[Arianne-general] Re: Few skill ideas.

[Brian T. <bri...@ho...>]

>From: Dante <da...@ne...>
>To: "Brian Thompson" <bri...@ho...>
>Subject: Re: Few skill ideas.
>Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 11:10:17 +0100
> > Tracking skills should be based on the particulars, races are probably 
>best
> > because they will each have nuances that are programmed into them.  
>Perhaps
> > this will fall under a grouped ability with the races being skills it is
> > hard to say.
>
>Don't tell me that having 5 year practice in tracking humans I won't be 
>able
>to tell that my current target is injured elf. Skill groups for tracking 
>are
>necessary... For instance hunters' tracking skill should be primarily
>animal-oriented...

That is why I suggested that the ability be humanoid tracking, quadraped 
tracking ...  Tracking one type of creature should influence another type as 
long as they are related, my ability to track bipeds goes up regardless of 
if I'm tracking a human or an elf and this allows me to use the skill of 
tracking an elf with more success, even though I have a lower skill level in 
tracking a elf than I do a human.

>Think of it this way though for every skill there should be
> > an anti-skill
>
>Not so drastic, but generally I agree. Example: "fake" skill - allows to 
>fake
>death on battlefield, fake being injured, drunken :-),  stunned... And many
>more. In my opinion, if troll shapeshifter changes his shape to an elf, he
>still moves like a troll... Unless he is smart  enough to fake.
>
>In short: I don't think that having one skill for putting on shoes and one
>for taking them off is good idea.

I wouldn't go so far either, it was just a "big idea" statement.  I think 
tht there should be many deceive type skills as we can actually incorporate.

> > I think that these would be excellent skills and there would additions
> > related to other attributes as well like a berserker mode or an assassin
> > mode for strong hits or accurate hits, but getting these all integrated
> > into the attack/defense system are going to take a while.
>
>I think those 2 skills (alertness and concentration) should be common,
>built-in, so anyone can use them.. (but outcome doesn't have to be equal in
>all cases).
>  For berserk, assasin... These skill should be more specialistic, 
>uncommon.
>Especially berserk. "Stealth" mode would me much more suitable than 
>assassin,
>I think.

I think you are right, and I remember discussing this before with Miguel on 
ICQ a long time ago (a year).  The berserk and critical strike abilities 
would not be abilities in the sense I have identified in the RP, they should 
be integrated into the combat system the way that area and duration are a 
part of the spell system, based on how the player wants their character to 
use a particular skill they would choose different levels of 
strength/accuracy to strike and these would be closely related to the type 
of weapon being used.

>
> > characters should be identified by major traits until they are put into 
>a
> > friendly or enemy database.
>
>Generally, I agree. But imagine that when 2 big armies meet, they are not 
>all
>archers. Imagine that a soldier with 2 handed sword is heading towards you.
>You know that he is 95% your enemy, but "system" doesn't know until he gets
>close and swings that big piece of steel. That's what I call a problem.

I understand but affiliations part of this is difficult but is apart of the 
system.  My question is though, is he one of your soldiers that is in combat 
mode but is walking back to the healing tents, can you tell just by looking 
at him, os that fact that hes in battle mode really going to tell you any 
more, there has to be an identifying mark or discussion between you to let 
you know.  If he chooses to where the armies identifying mark this would be 
coded to affiliations and so you you would see them as an enemy through 
affiliation.  IF you are on a battle field and all of your men are marked as 
friendly and you come across men that are not marked then they are probably 
enemy, the first time they start to use a destructive skills against you 
then you can attack them.  Imagine two armies of unmarked soldiers, neither 
would want to fight because the would lose karma the first time they 
attacked, how many of them would want to attack and lose karma?

>My idea is that those "modes" are more conventional, and you aren't forced 
>to
>use them! You still CAN attack without activating combat mode - you just
>won't get attrib bonuses. Your choice - more stealthy, or more powerful.
>I hope that it would result in situations, where in big frontal battles
>almost everyone uses "combat mode", and it's easy to determine who is ally
>and who's enemy. In other words, I hope it would reduce _combat_  mess and
>confusion, especially for NPC's.

I understand and I think that modes such as this may be usefull, because of 
the bonuses.  There should be other modes such as stealth mode in which your 
attributes would be affected also.  I agree with the dynamic nature of 
attributes.  The whole thing needs to be integrated so that we can all 
understand how each situation is going to work, but I do understand and will 
try to allow for this in the revised RP.

>Another example of mess:
>You and your friends from royal guard are patroling wilderness.
>You are traveling thru the mountains, and suddenly you see 2 humans 
>standing
>face to face with drawn swords. Distance between them - about 5 meters. 
>They
>seem quite exhausted, one  has injured leg, another bleeds from his 
>shoulder.
>Are they dueling warriors, or 2 companions who just defended them against a
>pack of wolves ? You CAN'T tell, until one of them takes some action. In 
>best
>case you can get suspicious. AI however is not really  armed with
>"Inteligence".

And if they re both in combat mode you still can't tell really can you, even 
if you are in combat mode.  The only way really is to wait for action, this 
is what will define things for the AI as well, the actions another being 
takes against them.  If the AI came across these two they would ignore them 
until the were attacking the AI, regardless of whether or not they were in 
combat mode or not.  I think that a good example of how to get the system to 
work right would be sparring.  How can you spar with a friend to raise both 
of your abilities and not lose karma?  I think that this is the real problem 
that we need to solve and maybe the rest will fall into place, attacking 
inanimate objects only goes so far.  Perhaps it will go into sparring mode 
but then if you use a skill it is not deadly, or not deadly at all, so the 
skill rise for sparring isn't as high as it would be for real combat.  There 
are many possibilities.  This is how I think we should control other things 
as well, such a learning and group casting of spells.  A group cast mode 
would automatically show all of the spells that everyone in the group knows 
and one person (the most able person perhaps) would control which spell is 
cast and the group automatically casts that spell against the enemy or 
target.  All players that want to group cast in the area of the leader must 
be in groupcast mode though.  I think modes will wind up being an excellent 
additon to the RP.

>I hope it's  clear what I meant this time.
>
> > I think I understand and the skills that you talked about above would be
> > directly related to combat, but not having a clear mode makes for more
> > possiblities.
>
>I understand. In my idea there's a place  for honor, and treachery.It's all
>about encouraging, not forcing.
>  Friends are enemies databases is good idea.

And I want to go further, love-friend-ambivalent-enemy-hated to be in love 
or hated the enemy would have to be specifically know. So the identified 
database would be separate to determine whether the person is a stranger or 
is specifically known.  A character can be entered into the known database 
in many different ways.


Brian Thompson

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.