ID:154573
 
I'm consisdering a magic system for my game.
should I:
1. Allow a magic point (mp) system, where each spell cost X amount of mp, or
2. Allow only 1 spell cast per hour/day method?
The spell could be in a scroll or book.
Which method is more popular? I prefer the mp method but it allows for poor role playing.
On 4/22/01 6:31 am sunzoner wrote:
I'm consisdering a magic system for my game.
should I:
1. Allow a magic point (mp) system, where each spell cost X amount of mp, or
2. Allow only 1 spell cast per hour/day method?
The spell could be in a scroll or book.
Which method is more popular? I prefer the mp method but it allows for poor role playing.

perhaps you could have a stat (something like Int) determine how often you could cast a spell. so with a very low "Int" you can only cast the spell, say once every day but with a high Int you could cast it once every hour.

It is a mix of your two options ;>
On 4/22/01 6:31 am sunzoner wrote:
I'm consisdering a magic system for my game.
should I:
1. Allow a magic point (mp) system, where each spell cost X amount of mp, or
2. Allow only 1 spell cast per hour/day method?
The spell could be in a scroll or book.
Which method is more popular? I prefer the mp method but it allows for poor role playing.

I'd say it depends on the type of game you're making. If you want to make a generic RPG clone, then go ahead and stick with MP. But I'd say aim for something innovative- not only does it make your game cool and unique, but limiting magic in a balanced but unusual way can really make the game a lot more interesting.
The spell could be in a scroll or book.

if you want your game to stand out a little, use some other system. I have a few ideas:

Use magical "runes" that you combine to make the spells, say a fire "rune" and a wind "rune" could make a fireball and water "rune" and cold "rune" makes ice. The "runes" could optionally be consumed in the process.

have the spells as tatoos on the magicians body, you channel your "mana" trough the pattern and out comes an effect. as above you can channel trough many tatoos at once and combine their effects.

or why not have the caster invent spells on the fly. like the first example but the "runes" are just toughts in the casters mind. every caster could have all the "runes" from the beginnning or they could be forced to learn them from scrolls and books or other magicians.


bear in mind that none of these examples include spells per se, only effects that you combine to make spells
In response to Leftley (#2)
On 4/22/01 10:08 am Leftley wrote:
On 4/22/01 6:31 am sunzoner wrote:
I'm consisdering a magic system for my game.
should I:
1. Allow a magic point (mp) system, where each spell cost X amount of mp, or
2. Allow only 1 spell cast per hour/day method?
The spell could be in a scroll or book.
Which method is more popular? I prefer the mp method but it allows for poor role playing.

I'd say it depends on the type of game you're making. If you want to make a generic RPG clone, then go ahead and stick with MP. But I'd say aim for something innovative- not only does it make your game cool and unique, but limiting magic in a balanced but unusual way can really make the game a lot more interesting.

just remember it all about balance....for example if i can only cast 1 spell a day or hour the spells better be strong or why use magic? as a roleplayer in online gaming I prefer the mp system Im not sure if it just me but i find it hard to role play whith limetd magic....Mages would suck & fighters would rule so how would you role play there? when making a system build it to be balanced this opens more doors to roleplay in...then i can be a mage,Fighter,warlock,etc
In response to Xzar (#4)
On 4/22/01 12:06 pm Xzar wrote:
On 4/22/01 10:08 am Leftley wrote:
On 4/22/01 6:31 am sunzoner wrote:
I'm consisdering a magic system for my game.
should I:
1. Allow a magic point (mp) system, where each spell cost X amount of mp, or
2. Allow only 1 spell cast per hour/day method?
The spell could be in a scroll or book.
Which method is more popular? I prefer the mp method but it allows for poor role playing.

I'd say it depends on the type of game you're making. If you want to make a generic RPG clone, then go ahead and stick with MP. But I'd say aim for something innovative- not only does it make your game cool and unique, but limiting magic in a balanced but unusual way can really make the game a lot more interesting.

just remember it all about balance....for example if i can only cast 1 spell a day or hour the spells better be strong or why use magic? as a roleplayer in online gaming I prefer the mp system Im not sure if it just me but i find it hard to role play whith limetd magic....Mages would suck & fighters would rule so how would you role play there? when making a system build it to be balanced this opens more doors to roleplay in...then i can be a mage,Fighter,warlock,etc

Keep in mind that roleplaying in a game is, at its basest core, deliberately doing something that you personally wouldn't do in a situation. As an example, suppose you're playing a character named "Skullcrush the Rabid Berserker." You look into a room and see a horde of goblins, far too many for you to fight safely. If you cleverly lure them out one at a time and pick them off one by one, you're being a poor roleplayer. You're doing what YOU would do, not what Skullcrush the Rabid Berserker would do- he'd barge in and start decapitating goblins. If you're a good roleplayer, you'd go in and do it too, even though you knew it was insane.

So, if you have a choice between a wizard class or a knight class, and the knight class happens to have a small but definitive edge power-wise, then as a gamer your natural course of action is to play as a knight and nothing else. If you do play as a wizard even though you know that wizards aren't as powerful as knights, simply because you like the thought of playing as a wizard, then that's a simple act of roleplaying. Not very in-depth or detailed, but it's a start.

Also bear in mind that magic need not be a substitute for physical fighting prowess. Maybe instead of just having a list of various attack spells, your wizards have grimoires packed with quirky little world-manipulation spells that do things that fighters simply can't do no matter how big their muscles are, such as turn a room completely dark to confuse pursuers or transform an enemy's Axe of Bloody Death +5 into an ordinary loaf of bread. In a game like this, even if knights do have a combat advantage over wizards, or are even still just all-around more useful, the perks of being a wizard really start to manifest themselves. Not only do you have two widely different playing styles to choose from- brute combat force or subtle world-manipulation spells- but you have two different characters with very complementary abilities. A knight might be able to absorb the mighty blows of the Increadibly Deadly Black Legionaire of Doom, and a wizard might be able to turn the Legionaire's sword into a loaf of bread, and so each has their own manner of defending themselves... but if you have a knight AND a wizard put together, then they can use both their defense powers together.
In response to Xzar (#4)
On 4/22/01 12:06 pm Xzar wrote:
On 4/22/01 10:08 am Leftley wrote:
On 4/22/01 6:31 am sunzoner wrote:
I'm consisdering a magic system for my game.
should I:
1. Allow a magic point (mp) system, where each spell cost X amount of mp, or
2. Allow only 1 spell cast per hour/day method?
The spell could be in a scroll or book.
Which method is more popular? I prefer the mp method but it allows for poor role playing.

I'd say it depends on the type of game you're making. If you want to make a generic RPG clone, then go ahead and stick with MP. But I'd say aim for something innovative- not only does it make your game cool and unique, but limiting magic in a balanced but unusual way can really make the game a lot more interesting.

just remember it all about balance....for example if i can only cast 1 spell a day or hour the spells better be strong or why use magic? as a roleplayer in online gaming I prefer the mp system Im not sure if it just me but i find it hard to role play whith limetd magic....Mages would suck & fighters would rule so how would you role play there? when making a system build it to be balanced this opens more doors to roleplay in...then i can be a mage,Fighter,warlock,etc


agreed, the game has to be balanced. I think my rune system could be balanced quite easily :)


(I seem to like this subject)
In response to Leftley (#5)
On 4/22/01 12:28 pm Leftley wrote:
On 4/22/01 12:06 pm Xzar wrote:
On 4/22/01 10:08 am Leftley wrote:
On 4/22/01 6:31 am sunzoner wrote:
I'm consisdering a magic system for my game.
should I:
1. Allow a magic point (mp) system, where each spell cost X amount of mp, or
2. Allow only 1 spell cast per hour/day method?
The spell could be in a scroll or book.
Which method is more popular? I prefer the mp method but it allows for poor role playing.

I'd say it depends on the type of game you're making. If you want to make a generic RPG clone, then go ahead and stick with MP. But I'd say aim for something innovative- not only does it make your game cool and unique, but limiting magic in a balanced but unusual way can really make the game a lot more interesting.

just remember it all about balance....for example if i can only cast 1 spell a day or hour the spells better be strong or why use magic? as a roleplayer in online gaming I prefer the mp system Im not sure if it just me but i find it hard to role play whith limetd magic....Mages would suck & fighters would rule so how would you role play there? when making a system build it to be balanced this opens more doors to roleplay in...then i can be a mage,Fighter,warlock,etc

Keep in mind that roleplaying in a game is, at its basest core, deliberately doing something that you personally wouldn't do in a situation. As an example, suppose you're playing a character named "Skullcrush the Rabid Berserker." You look into a room and see a horde of goblins, far too many for you to fight safely. If you cleverly lure them out one at a time and pick them off one by one, you're being a poor roleplayer. You're doing what YOU would do, not what Skullcrush the Rabid Berserker would do- he'd barge in and start decapitating goblins. If you're a good roleplayer, you'd go in and do it too, even though you knew it was insane.

So, if you have a choice between a wizard class or a knight class, and the knight class happens to have a small but definitive edge power-wise, then as a gamer your natural course of action is to play as a knight and nothing else. If you do play as a wizard even though you know that wizards aren't as powerful as knights, simply because you like the thought of playing as a wizard, then that's a simple act of roleplaying. Not very in-depth or detailed, but it's a start.

Also bear in mind that magic need not be a substitute for physical fighting prowess. Maybe instead of just having a list of various attack spells, your wizards have grimoires packed with quirky little world-manipulation spells that do things that fighters simply can't do no matter how big their muscles are, such as turn a room completely dark to confuse pursuers or transform an enemy's Axe of Bloody Death +5 into an ordinary loaf of bread. In a game like this, even if knights do have a combat advantage over wizards, or are even still just all-around more useful, the perks of being a wizard really start to manifest themselves. Not only do you have two widely different playing styles to choose from- brute combat force or subtle world-manipulation spells- but you have two different characters with very complementary abilities. A knight might be able to absorb the mighty blows of the Increadibly Deadly Black Legionaire of Doom, and a wizard might be able to turn the Legionaire's sword into a loaf of bread, and so each has their own manner of defending themselves... but if you have a knight AND a wizard put together, then they can use both their defense powers together.

yes..a system like that is good "For and offline game" when it come's down to playing mmorpg that kind of system would never work. just a replay to lefty >> suppose you're playing a character named "jaba the elven archer" you would want to pick them off one by one becaue elvan peope are suppose to be snecky and smart. if you just barged in there well thats bad roleplaying. Roleplay "is" acting out not as you would but rather how your carater would. (ok back to you) roleplaying in online games is very hard becaue there are 3 kinds of players. power players (50%) , PKs (30%), & Role players (20%) your job is to make them all happy & to make the game fun for all of them. now all the mages are the role players & the Pks & power players are knights...who will they be killing for the fun? the mages becaue they know they are the weakest. this system would work for a deblo type game where you pick the plays whith you (you can pick all the roleplayers) but not in a game where anyone can join.
In response to Xzar (#7)
On 4/22/01 1:52 pm Xzar wrote:
On 4/22/01 12:28 pm Leftley wrote:
On 4/22/01 12:06 pm Xzar wrote:
On 4/22/01 10:08 am Leftley wrote:
On 4/22/01 6:31 am sunzoner wrote:
I'm consisdering a magic system for my game.
should I:
1. Allow a magic point (mp) system, where each spell cost X amount of mp, or
2. Allow only 1 spell cast per hour/day method?
The spell could be in a scroll or book.
Which method is more popular? I prefer the mp method but it allows for poor role playing.

I'd say it depends on the type of game you're making. If you want to make a generic RPG clone, then go ahead and stick with MP. But I'd say aim for something innovative- not only does it make your game cool and unique, but limiting magic in a balanced but unusual way can really make the game a lot more interesting.

just remember it all about balance....for example if i can only cast 1 spell a day or hour the spells better be strong or why use magic? as a roleplayer in online gaming I prefer the mp system Im not sure if it just me but i find it hard to role play whith limetd magic....Mages would suck & fighters would rule so how would you role play there? when making a system build it to be balanced this opens more doors to roleplay in...then i can be a mage,Fighter,warlock,etc

Keep in mind that roleplaying in a game is, at its basest core, deliberately doing something that you personally wouldn't do in a situation. As an example, suppose you're playing a character named "Skullcrush the Rabid Berserker." You look into a room and see a horde of goblins, far too many for you to fight safely. If you cleverly lure them out one at a time and pick them off one by one, you're being a poor roleplayer. You're doing what YOU would do, not what Skullcrush the Rabid Berserker would do- he'd barge in and start decapitating goblins. If you're a good roleplayer, you'd go in and do it too, even though you knew it was insane.

So, if you have a choice between a wizard class or a knight class, and the knight class happens to have a small but definitive edge power-wise, then as a gamer your natural course of action is to play as a knight and nothing else. If you do play as a wizard even though you know that wizards aren't as powerful as knights, simply because you like the thought of playing as a wizard, then that's a simple act of roleplaying. Not very in-depth or detailed, but it's a start.

Also bear in mind that magic need not be a substitute for physical fighting prowess. Maybe instead of just having a list of various attack spells, your wizards have grimoires packed with quirky little world-manipulation spells that do things that fighters simply can't do no matter how big their muscles are, such as turn a room completely dark to confuse pursuers or transform an enemy's Axe of Bloody Death +5 into an ordinary loaf of bread. In a game like this, even if knights do have a combat advantage over wizards, or are even still just all-around more useful, the perks of being a wizard really start to manifest themselves. Not only do you have two widely different playing styles to choose from- brute combat force or subtle world-manipulation spells- but you have two different characters with very complementary abilities. A knight might be able to absorb the mighty blows of the Increadibly Deadly Black Legionaire of Doom, and a wizard might be able to turn the Legionaire's sword into a loaf of bread, and so each has their own manner of defending themselves... but if you have a knight AND a wizard put together, then they can use both their defense powers together.

yes..a system like that is good "For and offline game" when it come's down to playing mmorpg that kind of system would never work. just a replay to lefty >> suppose you're playing a character named "jaba the elven archer" you would want to pick them off one by one becaue elvan peope are suppose to be snecky and smart. if you just barged in there well thats bad roleplaying. Roleplay "is" acting out not as you would but rather how your carater would. (ok back to you) roleplaying in online games is very hard becaue there are 3 kinds of players. power players (50%) , PKs (30%), & Role players (20%) your job is to make them all happy & to make the game fun for all of them. now all the mages are the role players & the Pks & power players are knights...who will they be killing for the fun? the mages becaue they know they are the weakest. this system would work for a deblo type game where you pick the plays whith you (you can pick all the roleplayers) but not in a game where anyone can join.


The reason that MMORPGS (and even not-so-massive MORPGS) end up with that player distribution (and in fact, I'd say you're being pretty generous when you say that there's 20% role-players out there) is because they're set up like shoot-'em-up games. Your only real goal is to kill stuff, and there's a very limited and very simplistic way to achieve this goal, and not much else you can do. You might argue that a secondary goal is getting stuff, but I should point out that in most of these games, you get stuff BY killing stuff, and the reason you're usually out trying to get more stuff is FOR killing stuff. It all boils down to the combat system, which consists only of melee and simple attack spells/effects.

The main reason a utilitarian wizard would work in a world full of vastly superior macho knights is mostly because, well, they're utilitarian. Like I said, the concept behind non-combat-oriented spells is that they can do very useful things which fighters simply cannot hope to replicate. A fireball spell simply does the same thing a fighter does, but in a slightly different way. However, it doesn't matter how hard a fighter sits there swinging his sword, he'll never be able to duplicate the effects of a "create food" spell when he's sitting there starving to death. By giving wizards important abilities which cannot be performed by knights, wizards become too important to simply slaughter wholesale. Invariably, if you had a large enough player base, you'd have clans popping up, and that's when wizards would start to really become popular. Since the goal of the game would still be killing things, but in a much more roundabout way, one wizard on his own would still be at a disadvantage most of the time... but a few wizards in a clan chock full of knights would quickly find themselves in a position of political power. Most players just want to be the most elite killing machine possible, so there would be a lot more knights than wizards. But since only the wizards can perform certain vital tasks, such as, say, enchanting weapons to make them more powerful, or summoning pet demons, or opening gateways to really cool places, etc., the fewer real wizards there were, the more in demand their skills would be. The numbers wouldn't be balanced- you might have 5 to 10 knights for every wizard- but wizards and knights would be codependent on each other, so their relative weights in player matters would be about equal regardless of numbers. Whereas, if all the classes are just variants on the same thing (i.e., the "Killing stuff" class), no class needs any other class- they can do themselves what the other classes were built to do.
In response to Kaidorin (#3)
On 4/22/01 11:35 am Kaidorin wrote:
The spell could be in a scroll or book.

if you want your game to stand out a little, use some other system. I have a few ideas:

Use magical "runes" that you combine to make the spells, say a fire "rune" and a wind "rune" could make a fireball and water "rune" and cold "rune" makes ice. The "runes" could optionally be consumed in the process.

have the spells as tatoos on the magicians body, you channel your "mana" trough the pattern and out comes an effect. as above you can channel trough many tatoos at once and combine their effects.

or why not have the caster invent spells on the fly. like the first example but the "runes" are just toughts in the casters mind. every caster could have all the "runes" from the beginnning or they could be forced to learn them from scrolls and books or other magicians.


bear in mind that none of these examples include spells per se, only effects that you combine to make spells


Yoinks! That's almost my spell-casting system, down to the letter!

Almost, mind you.

The way I have it, you find little material objects of elemental magic called 'sigils'. Sigils are bent and shaped into the pattern of runes, which then can be combined with other sigils to create a mold. Once that mold is ready, the person can either cast it directly (which uses up the sigils), imprint it on their brain (which causes damage but allows permanent knowledge of the spell), or transfer it to a scroll (which allows ANYONE to cast a spell, but scrolls are extremely fragile and unstable).

Casting a spell from memory exhausts the caster, but it does little else. You can cast as many spells as you'd like. However, the more powerful the spell, the more it drains your energy. If you run out of energy when casting a spell, you fall unconscious, and any energy drain that wasn't accounted for is subtracted from your health instead!

So basically, if Jeff the Newbie Necromancer tries to resurrect a lich (getting the sigils for which would probably take a lot longer than newbiehood, but just for example), he would fall dead on the spot. The drain would be so intensive it would sap all of his energy and all of his health. He'd probably become totally eradicated, with no hope for resurrection, as well.

What I'm trying to explain is that magic is a dangerous art, so it is only practised by those who like to take risks. If you collapse when casting a spell, it was your poor judgement when creating it.

(And all spells are created by the caster, not pre-scripted, so there is no telling exactly how powerful the spell is. And I'm not giving away any of the game figures. =)
In response to Xzar (#7)
yes..a system like that is good "For and offline game" when it come's down to playing mmorpg that kind of system would never work. just a replay to lefty >> suppose you're playing a character named "jaba the elven archer" you would want to pick them off one by one becaue elvan peope are suppose to be snecky and smart. if you just barged in there well thats bad roleplaying. Roleplay "is" acting out not as you would but rather how your carater would. (ok back to you) roleplaying in online games is very hard becaue there are 3 kinds of players. power players (50%) , PKs (30%), & Role players (20%) your job is to make them all happy & to make the game fun for all of them. now all the mages are the role players & the Pks & power players are knights...who will they be killing for the fun? the mages becaue they know they are the weakest. this system would work for a deblo type game where you pick the plays whith you (you can pick all the roleplayers) but not in a game where anyone can join.


ok now here is something better... power players PKers an RPers IN ONE!! this is what is called an IC game... now let me explain.. an IC game is this... A game where you ARE the charicter and if you do not play the charicter you get 3 wornings.. each haveing a punishment. you will get punished each time you do something you char would not know about.. like this.. say your friend is stuck in the black pit and cant tell you IC that he needs help. so he IMs you and you go get him and help him... guess what... you just lost all your stuff and your friend gets knocked out by the imm and thrown back in.. that was not IC becase you CHAR did not know about it. anything your char dose not know about is called OOC. (oh yeah IC=In Char; OOC=Out Of Char) so this means you get punished if you talk about the real world in the game also.. this may not seem like fun but if there is an OOC channel that players can chat on its not that bad.. and of course the players would still be able to be power players and PKers they just HAVE to RP it.. as lefty was talking about the way a fighter would RP sounded VERRY single minded to me.. instead of worrying about what way they choose to kill mobs they should worry about what way they interact with players mobs and objects... RP is more than just killing goblins.. it is also makeing friends you would not think of and beating info out of things.. RP is stratigy! it is not a hack-and-slash-while-complaining-about-my-job-to-everyone-on -the-game sort of thing. althogh thats all you see in RP today.. the peaple that cant stand to forget there worrys and make a new life in a virtual space over the internet. if all you want is to hack and slash go buy diablo and play it over the internet.. (DIABLO IS THE MAIN CAUSE OF THE DEMORALIZATION OF RP!!) well this is the second time i have been typeing for a good 10 mins becase i have nothing better to do today so.... ok bye
In response to Jobey (#10)
Like I said (or at least I hope I remembered to put this in), my example was massively simplified.

The big problem with enforced roleplaying is the use of third-party chat clients. Granted, some abuses of these will be obvious and can be handled accordingly, but it's awfully hard to prove that someone was actually acting on a message their buddy sent them- maybe they simply knew where they were and realized that they hadn't heard anything for a while, so they went to check up on them. Also, I would think the manpower costs would become just a wee bit crippling if you actually tried to do this with a really MMORPG- you'd have to recruit way more imms than with a non-RP-enforced game, and moreover, they would have to be far better in quality- in a game where breaking character is a severely punishable offense, the temptation for imms to abuse their powers can get pretty big.

Also, I really, really hate OOC channels. I know it would be pretty much impossible to get a big online RPG off the ground without one, but I just despise instant worldwide communication of any sort, it's one of my big pet peeves in MUDs. Now, if the OOC channel was strictly policed and anytime people mixed in IC matters they were punished, that would be a bit better, but I think there should still be some other limits, such as restricting its use to players in a major city or other inherently safe area.
In response to Leftley (#11)
On 4/23/01 2:11 pm Leftley wrote:
Like I said (or at least I hope I remembered to put this in), my example was massively simplified.

The big problem with enforced roleplaying is the use of third-party chat clients. Granted, some abuses of these will be obvious and can be handled accordingly, but it's awfully hard to prove that someone was actually acting on a message their buddy sent them- maybe they simply knew where they were and realized that they hadn't heard anything for a while, so they went to check up on them. Also, I would think the manpower costs would become just a wee bit crippling if you actually tried to do this with a really MMORPG- you'd have to recruit way more imms than with a non-RP-enforced game, and moreover, they would have to be far better in quality- in a game where breaking character is a severely punishable offense, the temptation for imms to abuse their powers can get pretty big.

Also, I really, really hate OOC channels. I know it would be pretty much impossible to get a big online RPG off the ground without one, but I just despise instant worldwide communication of any sort, it's one of my big pet peeves in MUDs. Now, if the OOC channel was strictly policed and anytime people mixed in IC matters they were punished, that would be a bit better, but I think there should still be some other limits, such as restricting its use to players in a major city or other inherently safe area.


the ooc chan is like i said about the dude with IM.. if he uses it to get help the imm will quietly wiat at him till someone trys to help and then purg an scilence them (so noone else would know it is a trap) the kick there ass into hell. and when the dude in the pit wakes up and climbs out.. the imm would knock his ass out and throw him back in (note this IS a real example of what i do in my RPGs when players abuse IC and OOC channels).. so you see the ooc channel is not the prob.. it is the IC ones.. like say and chat and stuff.. it is much worse for a player to use IC to send OOC info around than it is a player useing OOC to send IC info... like if i heard that the fire clan is moving north today over OOC i cannot do anything about it. but! if someone tells me in the game about it without telling me it is OOC i could end up getting ourged or slayed becase i did not know i could not act on it (becase you cannot say OOC stuff in IC.. you see?)
In response to Jobey (#12)
On 4/23/01 2:35 pm Jobey wrote:
On 4/23/01 2:11 pm Leftley wrote:
Like I said (or at least I hope I remembered to put this in), my example was massively simplified.

The big problem with enforced roleplaying is the use of third-party chat clients. Granted, some abuses of these will be obvious and can be handled accordingly, but it's awfully hard to prove that someone was actually acting on a message their buddy sent them- maybe they simply knew where they were and realized that they hadn't heard anything for a while, so they went to check up on them. Also, I would think the manpower costs would become just a wee bit crippling if you actually tried to do this with a really MMORPG- you'd have to recruit way more imms than with a non-RP-enforced game, and moreover, they would have to be far better in quality- in a game where breaking character is a severely punishable offense, the temptation for imms to abuse their powers can get pretty big.

Also, I really, really hate OOC channels. I know it would be pretty much impossible to get a big online RPG off the ground without one, but I just despise instant worldwide communication of any sort, it's one of my big pet peeves in MUDs. Now, if the OOC channel was strictly policed and anytime people mixed in IC matters they were punished, that would be a bit better, but I think there should still be some other limits, such as restricting its use to players in a major city or other inherently safe area.


the ooc chan is like i said about the dude with IM.. if he uses it to get help the imm will quietly wiat at him till someone trys to help and then purg an scilence them (so noone else would know it is a trap) the kick there ass into hell. and when the dude in the pit wakes up and climbs out.. the imm would knock his ass out and throw him back in (note this IS a real example of what i do in my RPGs when players abuse IC and OOC channels).. so you see the ooc channel is not the prob.. it is the IC ones.. like say and chat and stuff.. it is much worse for a player to use IC to send OOC info around than it is a player useing OOC to send IC info... like if i heard that the fire clan is moving north today over OOC i cannot do anything about it. but! if someone tells me in the game about it without telling me it is OOC i could end up getting ourged or slayed becase i did not know i could not act on it (becase you cannot say OOC stuff in IC.. you see?)

...I'm a little bit confused as to how it's possible to take a piece of game information (IC info) and transfer it over an IC channel and have it be OOC. A piece of IC info cannot be transmitted strictly through proper IC channels and be OOC; rather, somewhere along the line, someone has to break character and go OOC. Let's say you've got Chauncey and Edwick, two members of the Legion of Buttkickers clan, and Edwick's RL friend, Bithome. Bithome hears that the Knights of Hiney-Whooping, LoB's longtime rivals, are moving in to stake out the Temple of Nifty Goodliness, and ICQ's this info to Edwick. Edwick then approaches his clan's ranking officer, Chauncey, and says, "Prithee, milord, wouldst thou deign give me thy attentive ear such that I may regale thee with mine tidings of the dread KHW?" to which Chauncey replies, "Verily, good Edwick. In truth I hadst been but napping gently when thy troubled self didst but appear." Edwick then details the danger: "Hark unto me then, fair Chauncey: The villainous and most heinous Knights of Hiney-Whooping, our long-hated rivals, have made adjournment to the Temple of Nifty Goodliness, the selfsame shrine which we hadst been ourselves laying scheme to plunder, with the despicable intent to ambush us forthwith." Chauncey exclaims in response, "Zounds! O wouldst that I had naught but heard these loathing, venemous words! Make haste, good Edwick, that we might amend our mistake for else we make our doom!"

This is a description such as you described: Edwick, having obtained the OOC piece of information that KHW was staking, passes it on to Chauncey IC. Under your plan, Chauncey now becomes a party to the entire affair and is subject to punishment for breaking character. I find this hard to believe. Granted, for starters, both of them should be permanently banned on account of their ass-crappy excuse for Shakespearean English, but Chauncey has taken no actions OOC. Nor can Chauncey in good faith simply ask "Is this IC or OOC?" because such a question is in and of itself very much OOC.
In response to Jobey (#12)
Oh yeah. Back to the issue of having universally accessible OOC channels, even if heavily policed such that there is complete seperation of IC and OOC elements, the fact that a player can be using the game for IC and OOC purposes simultaneously has always bugged me as far as having a completely immersive RP experience goes. If Philoctidide the Lone Assassin wants to camp out for several hours waiting for his rival to pass through an area so that he can murder him, he should not be able to sit there and happily chat the hours away talking about his favorite movie or some other such. He should have to sit on his bum in the cold and the muck and the darkness and the solitude like any self-respecting lone assassin would. Now if someone's simply sitting around in a nice big city shopping and making deals, I don't see any problem with them chatting on a seperate OOC channel. Happily chatting in cities, yes. Chatting whilst fighting against the Lord of All Darkness Bazuraloth in the deepest depths of the Abyss of Unparallelled Doom, no. Would it be uncomfortable? Yes. Would players like it? No. But I say, if you're going to try and make a real roleplaying game, do it right.
I believe the MP option is more widely liked.
In response to Jobey (#10)
as lefty was talking about the way a fighter would RP sounded VERRY single minded to me.. instead of worrying about what way they choose to kill mobs they should worry about what way they interact with players mobs and objects...

Not necessarily! Roleplaying isn't only interaction with other players; it's logically doing what your character would do in a given situation.

For example, if Mork the Meek was captured by a tribe of PC ogres, he would try to talk his way out, hoping that they would find him too annoying to deal with.

But in the same case, Rosham the Ranger would try to swipe one of their weapons, slash them apart, and get away. Rosham wouldn't care about the risks of making ogres angry, nor would he care that he probably wouldn't make it. According to him, he's a ranger, he can do it!

RP is more than just killing goblins.. it is also makeing friends you would not think of and beating info out of things.. RP is stratigy! it is not a hack-and-slash-while-complaining-about-my-job-to-everyone-on -the-game sort of thing.

Roleplaying isn't strategy, I think. Roleplaying is acting out a part. The point of raising your character from their teens to their venerability is not to be the best there is, but rather, to act out a life as accurately and intelligently as possible. If your character's goal is to be the best swordsman in the world, then so be it! But if your character's goal is to be the greatest diplomat, in a roleplaying world, each should have equal rewards. And if you don't care about either, and just live your life, that's also roleplaying; your character wouldn't think of slashing monsters apart, and he could care less about interracial relations. What he does care about is living his life, something that is rather rare.

althogh thats all you see in RP today.. the peaple that cant stand to forget there worrys and make a new life in a virtual space over the internet. if all you want is to hack and slash go buy diablo and play it over the internet.. (DIABLO IS THE MAIN CAUSE OF THE DEMORALIZATION OF RP!!)

Not so! There was always the "make everything difficult" crowd, who were out only for personal gain. It's existed since the boardgame RPG's (whom, if the GM wasn't good enough, were allowed to do it), it's existed through the very first LAN chat games, and it's existed up to the present day.

I've always had a natural aversion to DBZ fans (no offense to anyone intended) because they always seemed like "that type". I admit that I'm stereotyping, and badly at that, but when I logged into DBZ Spar the very first time, I was PKed in an instant. When I logged back in, I was PKed again. And again. Honestly, I was mad, and I swore at the person, which didn't help things. Fortunately, which made me warm and fuzzy, some other guys came to my aid and taught him a little lesson. That person might be one jerk in a crowd of cool guys, but to me, they all seem kind of the same.

Likewise, when I played Starcraft on Battle.net, I also was averted to the vast majority of them. 'ha, u suk' and 'lol U looser!' graced my screen more than once.

I don't play a game to win, I play it to have fun. And if I lose because some arrogant moron wants to get a two-minute kick, so be it; he's on my squelch list, or if that's not possible, my vendetta.

Actually, I would rather like to play DBZ Spar until I got a sufficient level so I could go after that guy. Which, in a sense, is a type of roleplaying, but with a personal touch. That's bad form. But he's probably long gone now, anyway.


My point is (yes, I do have a point, camouflaged in my probably ungrounded bias =) when someone breaks the rules, it ruins it for everyone. It's always been like that, except nowadays, with the anonymity of the internet, it's harder to keep players in line.

Diablo didn't ruin it... people ruined it.

Whoa, and that's enough.