gear. Sub Issue whatever for the merc/rom users. Giving the option to have alittle more then the norm is great.
– Perhaps based on class/subclass/race having completely different equipment after creation.
Something like that would make creation alittle more interesting. Perhaps giving the option of what outfit they'd like to wear, and ofcourse, it would have its own set of gear to give. Whether it be just naming conventions that change, or full on whats worn. I feel that would help make a more unique atmosphere during creation, and help create a difference in the way the mud feels at new character.
Hell, I think I'll put that into my mud, why not, makes the mud more interesting.
31 Jan, 2009, quixadhal wrote in the 25th comment:
KaVir said:
But if you hide the numbers, it'll instead be about first trying to work out the mechanics, because otherwise combat will be based on luck instead of skill. You cannot properly play a competitive game if you don't even know the rules.
quixadhal said:
In short, the game should be about beating the NPC's, or beating the other players…
But if you hide the numbers, it'll instead be about first trying to work out the mechanics, because otherwise combat will be based on luck instead of skill. You cannot properly play a competitive game if you don't even know the rules.
So, if you pick up a baseball bat, you need to know exactly how much it weights, how long it is, and exactly how fast the ball is speeding towards you before you can play? You have to memorize the exact odds of every poker hand that can come up to enjoy playing 7-card stud? Sorry, I don't agree. I don't need to know how many microns of action the keys on my keyboard have in order to type, but I can tell that I am faster or more accurate on some keyboards than others.
KaVir said:
Precisely - and such information can frequently become outdated or redundant. I vaguely recall when I was very young, playing games with other children at school where we would make up the rules as we went along. But while might work for children (despite being the source of many arguments), it's not the way I play competitive games as an adult.
DavidHaley said:
Because the one tells you up front, and the other requires you to go through potentially lengthy (and expensive) trial and error to reverse-engineer the game rules.
Precisely - and such information can frequently become outdated or redundant. I vaguely recall when I was very young, playing games with other children at school where we would make up the rules as we went along. But while might work for children (despite being the source of many arguments), it's not the way I play competitive games as an adult.
We're not talking about changing the rules, or having them be unknown. We're talking about you needing to know exact numbers as opposed to mechanics. Knowing that the iron sword does more damage but has the same accuracy as the copper sword tells you that the iron weapon is more powerful. Knowing that your friend does more damage with the copper sword than you do, tells you that his strength is higher, but not high enough to offset the difference in weapon types.
Nowhere in that do the rules change. Higher strength happens to let you do more damage, and an iron sword also does more damage than a copper sword. You just don't know exactly how much each matters until you've learned your character.
As calylia hinted at, knowing the numbers makes you feel compelled to min-max, rather than just playing the game. If I don't *know* that my STR is "only" 12, I may well still play a fighter and have fun doing it. If it's PvP that's making you feel compelled to min-max, either the system is too limiting or the so-called epic gear isn't very epic (IE: rare), since you should be able to compensate any lack of numerical superiority with enchants/gear/pots or just plain human cleverness in how you fight.
I also concur that there's no "right" choice. Only a right one for you. If your game is starting out, do whatever YOU think works best and the kind of players who like that system will find you. If you have an existing base, you'll have to try and find out what they would prefer – or accept that many of them will leave if you change things too radically.
31 Jan, 2009, Scandum wrote in the 26th comment:
Darien said:
Sleeping for hit-gains. Interesting concept. (peers at his mud code) Yup, sleeping makes you heal faster. But only if your not poisoned, plagued, infected with radiation sickness. Or a bleeding wound… Also don't gain health in combat.
I was talking about the hit gain for gaining a level.
Quote
I just moved to the d20 system.
If I ever do a new system I think I'll use a d100 system. To determine success a d100 is rolled against another d100 that is subtracted from the first roll. This creates a number between -99 and 99 before modifiers. Anything > 0 is a success.
edit: I'd also totally abuse pseudo random number generation. It's an area where close to nothing (as far as I know) has been done with in the gaming industry.
31 Jan, 2009, David Haley wrote in the 27th comment:
I'm sorry, the law of large numbers simply does not apply at all with just 30 rolls. You can make an argument about the difference not being that great depending on the size of the rolls etc., but it is mathematically false to argue that the law of large numbers applies. If you take random samplings of 30 times 1d12, it is unlikely that every one of them will be very close to 180. Depending on the game, maybe the difference between 30 and 100 hp isn't that great – well, fine – but if that is truly the case, I have to agree with Sandi's question of why bother in the first place. If it's all just for the illusion, why have interesting game mechanics at all, why have variance in stats, why not make everything a number that affects things only trivially?
I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Are you talking about predicting the random number generator? Good luck with that, given that you're not the only one getting random numbers…
I'm also not sure why you think that basically nothing has been done with respect to better generators than the basic "rand" function.
Scandum said:
edit: I'd also totally abuse pseudo random number generation. It's an area where close to nothing (as far as I know) has been done with in the gaming industry.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Are you talking about predicting the random number generator? Good luck with that, given that you're not the only one getting random numbers…
I'm also not sure why you think that basically nothing has been done with respect to better generators than the basic "rand" function.
31 Jan, 2009, quixadhal wrote in the 28th comment:
It may be worth noting here that MUDs, and many computer games of the genre, are attempts to re-create the D&D experience without the need for a DM or physically getting together to play. As such, you don't really WANT random numbers to be totally random!
Yeah, you read that right. What you actually want is a random number generator which can make the same judgement calls about when to fudge the dice rolls that a human DM will do. That means not only making a decision based on what's happening in game, but also on the mood of the players.
A good DM knows how to scale the difficulty of an already-in-progress encounter, not just based on how the players are doing, but on the overall feel of the room. If everyone is tired, the DM will try to make things go faster, often by letting the mobs have fewer hit points than they really should have had. If the players are getting too cocky, or act like they want a challenge, they may get an upgrade. The point is, to have fun. Having the party wipe when they do something stupid can be fun, but having them wipe because everyone is tired and not paying attention is no fun.
So far, the computer can't tell the difference, and so even with some heuristics to adjust difficulty based on how the players are doing, it still can't tell the difference between someone not paying attention and getting pissed off, and someone eagerly charging ahead to see if they can do it.
That doesn't mean we don't want the PRNG to actually be as random as possible, but it does mean most players would not enjoy combat that is based too heavily around the numbers. You can see that in MMO development via the "swish" factor. Players tend to not complain about hit streaks, but certainly notice miss streaks. City of Heroes went so far as to put anti-streak code in to prevent more than 5 hits or misses in a row.
It's good to keep that in mind when talking about needing a "better" PRNG.
Yeah, you read that right. What you actually want is a random number generator which can make the same judgement calls about when to fudge the dice rolls that a human DM will do. That means not only making a decision based on what's happening in game, but also on the mood of the players.
A good DM knows how to scale the difficulty of an already-in-progress encounter, not just based on how the players are doing, but on the overall feel of the room. If everyone is tired, the DM will try to make things go faster, often by letting the mobs have fewer hit points than they really should have had. If the players are getting too cocky, or act like they want a challenge, they may get an upgrade. The point is, to have fun. Having the party wipe when they do something stupid can be fun, but having them wipe because everyone is tired and not paying attention is no fun.
So far, the computer can't tell the difference, and so even with some heuristics to adjust difficulty based on how the players are doing, it still can't tell the difference between someone not paying attention and getting pissed off, and someone eagerly charging ahead to see if they can do it.
That doesn't mean we don't want the PRNG to actually be as random as possible, but it does mean most players would not enjoy combat that is based too heavily around the numbers. You can see that in MMO development via the "swish" factor. Players tend to not complain about hit streaks, but certainly notice miss streaks. City of Heroes went so far as to put anti-streak code in to prevent more than 5 hits or misses in a row.
It's good to keep that in mind when talking about needing a "better" PRNG.
31 Jan, 2009, Igabod wrote in the 29th comment:
I stumbled upon this rogue-like game one day about 7 or 8 months ago and really enjoyed the character creation process. It's fairly lengthy but definitely cool. The game itself isn't quite ready for full play yet but it's worth checking it out. The address is http://www.incursion-roguelike.org/index....
It's not the typical character creation that I would choose for a mud usually, but it does provide some really nice ideas. It also incorporates some of the more unique ideas I've seen expressed here, such as the choosing between a list of items, skills, and feats. If I was going to rewrite the nanny code, I'd use this game for a lot of my ideas.
It's not the typical character creation that I would choose for a mud usually, but it does provide some really nice ideas. It also incorporates some of the more unique ideas I've seen expressed here, such as the choosing between a list of items, skills, and feats. If I was going to rewrite the nanny code, I'd use this game for a lot of my ideas.
31 Jan, 2009, quixadhal wrote in the 30th comment:
Interesting, although it's got nothing on Dwarf Fortress. :)
31 Jan, 2009, Igabod wrote in the 31st comment:
quixadhal said:
Interesting, although it's got nothing on Dwarf Fortress. :)
yet that is… it is actually modeled after Dwarf Fortress and a few other notable rogue-likes. The person coding it has some really awesome ideas in progress though. The race/subrace feature is really neat and I'm eagerly awaiting it's completion. I've either never played DF or have only played it a couple times, I can't remember. Either way, I don't know whether it has as in-depth of a character creation process as incursion does. The thing that really attracted me to incursion was the subraces and the feats. The feats idea was taken from Ancient Domains of Mystery (ADOM) I believe, the subraces was from some game I've not played yet.
Jeeze my brain is stringing sentences together in weird order. Please everybody excuse me for today, I'm sick as a dog and unfortunately couldn't take off another day without having to go to the doctor which I can't afford.
[edit to add in quote for context]
[edit to add this]I just downloaded DF and haven't played it yet, but I was looking through the website and it looks like this might indeed be a great game. It has active development by more than just one person, and even a community devoted to modding it. I gotta thank you for the link quix. I'm sure I'll enjoy playing this when I get off work.
31 Jan, 2009, quixadhal wrote in the 32nd comment:
If you're really bored, check out these videos… http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=...
Be sure to click the high-quality version, otherwise you won't be able to read the text. Yes, it's a multi-part tutorial for Dwarf Fortress. The game really is quite complex. :)
It's probably also worth mentioning that it is a real-time strategy game, despite using rogue-like graphics. You want to pause early and pause often!
Be sure to click the high-quality version, otherwise you won't be able to read the text. Yes, it's a multi-part tutorial for Dwarf Fortress. The game really is quite complex. :)
It's probably also worth mentioning that it is a real-time strategy game, despite using rogue-like graphics. You want to pause early and pause often!
31 Jan, 2009, Igabod wrote in the 33rd comment:
Yeah I've been reading through the forums a little bit and I'm discovering that it's not quite what I was thinking it was before. I may have to wait till my brain isn't so foggy from cold medicine to actually try and play this.
31 Jan, 2009, quixadhal wrote in the 34th comment:
Well, just remember their motto. "Losing is fun!"
31 Jan, 2009, Igabod wrote in the 35th comment:
Ever played ADOM? I didn't even know it was possible to win till I played the game regularly for about 2 years.
[edit to add] and even then I had to cheat by looking at the spoiler guide.
[edit to add] and even then I had to cheat by looking at the spoiler guide.
31 Jan, 2009, KaVir wrote in the 36th comment:
KaVir said:
I'd also like to add that I strongly dislike hidden numbers
quixadhal said:
You have to memorize the exact odds of every poker hand that can come up to enjoy playing 7-card stud?
Do you think poker would be more fun if the values - the numbers - were hidden from the players? Do you think playing cards have the numbers printed on them to "stroke the egos" of the players?
quixadhal said:
We're not talking about changing the rules, or having them be unknown. We're talking about you needing to know exact numbers as opposed to mechanics.
It is hardly uncommon for numbers to be changed as a mud evolves and develops. Even well-established muds will make tweaks here and there to prevent stagnation - and the smallest of changes can sometimes have a huge impact on gameplay. Each time such changes take place, former knowledge becomes redundant, and the player is required to once again reverse-engineer their character.
quixadhal said:
As calylia hinted at, knowing the numbers makes you feel compelled to min-max, rather than just playing the game.
Remember that I'm specifically talking about competitive games, and in that context a certain degree of min-maxing is not something I would consider undesirable. Furthermore, hiding the numbers doesn't stop people from min-maxing, it just forces the players to jump through additional hoops.
It's also been my experience that increased transparency makes it easier to balance different aspects of the game. Increased game balance results in less min-maxing.
31 Jan, 2009, Sandi wrote in the 37th comment:
quixadhal said:
You have to memorize the exact odds of every poker hand that can come up to enjoy playing 7-card stud?
Yes. Absolutely. (but I tend to play blackjack and craps (less to memorize))
People like me stay far away from "friendly" games, however.
quixadhal said:
Sorry, I don't agree. I don't need to know how many microns of action the keys on my keyboard have in order to type, but I can tell that I am faster or more accurate on some keyboards than others.
But it sure would help to know that 'stat' if you were going to make a better keyboard, no? (this is about Creation, right?)
Just to underscore KaVir's last point, some have fun playing games, some have fun winning games. When you play to win, the rules change. Instead of limits, they become goals. You wouldn't fold as many times as I would in a poker game - you'd miss out on the "fun". And you wouldn't think I was fun to play with, 'cause you're playing with me, and I'm playing against you.
31 Jan, 2009, Dean wrote in the 38th comment:
Hades_Kane said:
Marrcon:
Edited to add: One of the reasons we've added in the hair/eye color, hair length, body type, etc. is to provide some means of a description for lazy people. I hate going into a game and looking at someone w/ no description, and thus having -no- indication of what this character looks like. On my game, when you look at someone, you see their character description, and then the last line is something like:
He is an short, obese Human adolescent with long blue hair. John is in perfect condition.
Edited to add: One of the reasons we've added in the hair/eye color, hair length, body type, etc. is to provide some means of a description for lazy people. I hate going into a game and looking at someone w/ no description, and thus having -no- indication of what this character looks like. On my game, when you look at someone, you see their character description, and then the last line is something like:
He is an short, obese Human adolescent with long blue hair. John is in perfect condition.
I'm one of those lazy people who will be happy to let those descriptors do the talking persay. The only time I bother with writing a description these is if I am on RPI mud that requires me to do so.
31 Jan, 2009, KaVir wrote in the 39th comment:
Dean said:
I'm one of those lazy people who will be happy to let those descriptors do the talking persay. The only time I bother with writing a description these is if I am on RPI mud that requires me to do so.
I actually prefer to use generated descriptions - I don't even give players the opportunity to write their own. There are obviously both pros and cons to such an approach, but I find it better suited to my style of mud.
31 Jan, 2009, Chris Bailey wrote in the 40th comment:
kavir said:
Do you think poker would be more fun if the values - the numbers - were hidden from the players? Do you think playing cards have the numbers printed on them to "stroke the egos" of the players?
quixadhal said:
You have to memorize the exact odds of every poker hand that can come up to enjoy playing 7-card stud?
Do you think poker would be more fun if the values - the numbers - were hidden from the players? Do you think playing cards have the numbers printed on them to "stroke the egos" of the players?
I might be misunderstanding either one of you, but I think that Quix is referring to the "odds" of the poker hand, not the values of the cards. If that is the case he doesn't mean that you should hide the card values, but imagine if every player had a small LCD screen in front of them printing out the current probability of their hand winning every time they received a card. That wouldn't be too much fun would it?
Random Picks
