Hydra, this could be a solution, although think about a Bag in a Bag in a Bag . IMO, if you cannot afford to carry a magic ring, then you DON''T get it at all, instead of get it and find a way to stay alive. Of course, you might be lucky and make it to the Caster, who identifies it (and even buys it), but ya never know, dontcha ; that precisely is the sweetest part.

Bring only really needed stuff. First rule in camping. If you ever been on a camping trip, you should know that one always tries to minimize his load. The same should be applied to the games.


Boby Dimitrov
boby@azholding.com

BobyDimitrov, You seem to be taking a pretty hardcore attitude to limiting magic items: (no prob. with that, could turn out quite good unconventional ideas often work).

Is this for a massiv. multiplayer game? or a single player game?

Anonymous one, you are right, although I don''t call it hardcore, but realistic . And that''s not just for the Magic Stuff, it''s about any design concept that I think it has to be changed for good.

And that material in my posts is from an old game design, which we threw away. It was for a single player game, although we had some pretty nice ideas for cooperative play over tpc/ip.

Now I''m a newbie to this forums, but seeing how some ideas are accepted, I start thinking about looking for my old design notes, somewhere in the backup cds, you know...


Boby Dimitrov
boby@azholding.com

While I don''t see how you can state your magic system
as more ''realistic''(been summoning demons lately?). Your
premise of extreme penalties somehow doesn''t seem appealing,
and no one ever said you can make it so a bag takes up
space, ie a bag that holds 8 can''t be put in a bag that
holds 10 without eliminating 8 of the 10 spaces. That''s my
thoughts even without liking the bag idea. You''ve said that
most items only cost while they are equipped, this is where a
good bag idea does come in, if the person is willing to waste
their points so that they can have bags on them that cost just
to have, then it makes sense that 1) the bags can holds more
in a total than if the person was wearing the eq, ie he can fit
3 items in the, but only afford to equip 2 of them and 2) this gives you the oppurtunity to be a carrier, or a user. In a world where magic is norm, warriors are going to figure out a way to at least manage the items until they can be dealt with. Players
don''t like being left out in the cold, nor do i think they would
enjoy in anyway finding out just because they picked up some
ring they are now cursed for the rest of the game. Making magic so intertwined that the wood cutter is cutting wood with magic,
causes a anti-magic phenomenon. It makes magic seem like it doesn''t help, and any game a person plays with magic; usually they are looking to do cool things with it that stick out. Oh, and I''m not shooting the idea, I''m more saying it''s a tricky
idea, one level editor on a caffeine high can ruin the game with
a badly created item.

While I don''t see how you can state your magic system
as more ''realistic''(been summoning demons lately?). Your
premise of extreme penalties somehow doesn''t seem appealing,
and no one ever said you can make it so a bag takes up
space, ie a bag that holds 8 can''t be put in a bag that
holds 10 without eliminating 8 of the 10 spaces. That''s my
thoughts even without liking the bag idea. You''ve said that
most items only cost while they are equipped, this is where a
good bag idea does come in, if the person is willing to waste
their points so that they can have bags on them that cost just
to have, then it makes sense that 1) the bags can holds more
in a total than if the person was wearing the eq, ie he can fit
3 items in the bag, with none equipped, or only afford to equip 2 of them and drop the 3rd. 2) this gives you the oppurtunity to be a carrier, or a user. In a world where magic is norm, warriors are going to figure out a way to at least manage the items until they can be dealt with. Players
don''t like being left out in the cold, nor do i think they would
enjoy in anyway finding out just because they picked up some
ring they are now cursed for the rest of the game. Making magic so intertwined that the wood cutter is cutting wood with magic,
causes a anti-magic phenomenon. It makes magic seem like it doesn''t help, and any game a person plays with magic; usually they are looking to do cool things with it that stick out. Oh, and I''m not shooting the idea, I''m more saying it''s a tricky
idea, one level editor on a caffeine high can ruin the game with
a badly created item.

That last double post was by a different Anonymous.. gah.
Although I do agree with many of the points that they made.

Particularly the inventory space one, the way that players want to pick things up and experiment with them.

You guys ever though of registering? Anyway. Although I did not understood most of your posts, I''ll try to answer.

First of all, the penalties are not extreme. They are not even penalties! Let''s get this pysical: suppose you could wear a 80 kg. backpack. Suppose for some reason you put 130 kg. in that backpack. Now you gonna get tired faster, won''t you? You may even not be able to make several steps with such load. And suppose you go and try to cross a stream with such a backpack. Suppose you slip, which is quite possible with that on your back and those nasty river stones. Suppose you drown, because the backpack pulls you to the bottom and it''s so heavy you cannot get it off.

Now, is the fact that you drowned a penalty? Well, IT IS a penalty, a penalty for the stupidity of the player. So next time he plays he''ll know just how much to put in that backpack. I play games to have fun, not to act stupid, otherwise I''d become a circus clown or something like that. And if a game "teaches" you what cannot be done, then you won''t do it. Is it that complicated?

In Diablo you have limited inventory size. Is this a penalty?

I haven''t said that "items only cost while they are equipped". Some items are USABLE only when equpped. This is a preset value. Like a ring - you can use it''s power until you wear it on your finger and you have the Skill to CONTROL that power and USE it in the PROPER way. You take it off and the power is gone, no need to be controled. That''s it.

About non-casting Chars owning Magic Items. If you were a plain dumb Barbarian, you would know pretty well the sound of crushing Ogrok skull, but when it comes to Magic all you could say is "Ugh.". You could find a Magic Amulet, i.e.. You could wear it in your pocket for 10 years and nothing happens - the Amulet has to be equipped (put on your neck) to unleash its power. But be so DUMB and put an unidentified Magic Item of great possible power WITHOUT the skill to understand it, not to say CONTROL it, around your NECK and you just couldn''t hope to live to the next meal, don''t you? So it''s not a problem to carry around a full sack of Magic artifacts. Just don''t try them on yourself without the needed knowledge.

And if the artifact has powers even if not equipped and you get it and put it in your pocket, thinking about the money you gonna get from the Caster, you pretty much risk too. You could have some kind of "Protective Box", but it sould be something sizy, like you don''t usually carry it around with yourself.

Once again, all this concept reffers to a specific rare-magic world. This is not a low-level, but a rare-magic, note the difference! Low magic is demiwide spread magic, but weak one. Rare magic is strong magic but in very small pieces around the world. This is NOT Diablo, where even the FLIES (!!!) wear an enchanted full plate mail or two, just in case.


Boby Dimitrov
boby@azholding.com

Just curious, esp. because I have been thinking about how something like this might be done for "rare and ancient alien artifacts" for a SF game...

What, exactly, is the player behavior you''re trying to enforce? (i.e, what''s the point?)

Nominally, if you put something like this in the game, you''re going to have to warn the player just on general principles. If you have negative effects, players will play to minimize them. (If they''re unavoidable, then that''s just bad game design.) So by putting this in, you want the player to make some kind of choice.

If it''s simply to get the item identified before use, then that will quickly become a non-choice and probably just a money drain-- which isn''t bad, but really only a formality that''s not that interesting. My thought would be that a justifiable reason to include something like this (with mixed good and bad effects) is when you want the player to take a calculated risk: do I (say) try and use an unidentified object to get out of a jam? Is the identifier mechanism unavailable (shop closed, research lab under siege), but I need the artifact this second?

It seems to me ill effects, even made in order to be more realistic and to inspire reverence, will only lead to minmaxing or save and restore gameplay if there''s not a compelling reason for them to be present.



--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

I don''t know about anyone else but I''d be interested in hearing some of your ither design ideas discarded or not.

quote:

---

My thought would be that a justifiable reason to include something like this (with mixed good and bad effects) is when you want the player to take a calculated risk: do I (say) try and use an unidentified object to get out of a jam? Is the identifier mechanism unavailable (shop closed, research lab under siege), but I need the artifact this second?

---

Wav, thanks for that one. Here's some more information (I really should find my old stuff):
If you use a magic item that is identified, but you don't have the skill to control it, it doesn't mean you'll drop dead in a second. If you have say 20 skill points and 22 required, you could go a long time using that item without any side effects. It's a random matter. This way, if an item is REALLY useful, you'll get to use it. And what's more, using magic extensively will raise you Magic Skill faster, so finally you WILL have 22 skill. If you try an item that's way beyond you skill, like 30 to 20, well, you get 50% change for malfunction . This is not death, this is missing an attack, making some damage to the player, missing the target, etc.
If you use an unidentified item it's the same, only that you couldn't quite know what you're getting into. It could be a weak ring or most powerful amulet. You could use it in extreme situations, like escape a deadly trap and such, but that's maybe the only good reason. And as I said, every item has an Identify value, so the trick is that it can get very hard to find a Sage with sufficient skill to identify rare items. It's like in that story:
"I have this ring since I was 16 (now he's bout 70), but I never dared to put it on my finger. The Sage in our village told me it was very powerful and I don't want to mess with such power, son!"
The "Save game, try ring, load game" issue. As I said, the effect is not THAT fast, or even visible. You could wear it for an hour (real time), forget about it, then all of a sudden in a combat it damages you. You gonna load your last one-hour-ago save? I know I wouldn't. But the save/get killed/load problem is another topic.
Things can get messy only when working with opposing Magic energies, like Fire ring - Water amulet(ice). But if you show/explain the player the consequences of such interaction in the intro, or in tutorial, or as a part of the story, it's not quite likely for him to try it.

You asked what "player behavior (I am) trying to enforce?". I'm trying to make the player think before he acts. I'm trying to show him, that considering all your serious decisions before you take action WILL do him good. I'm trying to make them play wise (and even get wiser (real life) as a result of playing), not stupid. That's all.


Boby Dimitrov
boby@azholding.com

Edited by - BobyDimitrov on June 6, 2001 6:03:10 AM