On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 12:26:45PM -0600, Mark Roberts wrote: > > Sure. What conceptical things do you want to talk about? > > Ok... try this on for size. > Remove rooms from ROM. Replace them with an (x, y, z) coordinate system. > Players have vectors (which include both direction and speed.) > Everything has descriptions for certain distances. At a distance, you could > see "There's someone over there." A bit closer "There's an elf over there." > closer: "There's an elf slinking around here." (stance.) "Earl, the Elven > Thief stands here." (Stance). As you approach something, you see there's a > tree a bit off to your right, and an elf by the tree. To your left, you see a > small wooden shack. (Since everything has a DESCRIPTION and a construct > material.) Of course, then elves might need to see better than humans, so you > have a vision limit... and that can be fun.
Don't get this wrong, but I don't like a coordinate system. Specially because it's not like real life. Look at it this way and compare your street with your house: regarding size the house is small and the street is big. But then, there are more single locations in your house which important for you: your room, the living room, the kitchen, the toilet, the stairs, the garage with your bicycle and your garden. The street? Maybe three interesting points: the road to the rest of the world, your house and the house of the love of your life. So the small space in your house has more important things to show than the big space outside of it. The coordinate system can't easily show this, since all information is shown relative to the other information. With a room-based system it's easier to enlarge areas of importance (your house has nine rooms and the street has only three of them) > Maybe we could discuss there merit of levelless equipment in a leveled world. > I mean, if ROM is so "realistic" as to say that you have to EAT every so > often.. (Even if there ISN'T any "real" side-affect of not eating..) Why > should someone be prohibited from pickup up a nice sword? Maybe one way to > get around this is to have most weapons relatively similar. 1d8, 1d12, 2d6... It's more to do with skills in a weapon-type than with which level you are or what kind of weapon it is: A sharp dagger can do in my hands (high dex, elf, thief) hands than in the hands of a clumpsy person (low dex, troll, fighter). Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with the way skills/weapons are implemented by default, but for players it's the easiest way. > > What better implementation of the unlimited bits code do you have > > in mind? It's so simple you can't make it simpler. > I don't have a "better" one... I merely have a "different" one. Feel free to explain. > > What would you do with the nanny? I've removed all references to > > character-data out of it and the only thing being worked there with > > is the descriptor-data. > > Make it account based. Why did you think I wanted to get rid of the character-data there? Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.MavEtJu.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Interested in MUDs? Visit Fatal Dimensions: ------------------+ http://www.FatalDimensions.org/
