Maybe we should stop being like DnD and be DnD?

Submit and discuss your ideas for the MUD.

Should we implement strict DnD for players or keep our beloved game the same?

keep it the same
7
47%
whatever brings in the new players
8
53%
 
Total votes: 15
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Maybe we should stop being like DnD and be DnD?

Postby kiryan » Thu Jan 12, 2006 4:01 pm

This is a really radical suggestion, but one of the big reasons I came to sojourn was that it had a mem system instead of a mana system. It was like DnD. I wonder how many people we would pick up if we were a more strict implementation of current DnD?

Then in essence, Wizards of the Coast would be doing our advertising for us by creating a gaming system that people pay money for (in buying books) and enjoy... Then maybe we can implement some sort of DM god positions where people could run mini campaigns for their buddies (like dnd is played in real life) and figure out some way to keep "monty haul" from happening.

I'm not voting in this poll, because I don't know how I feel about this idea on principle even beyond the thousands of hours of time it would take to remake the game.
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Postby Shevarash » Thu Jan 12, 2006 4:09 pm

No, I don't think we should "become" D&D, although - there is alot that we can learn from 3.5E D&D, and alot that we can use in this game.
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
Vigis
Sojourner
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Postby Vigis » Thu Jan 12, 2006 4:49 pm

Shevarash wrote:No, I don't think we should "become" D&D, although - there is alot that we can learn from 3.5E D&D, and alot that we can use in this game.


Apparently the correct spelling of "a lot" is not one of them :twisted:
Nerox tells you 'Good deal, the other tanks I have don't wanna do it, and since your my special suicidal tank i figure you don't mind one bit!'

Alurissi tells you 'aren't you susposed to get sick or something and not beable to make tia so i can go? :P'
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Thu Jan 12, 2006 7:44 pm

We'll id agree with you on the merits of the game Shev, but I don't think we could find any better advertising than to be able to say that we 99-100% implement 3.5 DnD. There are a lot of people who play dnd and there aren't a lot of dnd muds out there, not one that I've seen that really tries to implement 3.5.

I wonder, would you and the forgers be willing to create a second mud that you own with the toril areas/codebase and "hire" a team to develop it based on the 3.5e rules? You can always shut it down, but it might be interesting to see how well 3.5 can translate to a mud and how popular it would be.

Maybe even start them with the toril areas, but set the direction that every "new" zone written specifically for this new mud must eliminate an existing "toril" zone, so there is divergence at some point, but you don't start off with a mud that has 0 content.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:41 pm

There is literally no possible way to successfully implement 3.5 D&D in a text-based environment.

I am a halfling rogue in a party fighting a huge size ogre. I would like to tumble through his threatened space, draw my weapon during movement using quick draw, flank with the dwarven paladin, and land a sneak attack.

How exactly would you express that sequence of events using the toril engine? And more to the point, how do you express a turn-based simulation game in a realtime text environment?

Even Neverwinter Nights, in all of its graphical splendor, only manage to incorporate some 75-80% of 3.5 D&D into the game engine.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Drache
Sojourner
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Bloomington IN USA

Postby Drache » Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:25 am

Kiry smells like a monkey's butt.
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Postby Shevarash » Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:33 pm

It is obviously impossible for any computer game to completely replicate the tabletop experience. However, many of the core gameplay mechanics from D&D are well suited to computer gaming and we could benefit from implementing a portion of that.
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:55 pm

ragorn, you have a point, there are some things that are just not possible because of the creativity that is marshalled by the DM.

however, to address your scenario...

I might extend the combat round from 4 seconds to 30 seconds. Then allow actions to happen within the round or simply do away with rounds. So the fighter would initiate the fight, and the rogue would simply wait until the fighter flanked the mob, then initiated his tumble and sneak attack. Whether that took 10 seconds to flank or he opened with flank the rogue would wait until he saw the successful message before entering his command. It wouldn't be turned based per se, but you would have better opportunity to take a turn, and if you didnt make an action in the specified turn duration you simply wouldn't do anything.

second, action
------
1, fighter enters command to flank giant
2, giant draws his weapon
3, rogue enters command to tumble
4, rogue enters command to draw weapon
4, fighter swings at giant
5, giant swings at fighter
7, cleric casts a heal on fighter
8, fighter makes his double attack and swings a second time
10, rogue finsihes tumbling and enters the sneak attack command
11, giant switches to rogue
15, fighter makes his triple attack and swings a third time
18, rogue tumbles again
19, giant loses target
20, giant selects new target fighter

I remember combat in DnD being very short # of rounds and a high amount of damage (relative to hps) per hit. Making combat last 5 or 10 minutes for 5 or 6 rounds would actually be more inline with a table top experience. You could even setup a round in a 30 second planning phase and a 30 second action phase allowing chars to plan their round together in a queue or target second manner, then give them additional opportunity to change mid round as the fight goes unexpected.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Fri Jan 13, 2006 6:01 pm

or you could just make it turn based.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Fri Jan 13, 2006 7:27 pm

Or you could sign up for the D&D Online open beta.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Kallinar
Sojourner
Posts: 564
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2001 6:01 am
Location: C'ville Va.
Contact:

Postby Kallinar » Fri Jan 13, 2006 7:44 pm

I was told the d&d online beta is seriously nasty right now. I am sure a lot of people here could offer up some spanky advice to the noobs over there.
Kallinar goes MOO
Image
Confucious say: He who walk around with hand in pocket feel kockie all day.
Malacar
Sojourner
Posts: 1640
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Boston, MA, USA

Postby Malacar » Fri Jan 13, 2006 7:46 pm

Let me preface this comment by saying: I have played D&D for over 20 years. I love it, play it weekly, and would recommend it to any gamer.

That said...

I was in the D&D beta, and the game flat out sucked. It was boring, linear, and rather lame.
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Postby Shevarash » Fri Jan 13, 2006 7:54 pm

I haven't been very impressed by what I've read and seen of D&D Online either. I don't think thats a symptom of the d20/3.5 system but rather of a poor implementation.

How Turbine managed to snag two of the hottest licenses imaginable (D&D, LotR) after AC2 is beyond me...
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Fri Jan 13, 2006 9:04 pm

the dnd online beta looks like a graphical MMORPG. This suggestion is a text based RPG. Thats an apples to oranges comparison. There are inherent benefits to text games and different inherent benefits to graphical games.

And back to the point, before it was decided that dnd would be impossible to implement in text, we were actually talking about whether we would get more players if we more strictly implemented dnd than merely being based off dnd.

I don't know for sure, but I'd imagine there are a lot of players who would be interested in a more accurate dnd implementation than is available. Every mud seems to be dnd based, but how many can say they even have a spell circle system.. how many could say they even attempt to implement 3.5?

I think it would be worthy of some research and consideration, and if its impossible to alter toril to be more like 3.5 (which I'd probably agree that it is, why throw away what has taken years to refine) we could still attempt a new mud venture and derive any benefits for toril that are possible by controlling it. Whether thats code, areas or just marketing.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Fri Jan 13, 2006 9:12 pm

maybe we should start a mud where you are a terrorist that fights against the evil nations and market it to the middle east.

then 1 year after go live, we implement the evil race US and pvp their butts silly with advanced technology (artifacts).
Dalar
Sojourner
Posts: 4905
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Dalar » Fri Jan 13, 2006 9:27 pm

Shevarash wrote:I haven't been very impressed by what I've read and seen of D&D Online either. I don't think thats a symptom of the d20/3.5 system but rather of a poor implementation.

How Turbine managed to snag two of the hottest licenses imaginable (D&D, LotR) after AC2 is beyond me...


Is Microsoft still backing them up?
It will be fixed in Toril 2.0.
Aremat group-says 'tanks i highly suggest investing 20 silver in training weapons from cm to cut down on the losing scales to shield'
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Postby Shevarash » Sat Jan 14, 2006 3:43 am

No, MS dropped them when AC2 tanked.
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD

Return to “T2 Ideas Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests