On Tue, 4 Nov 1997 17:55:43 -0800 Daniel Koepke <dkoepke@CALIFORNIA.COM>
writes:
>On Tue, 4 Nov 1997, j f chaos wrote:
>
>-> I would also add in the ability for mobs to attack multiple
>->targets(can't remember the name of the snippet).
>
>Not terribly difficult. I would probably go a lot further, and
>redesign the combat system before I did trivial things like that,
>though. I like doing the big, bad stuff first. :)
>
I like to do the general stuff first and fine tune later.
I am going to have to write a separate combat system for my mud and keep
the original one also.
>-> Add an RP base for the mud, so that mobs are actually there for
>more
>->than just beating up. (Although it can be fun sometimes)
>
>I don't know if I follow the concept of a, "RP base." In other words,
>what exactly is a "RP base"? I would think it up to the individual
>administrator/coder to implement the style of role-playing he or she
>most desires. I wouldn't object to providing a script language, or
>perhaps a (primordial) logic engine for NPCs (e.g., if it is snowing,
>put on some clothes; if I'm smart and aggressive, and the person in
>front of me is 20' tall and carrying an oversized Claymore; and I'm
>2'4" and armed with a slingshot, I'll be smart enough to not get
>myself killed).
>
A logic engine would be great. And how about mob interaction, so that
they aren't just there to kill. They could drop hints at where to go,
maybe even just lead the character into an ambush. Even better would be
to have the mobs attack each other (if they are a rival gang or such).
>-> The ranged weapons patch is a good one to add, so that you
>don't
>->always have to be up close and personal w/ the mob
>
>I...errr...Bob...would never add patches to a derivitive unless they
>were written solely for BobMUD (if this ever comes to fruition, that
>might as well be its name; then...Bob...can have a little historical
>section on, "Why BobMUD?" four years from now), and even then, I would
>probably work on my own implemention.
>
Someone could always just port some of the better patches over to
BobMUD
>-> I don't know if I'd be willing to take anything out besides
>quite a
>->few of the stock areas.
>
>I was thinking about removing all the stock areas, changing the
^--Bob was thinking
>database format (maybe bothering to write a converter :P), and
>including a little Limbo-like area in the stock code. But I don't
>know if that really has the desire affect of making people do
>something creative with their MUD. I think it'd either make people
>not use BobMUD or force them to bother converting the stock areas.
You could include one zone, so that the user gets the feel for BobMUD,
and
how it works.
>Your thoughts (on the matter)?
>
I think the grey matter is great, it's what keeps us all the way we
are, and
allows us to be individual.
Lord Chaos
Individualist Extraordonaire
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/08/00 PST