> Appereance
> Clothes are things you can change when ever you want. ( I understand
> your idea of character recognition but ...).
> But Skin, hair and eye color is only modifiable during generation or
> using disguise skill/abilite.
Understood, just thought it was easier conceptually and functionally
> Attributes
> QUESTION: What means "Generated at character generation using a 50%
> setpoint for race of the character"?
The character is generated with the attribute set to the middle of the range
for that characters race.
>
> Size
> It would be better if we make human size to be around 30 and we scale
> the rest of things into this scale ( 0-255 )
> Anyway if you think it is imposible to fit in that format we could use
> floats, but this is going to be a real pain.
> QUESTION: Are floats portable? or we need to modify it as 16 bits and
> 32 bits integers?
Question is then what will be the smallest thing and the largest things we
will try to represent in this system? 32 may be a good place, the idea is
that this is the multiplier for constitution to make the "hitpoint"
conversion seem realistic (dwarves would be size 1 although they are shorter
they are more robust and stocky so they would be the same as humans in
"hitpoints")
> Agility
> "Armor use is based on agility. There is a minimum agility requiered for
> use of each type of armor".
> I think that better that requiered should be needed, if you don't have
> it you have a penalty on the armor skill.
Sorry required is needed. To me this is exactly what I meant, sorry if I
didn't say it. The armor skills and all haven't been worked completely, I
envision special defense skills and attack reflection defenses complex
counter attacks involved with spiked armors and more. This skill is
practicularly useful in the reaction phase of a round.
> Another option should be to split armor in two values, pasive that is
> used whenever you wear the armor and active when you have the ability
> to
> use it.
> Anyway I prefer the option 1.
I agree entirely with option 1 although option 2 would work I think option 1
is more dynamic and in line with other skills and abilities.
> Perception
> On Arianne you can use any kind of perception you want, not just only
> vision. Just imagine playing Arianne with a blind character...
how do we allow a blind character to play? they can't see whats around
them, I could see a race with ultrasound, but otherwise do blind characters
get a blank screen with other sensory descriptions?? blindness seems a
little unrealistic to me because the plyer would use their sight to navigate
still, wouldn't they.
> Karma
> This is an stupid code problem, but instead of -127~127 I would prefer
> 0~255, with initial value on 128.
> Another thing is that is karma is negative (<127), the essense should
> drop, don't you think so?
this would work as well I just thought that the + and - thing would make it
a little more understandable.
> Climbing.
> Your idea is great, but I think that using 128 for 45º and 256 for 90º
> would do a better job, as it is a bit hard to decide situation in your
> case.
> But anyway I would love to give it a try as it is a very good one
again the range give was to allow spider to climb on the undersides of
things like on the roof of a cave, and drop down on those below them. I
think there are more apllications as well with the range currently in the RP
> Magic.
> Casting Magic should cost Intellect points, as fighting cost strengh
> points, don't you think so?
I agree entirely this is a part of the RP, the magic system, I have been
developing in the odd moments betwwen doing this task and that, it is
finally coming to a cohesive point here I can put it all down. Other skills
such as lockpicking and trap disarming will drop intellect as well. again
these are details that will be filed in in the next couple of revs.
> Spells
> Spell need a minimum leve, isn' t it? So instead of forbidding a low
> level character to cast a high level spell, we let him but increasing
> the rate of failing the spell, I think that to keep in the way with
> the
> rest of the game, a 5% fail rate increase for each point of difference
> between caster level and spell level
I think the crit success, success, fail and crit fail tables could be
extended but I thought they were pretty good by making the majority of this
fall within the +25 and -25 range was more reasonable, we can extend the
range to +125 and -125 if you think this is a better representation.
> What is the difference between levitation and fly?
Levitation and fly are 2 different spells that do the same thing in
different ways, again allowing characters to do the same things in different
ways is of vital importance for the magic system.
> We could perhaps could have some spells on void magic for characters
> below 128.
Dead characters below 128 will be able to use void magic, but characters
>128 will be allowed to use void magic while they are alive. I do have
ideas for races that walk the borders between the spirit and living realms
that will be able to use void magics while "alive".
> I will try to write something about Alignments/Affiliations.
Thanks any input is welcome.
> About Objects.
> Well this is a big point related to all the Arianne engine.
> In order to give the maximum flexibilty to the engine I have make no
> diffs between objects and characters. All in Arianne are objects,
> except
> the terrain and because of efficience problems.
I understand and agree, this will help keep it persistent, the objects I
speak about are able to become polarized to magics or ways of doing things,
I think this brings the world to life just that much more.
> So to code it we perhaps need a race called object.
> So we the object heriarchy could looks like this:
> * Object
> ** Human
> ** Wolf
> ** Object
> ***Sword
> ***Shield
> I say this just in case anyway take a look at the code lookig for
> something that don't exist.
> So appears a new problem( and a solution to an old problem ): We now
> need also an object editor, but we can now let users to create
> objects.
Yes. but this comes with the abilities in the RP to make such objects,
don't you think so? If someone wants to build make a sword with certain
abilities they should have the prerequisite abilities the forge and enchant
the weapon they wish to add to the game. Houses can be built but they must
pay for the raw materials and laborers to do the job and the more laborers
they hire the less time it takes for the house to be built, they must wait
until its finished to use it. If a person has good abilities, like for
forging they can take up residience at a forge and make weapons in return
for money and notoriety, perhaps the favor of the king.
> Objects
> I would add also to objects the size attrib and remove uniqueness as
> each object is going to be a new one.
> So imagine that in the world are only 1000 swords+5 and you buy all of
> them....
Yes, I haven't added this yet but the size attribute for objects will
determine how it fits in to a characters pack/inventory each race will be
able to carry up to a certain size each unit will be a square in their back
pack, pouches will be used to carry multiple small items in a single square,
like rings or runes. I thought uniqueness could be used to help assign
value to or limit the production of such items artificially. Like if a
sword+5 is destroyed(objects can be destroyed like characters dying
right????) a blacksmith npc could then produce another one but by limiting
the number in existence the value of an item could be a little more stable.
> Whatever of the player attribs should never go above 255. So if you
> use
> an object augmentation and your level is already 255, you stay at 255.
Agree entirely and have thought about having exponential effect, like the
augmentation is actually to the ability points in a ability so the effect of
the same item on a advanced character would be much less, but for a poor
character the ability raise would actually be much larger. Does this seem
reasonable?
> About advantages and disvantages the list should be carefully checked
> to avoid giving a extra points to people how modify the client. (EX: A
> blind character seeing)
I agree entirely, the blind character still seems a little out there though
because the player will see the screen to play as well right?
> About the way the combat works I would like to see a way of giving some
> extra points when the attack is N-1 so that a few low-level characters
> attack a high-level character and they are able to hurt and even
> defeat it.
Sorry, N-1??? I think a part of the attack will be dividing it into rounds
8 attacks each so that if 2 characters meet to fight the rounds will be
divide by a react comparison. They will not necessarily each recieve 4
rounds of attack (therefore defense and counter attacks are more important)
but for a group attack situation the rounds will be more evenly divided and
although a strong character will have a more powerful attack they will only
be able to attack once per round and will be attacked 7 times by the other
characters, the gang up effect works well in this case. If however the
characters react is equal to the 7 other characters combined that character
will still get half the rounds to attack. This way the rounds are doled out
so that the rounds are divided in this way the toatl react for characters in
the range is added up and divided by 8 so that if there are 4 characters in
the immediate area, say the viewable screen for ther 2d version, and their
total react is 200 this would mean the base react for the area is 25 if
character #1 has a react of 75 they would get 3 turns, #2 has a react of 15
so they would get one round, #3 has a react of 50 and they would 2 rounds
and #4 has a react of 60 so they would get 2 rounds. the rounds are
seperated so that the first character goes first in the middle and last, or
in some way like this. The only problem with this idea is overlapping
perceptives/screens.
> What is expected to appear on World Philosophy? Perhaps I can write
> something.
This is the ideas behind the RP, the soul of the why, like the idea we want
a RP world not a hack and slash. How the gods came to being and what the
ideas of atheism and nonfollowers mean to the world as a whole. It will
give a glimpse of how the world and paths can be played out and what we
would like to see from everything we've been working on. I see it as a
complex walk through of possibilities an analysis of why things are the way
they arte for each of the choices available, and finally the big picture,
what we hope to accomplish by making things this way. Yes, this part should
contain a statement from you and each of the creators and perhaps a group
statement of will, for what we want the game to become!
Brian Thompson
> -- http://www.arianne.cx -- Arianne --
> The free open source massively multiplayer online role playing game
>
> nuclear cia fbi spy password code encrypt president bomb iran irak
> korea
> cuba
> Ala yihad mosad kgb free freedom human rights yugoslavia kosovo ebola
> dna
> Echelon must die
> _______________________________________________
> Arianne-general mailing list
> Arianne-general@...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/arianne-general
>
|
