Oh, sorry about the Postcount++, but is this going to be an actual MUD, or more of a Rogue-like?

_________________
What most people don't understand about "enlightenment" is that it is not an end-goal; but where you find yourself just before taking a new "first step."

Well, not the worst idea ever, but I certainly wouldn't use it here.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

Probably something from both.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

I guess what I meant to ask was: "Is this a multi-player or single-player game?"

_________________
What most people don't understand about "enlightenment" is that it is not an end-goal; but where you find yourself just before taking a new "first step."

Both.

Anyone that's interested in participating add yourself to the list.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

Just updated the class list with properties that I currently have for my RPG.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

Hey guys! just found this website... if you need any help developing with c# just let me know what you guys need done and i'll see what i can do.

You highlighted a problem with sliding monster scales in your post - difficulty in quickly identifying threat level for what should be a familiar foe.

i.e. you run into a granite golem and you know how to deal with it ... or do you? It could be a walkover or a nightmare depending on it's relative position in the power scale.

I kind of liked diablo's approach to reusing monsters - you'd get a bunch at a set level, then a gap, then they would show up again with a visible difference at a higher level, then a gap, and so on - set groups rather than sliding scales.

What's your experience? What else have you done?

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

I kinda like the idea that a mob wouldn't be cookie cutter. There should be a little bit of difference between the same type of mob. I think a couple levels less than or greater than the character would be nice, just to keep things interesting. If a player knows he can walk all over a certain type of mob, where's the danger or fun?

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

I think it's just the frustration of walking up to a mob you've seen a dozen times and getting flattened because it's a different level.

A bit like playing DooM and finding that one in every 10 of those pinky demons would bite your head off if you tried to chainsaw them even though they looked just like the rest.

I think it just makes it difficult for players to assess the situation they are in, unless the level is used as an absolute guide to power (i.e. a level 12 x is equal to a level 12 y is equal to a level 12 z) and monster type is just an indication of attack and defense types.

You shouldn't get flattened, but it should be a challenge. That's part of the play testing process.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

If you link the monster's level with his stats, XP and damage, then you can vary them slightly. Like in WoW there would be a Wild Boar or something, and it's level would vary between say 10 and 14. Then depending on your level, some of them might be worth avoiding.

Elite mobs make it interesting, but they need to look different, like in Diablo 2, they would be a different colour

_________________
Whatever the mind can conceive and believe, it can achieve

I understand your point. level 20 granite I can get to know. level 30 granite I don't know.

One of the things I dislike about fixing creep stats, is that we can get to know every creature a little too well, and there's nothing new in the game. Just the same old monsters.

I thought it would be nice to have standard creep classes, but a sliding scale of power levels of each one. It adds that little bit of variety to their design.

Since the dungeon is always going to be filled with creeps of similar level to the player anyway, I don't think levels really matter that much, because they're never going to be much of an issue.

ie,
If I'm level 10, the golem will be level 10.
If I'm level 20, the golem will be level 20.

So both feels much the same. Although, both golems have the same magics, which may be relatively less potent at higher levels. [*]



But...

If I'm level 10, and the golem is level 12.
Then I know it's a slightly harder version of the 'familiar' unit. I need to be more cautious dealing with it.

Otherwise we'd have to invent half a dozen units for every power level, which would run into the hundreds, and you'd only ever see a mud golem on levels 1 and 2, and never again.


[*] What this will create is a feeling of having mastered a particular creep class as you've met it at levels 10-20, and by level 20, although the creep stats are matched to the player, it's magics/special abilities are too weak to give itself any advantage during the conflict. This is where a new creep class (the next up the golem family, for example) will provide a newer challenge, because it's magics will be stronger and matched to the player again. To the player this new unit should hopefully feel slightly different to it's sibling, which is how it should be. However, tactics required to deal with it will most likely be somewhat similar throughout the entire golem family.




Possible... As I said at the beginning, I'm not a fan of rpg games, so my design opinion is probably not the best.



I happen to like that idea. I think creep class should be more about attack and defense types, as in how to deal with it, rather than power used to deal with it. Like a golem may be slower but stronger than a skeleton warrior. So to survive the golem you have to strike and pull back, strike and pull back, otherwise you'll get flattened. To survive the skeleton, you can't outrun it, because it its too fast and strong, so there's no chance of defeating it with pulling tactics. But if you just stand there relentlessly hitting it, and being hit back by it, it will easily topple because it is relatively low on hitpoints.


I think the development plan should be:

- prototype map specification.
- build the map reader.
- declare unit arrays, and their stats.
- character creation / loading routines
- graphics renderer.
- declare item types and their abilities.
- declare unit inventory and stats enhancment from item types/abilities.
- declare active weapon/tool/item.
- player character movement.
- unit interaction.
- creep AI
- creep design
- automated map designer
- networking
- eye candy

I guess it depends on how the monsters are displayed and packed into the game, and how quickly the action takes place - can the player get the information they need by glancing at the monsters on the screen, would they need to inspect them individually, would there be time, etc

A while back I played a game where it was quite hard to tell 'miniboss' monsters apart from the regular ones without highlighting them - all it would have needed is some kind of visual indicator (i.e. a red glow around anything really dangerous to you, and perhaps a blue glow around anything that your character could walk through easily).

It's less applicable if you only run into one or two things at a time and combat is a more thought out affair.

Im kind of thinking of this mud game as a fusion of my experiences of dungeon master, and warcraft 3.

In DM, you could see several step in front of you, and you could weigh up visible creeps before engaging them, swapping between light/plate armor, swapping between axe / sabre, etc.

In WC3, you would click on each unit to see it's stats, although that game is faster paced, creeps were fixed, but you did generally have time to glance at things like armor/weapon upgrades for your enemy team's units.

I'm imagining this mud game something inbetween. You can see things which are several steps away, and generally have time to check them out before deciding how to engage them.

Something as simple as ALT key depression could show creep name, power level, elite status, and a hp bar above each unit. Elite units could be glowing too, just so you can't miss them. Or for a more detailed profile listing damage and armor and hp figures, you could click on them.

I like this kind of idea.


Networking needs to be planned for from the beginning I think. It doesn't need to be implemented immediately, although I'd prefer that. It's not really a MUD without the MU.

At the most basic level a Map could be:



It might be good to have data specifically for the rooms and hallways, but I'd have to think this through.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

I'm wondering is something like an MMO /con system might be better than showing actual stats. Maybe do that just for hardcore mode. More thought is needed.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

Just thinking, what sort of graphics/view are we going for?

Are there any snaps from existing games you can post links to, the sort of thing you had in mind?

Don't forget the great feature in diablo whereby the more you killed of a monster the more info you would get on it... kill a lot and you get it's name, health and mana ranges, vulnerabilities etc.. I quite liked that (and in diablo there was some variation in health ranges etc. of the same type of monster still. Not enough that one of them would flatten you while others wouldn't, but enough to mix things up and make it interesting )

_________________
God must love stupid people, he made so many.
theraje: 'God doesn't love stupid people, they're just easier to make'
http://sharedillusions.blogspot.com