At 03:45 PM 7/4/00 -0500, Patrick Dughi wrote:
><snip>
> struct forge_data {
> int **vnum_list;
> int top_vnum_list;
> int res_vnum;
> int skill;
> }
Another viable mechanism. I prefer the former, for simplicity's sake. See
below.
> Well, like I said, we don't need to use constants. Too
>limiting/memory inefficient.
How is it memory inefficient? Limiting... well I can see that. But I don't
think that
there is any per se "easier" way of doing this. Text file? Database? If so,
I'd still
want to read it into an array of these structs.
> Now, granted, that's not involving any skill (or perhaps you
>depend on an NPC to simulate the creation). However, it's a simply
>workaround.
True. Creating container items such as a forge, requiring hammers, having
an anvil
present at the forge, the quality of all of those said items, all should
factor in. If you
haven't noticed, we're looking at a _very_ large and complex system.
Forging will
be but one aspect of it. Tailoring, jewelcrafting (from cutting raw stones,
etc., to
smithing the necklaces), etc. are all planned.
> In truth though, the biggest problem I see with
>assembled/forged/combined/etc items, is that they're not well used. Lets
>assume we require skills to 'forge' an item. Right there, we have limited
>it's usefulness. Just as we cannot allow a mage to have a backstab more
>powerful than any other attack, or a fireball from a mage as the ultimate
>killing weapon, we cannot raise a 'forged' item up as the new holy grail.
>It must be balanced within the mud, and as an item which is only created
>by (i'm assuming) a small subset of players, it cannot be unbalancing.
>Add in the fact that you have to both know how to create something, and
>that you have to gather the material; resulting in the end in a product
>which is at most +3 or so (depending on your system) for hit/damage to
>remain balanced. While a few hardcore, 16 hour a day players will get it,
>many people won't go though that trouble. It's not worth it to builders
>and coders to spend the time to make the system and the mini-quest type
>setups to recieve both the items and the recipe, so that only a very few
>could profit from it.
Certain classes will be able to use it. A small set of classes per
artificing skill.
Merchants would be more of the jewelers, "commoners" would be the blacksmiths,
etc. Certain recipies are known. Others would be quest results. Same with the
ingredients.
> Let's assume the opposite; it takes no foreknowledge of recipies
>(they're written out somewhere accessable), and you require no skill.
>Now, the ability is so common that the result, the product of the
>combination must be fairly negliable. You're probably going to dismiss
>armor and weapons (anything permanant) all together. No one wants
>crap that is unusable. Lets stick to other things, like potions, salves,
>etc - things which are transitory, have a set number of uses/charges.
>These things I think are a much richer object to use - it shouldn't hurt
>anyones balance to have a character with 20 or so cure light wounds
>potions. The older characters will barely notice - true, but the younger
>characters will thrive on them (assuming old=higher levels & higher levels
>= higher hitpoints). Because you're using ingredients to create it, it's
>natrually limting howmany you actually can have.. so no one will hve 3
>million, but they'll still be common enough to be in day-to-day usage.
Make a large set of recipies. Make some of the ingredients the objects
of quests. Suddenly the amount of work to make an item just doubled--
or more, depending on the quest. And depending on your skill, you might
trash the ingredient rather than produce the desired result.
Maybe some ingredients are only manually given out by immortally-ran
quests.
Enchanting artificed items is something else that will need to be carefully
looked
at. I'm leaning towards a type of transmutation spell. Where you give a
piece of
silver ore to a wizard (vnum 123) and he enchants it. He returns a piece of
star-silver ore (vnum 2456). The original ore when combined with certain
ingredients
might produce a silver necklace. The new one might produce a star-silver
necklace
which has 5 charges of continual light.
I might tie it to an event system so that they might have to wait one or
two turns
before gaining the resulting object. Considering that they might have to forge
ore into bits, bits into bars, bars into blades, and then blades into
swords, it
will probably take a bit of time to get a fully finished item anyways.
><snip> Cosmetic value is important in a few ways.
Agreed.
> Let forge be the ability to enhance your weapon/armor/item. You
>can name it, or inscribe it. Embed gems in the pommel, tint it with
>special colors, make the edges especially jagged or especially sharp,
>remake parts of a weapon with rare metals, or if your campaign's
>magic/technology allows it, gemstone or demon bones, or dragonclaws
>(Granted, you'd have to procure the gem/dragon-demon bones, etc).
Hmmmm. Interesting concept, to re-forge an item and make it better. Ie,
take a steel sword and forge it with mithril to gain a stithil sword...
*ponder* This will take some consideration.
> The one problem that I can see with this (aside from an evaluation
>process.. you wouldn't want someone to change their weapon so everyone
>sees "Duke wields an atomic weapon with the slogan 'f#^k you' inscribed on
>it's side'")
Restringing is something I want to do. However, I would like to make that
a per se part of the forging process. So someone could commission a sword
that has the description of "XYZ" from a merchant. The merchant then turns
to a commoner smith and passes it along. Commoner sells to merchant
finished product. Merchant then takes it and makes contact with the
commissioner of the item (storing it in their store for safekeeping, which
could
get robbed) and marks it up at a profit.
> Now, a steel longsword, or a brass shield, these need some
>embelishment. You can even up the stats so they're equivilent (but not
>above) the unique items that oddly enough, everyone has, that I talk about
>above. You get two benefits; suddenly there is a plethorea of new,
>interesting, unique items on your mud - making the players happy and
>attracting new ones, and two, your skill/tool/etc is being used.
This is going to be a very involved system. Tying it in with quests is
going to make
it even more so.
Basically, I have seen the realism vs. popularity arguments. I tend to
disagree.
Levelling takes priority over RP because people enjoy it more. Because they
get stronger doing so.
But, in my viewpoint, the more ways you give the player to spend his/her
time, the
less of a focus on levelling they will have. So. The objectives and ways a
player
can spend his/her time are:
* Level
* RP
* Quest
* Make items
* Buy/sell items
If you make a detailed, extensive quest system, people will use it. Especially
when you reward their time adequately. Or give them something that can be
an integral part of making their character stronger, if they put the pieces
together, or work with someone else to do so.
Yes, I want to see a lot of varied magical items strewn throughout the
playerbase.
Some will be common. Others will not. It's all going to depend on the interests
and perseverence of the player.
Just my thoughts.... one of the long subjects of discussion that my staff
has been
faced with.
--SR
--
StormeRider "Peace favor your code."
thelastsunrise.net 9000 (http://www.thelastsunrise.net)
windsofstorm.net 4008 (http://winds.windsofstorm.net)
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://qsilver.queensu.ca/~fletchra/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/10/01 PDT