Posted by The First Apostle on December 1, 2000 at 11:13:44:
In Reply to: What cost realism? (A little long) posted by Radakh on December 1, 2000 at 08:30:25:
> It seems the staff at CF is striving for an enriching realistic That's a question I've often wondered. Everytime something new is > One other thing I'm On a basic level, it has always seemed to me they attempt to make > The idea of realism is nice, but at what point does having This is a good argument, but there is quite a bit we don't know about > It's almost like taking care of one of those Agreed. Why should I all of a sudden be made to feel uncomfortable. However, The permutations that might go into calculating morale make my head spin. It shouldn't.. but then again.. how many characters take that into account. I'm very curious about morale, and how it works. We (players) tend to get a
> feel to their mud which is wonderful, but I'm wondering if too
> much emphasis is being put on realism.
implemented a cringe a little bit (like the sicknesses). Is it too
much? At first, it always seems like that, but after being tweaked
it tends to settle down quite a bit. The new addition settles into
the fabric of the game. I'm sure 'morale' will take a similar path.
> wondering about is the direction the staff is taking CF. Are
> they striving for a pk mush or something no other mud has attempted
> before?
novel additions to the game. Adding new aspects to a game no one else
has tried or improving on someone elses idea is quite challenging. If
they (admin) didn't find new ways to challenge themselves running this
mud would become rather boring.
> outside influences like morale become too much? I personally don't
> understand why my character is telling me things now instead of me
> telling the character.
morale. One the one hand I happen to aggree with you. I don't like the
idea of the character dictating *my* reactions to an event. However,
there is so much I don't know about morale, it makes it difficult to
fully comment on it.
> digital pets. Not only must I deal with 7 (insert cabal here) members
> ganging me, I must also figure out why my character has become bipolar.
there are situations where a character might not feel as comfortable as he/she
should. Would a neutral cloud giant be fully comfortable with a chaotic evil
drow shaman? Shouldn't neutral dwarves grouped with duergar be wary? I should
note that these are speculations on how morale might be working, and are be
meant to be taken with a grain of salt, but your point makes sense.
> The idea of not completely trusting your groupmates does make sense, but
> how long does it take to get to know the fellow before you'll allow him
> to cast on you?
> Why should that be determined for you?
Restating my point above.. would a dwarf fully trust a duergar in his group?
> I know nobody in
> their right minds will roleplay not trusting because of the time involved
> getting to know their group instead of ranking. It just seems ridiculous
> to have to sit there and talk and walk around as a group when the only way
> to gain ranks is to kill things.
> I guess my biggest concern is having uncontrollable factors given out by the
> game forcing me to play a character a certain way in order to rank easier.
> Roleplay is nice, but killing mobs repeatedly is still the only way to make a
> character gain ranks and get the cool new skills. If roleplaying is the biggest
> factor in the mud, then perhaps it's time to look at a new way of character
> advancement.
little apprehensive when something new is implemented that we don't quite have
a handle of. Give it some time. It's possible this is part of a larger picture
we aren't privy to yet.