PlaneShift
Gameplay => Wish list => Topic started by: Darkanan on May 27, 2003, 07:21:13 pm
-
I have played lots of MMORPGs let me just give you my insight into how to make a good one. This is going to be a long post but I\'m at my boring Programming job and I\'m sick of looking at code and want to take a break. Heres my insight guys taking a little bit from the best MUDs and MMORPGs to ever exist.
Races - Have about 10 different races that people can be. Each will have different starting stats maybe different night visions and different numbers of limbs for different armour types (ex. Centaur would need horse armour on top of human armor)
Stats - The best skills/Stat system I have ever seen has been this one. You start with basic stats based on what race you choose. Each race gains certain stats quicker. For example Elves gain Intelligence and Wisdom faster than Giants would and thus are better magic users.
There are 6 Stats:
1.) Strength - How much capacity you can carry, how strong your attack is (physical melee attack)
2.) Constitution - Hit Points. The higher the more HP you have. For each Con point give 10 hp or something like that
3.) Charisma - This is mainly for Rogues and assassins. Your charisma is your stealth in a way. The higher it is the better you can steal and Back stab.
4.) Intelligence - This is the strenght of your magic spells
5.) Wisdom - the higher this is the MOre MP you have, also the higher the better success rate of landing a magic attack
6.) Dexterity - The higher this is the better landing rate of melee attacks also can parry more attacks.
Classes and Sub-Classes:
You already have them
Player Killing:
This is the most crucial aspect of a game. You must allow PKing. There are a few differnet ways around this. You can first of all take one route that a lot of games did to offer both PVP worlds and NOn-PVP by having two different servers but you will soon see that most people prefer PVP. NOW, Dark Ages did a great job with this idea. YOu can have three kingdoms everyone must choose to be from one of the three You are safe mostlikely when you are inside of your kingdom but once you leave your doors you are not safe any more. That is one way. But the best way is to allow PKing everywhere except for one safe area in each town like the bank or something.
How to Regulate PKing:
You would be suprised at how well people in the game regulate PKing but one good way is to make an NPC police . If you PK someone you become an OUtlaw people can thus hunt you down and kill you one time and they will not be deemed an outlaw. Also have NPC police in each town. If an outlaw comes within their range they will be put in jail for 5 minutes. When you are in jail you are vulnerable to anyone attacking you which brings into another aspect guilds/kingdoms protecting thier friends in jail. It adds a different layer of depth to the game.
Speaking of Depth that is the most importnat aspect of a game: Too many games are just powerleveling and training and thats it. You can\'t do shit with a high level except go around and kill younger people there has to be something to keep people attached to a game. There has to be something. One good way is the kingdom idea and to have people join kingdoms or you can just give people the option to join a kingdom. Put the kingdoms in a constant powerstruggle and let them build armies and such that will keep people coming back but there must be further layers of depth in the game. And that is where questing comes. If you make the theme of the game something like to become an Immortal. This is the best idea I have ever seen in any game unfortunately it was practically impossible to become immortal. Make there an ultimate quest to become an immortal and allow immortals sort of extra powers. You can make it a secret class if you wish. And a secret race make dragons a secret race so a dragon immortal is in a way invulernable. IF you set it up so that the entire quests takes about a year to complete including of course that you would need a high level just to undertake it that will allow for people to constantly be playing this game. Guilds are a must but this game already has them.
Quests are a must also and this game already has them as I see. But I think there need to become smoe things to add depth to this game so it doesn\'t die out when you get to a high level.
Darkanan
cjtign@wm.edu
-
The idea of a \"good\" mmorpg is based on individual likes and dislikes. What you have provided is your idea of a good mmorpg. I for one don\'t agree with your layout. This game is being made for more than yourself.
-
I agree. Your \"perfect\" system focuses too much on battles and PKing than real roleplaying.
This is a MMORPG and not some kind of hack n\' slash a la DAOC.
Well, taste is different, sadly but true.
EDIT: Since when did \"charisma\" become the main attribute for a rogue? Rogues doesn\'t have need for charisma since they often operate alone. \"Dexterity\" is the most important thing for a rogue since it\'s used to pick locks, escape etc.
Charisma is more for leader-types like Paladins.
-
you base your ideas a lot like FF11, I like it :), but for the Pk\'ing thing...ehh I\'m not confident that the Devs will agree with you on that, but its up to the Devs not me.
But I do like your stats, like Strength, Constitution, dexterity, wisdom, stamina, vitality, intelect, and that sorta stuff......
-
Originally posted by Fanomatic2000
I agree. Your \"perfect\" system focuses too much on battles and PKing than real roleplaying.
This is a MMORPG and not some kind of hack n\' slash a la DAOC.
Well, taste is different, sadly but true.
EDIT: Since when did \"charisma\" become the main attribute for a rogue? \"Dexterity\" is the most important thing for a rogue since it\'s used to pick locks, escape etc.
Charisma is more for leader-types like Paladins.
I have a couple of comments, 1st you look at the top 10 or even the top 50 RPG?s in both print and computer formats and you see a trend, very detailed combat system, very simple or vague social system.
Is this to say that they are unimportant, no, just that for the games they are not the focus or that the game enforces them in some way that the players are not able to dictate directly.
As for what is an RPG it is all types of things, unlike the narrow view that some people give it, it is any game where a player dictates the actions of a character indirectly through some degree of chance. Chance is where RPGs and action games vary.
As for hack and slash?that has been part of RPGing since it?s first published examples.
On Charisma for a rouge thing?depends what a rouge is?in AD&D 2nd ed a bard and thief where both rouges. In classic adventure movies the rouge is usually tolerated because he is liked for some reason despite his/her shady disposition.
Lets take Han Solo the classic movie rouge?I would say he was more charismatic then he was dexterous.
Fanomatic2000 I am not ragging on you to say you are wrong, simply to say there is more to RPGing.
A few years ago I was in the (no hack and slash school of thought) now I am more whatever the group has fun with.
In making a game you try to focus on a genre and target audience. For PS we are targeting more of the Role Player as opposed to combat types because it is what we want and not many games in this area focus on. And we wish they did.
If combat was the main thing in this game?then it will be done a lot sooner though :-)
But don?t get into the trap of saying an RPG is this and not this cause in reality it is very broad, and even some RPGs have no chance involved?they just are not very popular.
-
Well, you can\'t compare a movie-star with a D&D hero. Just like in most movies, the heroes in Starwars were immortal, and they didn\'t have the same conditions as a \"real\" hero.
Sure a rogue can be a leader, but charisma isn\'t his main-attribute.
To say that charisma is the same as stealth is completely wrong. Charisma is how strong your personality is, and how easy you can manipulate the persons around you. It means that charisma is the main-attribute for politicians, Paladins, Bards and so on.
I mean, practically you can become an assassin with extremely high charisma, but it would be better if you raised your dexterity (your ability to sneak, dodge and hit)
I\'m comparing to NWN (which uses AD&D rules).
About the term \"RPG\" you\'re right when you\'re saying that different people has a different taste when it comes to RPG.
Sure, I cannot say what a RPG is, because it\'s different depending on what person you ask, but why did you name runescape the-game-that-shall-not-be-named then? Who are you to say that \"Ronescape sucks\", and \"Ronescape isn\'t real RPG\"? Taste is different isn\'t it?
-
What are you using to define rogue? Oh, and sorry for the misspelling rouge and rogue always gets me.
Rogue by the dictionary is as follows.
1. An unprincipled, deceitful, and unreliable person; a scoundrel or rascal.
2. One who is playfully mischievous; a scamp.
3. A wandering beggar; a vagrant.
4. A vicious and solitary animal, especially an elephant that has separated itself from its herd.
5. An organism, especially a plant, that shows an undesirable variation from a standard.
For movies and games, I have to say I use the first definition. But again we are arguing semantics. You are defining rogue in combat, and I am defining them socially. You look across the board and dependant on their (focus) you have their primary stats.
Now if you said ?thief? then yes charisma is pretty pointless. ?assassin? again not needed. ?Bard? yes, ?fence? yes, spy ?really probable?, scout ?not really?, con artist ?really important??
Hell, in some cases and game systems I would say intelligence is more important then dex?but this is not a class based game so in reality it is pointless for this game.
Ack, you just added your RP statement. The game that shall not be named ?Rune Scape or what ever it is, is not my choice. It was the game that will not be named before I was around here and I think it was added cause it was being compared to this so much that the devs got sick of hearing it?but I could be wrong.
As far as NWN it uses D&D rules or D&D 3rd ED and a modified form of those at that. Rune scape I only played for a few minutes and stopped so I really can?t comment on what it is or was, other then to say, it seemed like an RPG to me. Not a particularly good one or the type I am interested in, but an RPG.
Most of the D&D lines of video games even take combat over Role Playing but can anyone really say that the grandfather of the genre is not really an RPG???
Anyway?what I am saying is RPGs is not a narrow Genre at all, it?s not even about opinion, it is about that there are many different types of RPGs that focus on many different things.
Our game will focus more one playing the role of a character more them most, not as much as some.
-
I meant \"rogue\" as a thief, an assassin or a highwayman. The reason a bard is often a \"rogue\" in other games is because many RPGs focuses on battle. I mean, what should a bard do? Play monsters to death?
Therefore the term \"bard\" became the same as \"factotum\". A person who can sneak, pick locks, fight and so on. In PS there is no classes, and you don\'t have to put your life in danger so there is nothing saying that a bard is a rogue.
Intelligence is what you use when you pick locks, how fast you learn skills and spells . It\'s up to the player what he/she thinks is the best skill, sneak or pick locks.
Oops, back to the subject...
-
Its all relative boys.
-
About PK the main problem is called \"griefers\".
Some people seem to enjoy ruining the game for others. They kill people without reason just to piss them off. PK will in my opinion ruin the athmosphere, and it will make people focus more on survival than on RP.
Why add a PK-police if you want PK? Why would anybody kill another PC if they know that they\'re going to be killed if they do so?
PK *will* lead to hatred, and that\'s something I don\'t want in a game. Everything will be about revenge. ie. \"You kill me, I kill you, and If you kill me again, I will kill you again\" and \"I\'m gonna report you to my clan so that they kill you every time they see you\".
And how fun is it when you can\'t trust nobody? I don\'t wanna join a party when I know that my \"friends\" may be PKs.
There is always griefers, and there will always be.
-
I have to agree with Fanomatic2000 here?the PvP/Pk/PT issue is simple at the moment. If it can cause grief to a player?it won?t be in the game. if the player decides it is fun or better to enter into a situation where he could be Pked or whatever then it was done by the player and he or she can sleep in the bed that the player made.
We plan to give guilds very many options in how they are run and what they can do, as such they will be more then a group of players helping each other, there will be options and benefits to choices made, as well as drawbacks.
At no point in the game will a player be able to PK another that did not enter into a situation where it would come up.
For those of you who think this is negotiable?it is not at this point in anyway. The Pro PK types need to come up with a really good system that would win us Devs over.
We feel the current system that we have planed is the best situation for this game.
Not to get off topic but this is very much the same as adding Guns into the game?there would really have to be a good reason and system for it, and on the Gun issue it is even tougher cause I don?t know of a single Dev that likes the idea.
-
Guns in a fantasy Roleplaying game. Never heard of that one before. I don\'t like the idea.
And with the PKing I sorta already gave you guys a flawless system. I\'ve seen it in action and it works perfectly. You can even check it out. Check out a MUD called Merentha most of the ideas came from that game and absolutely have never had a random PK and on top of that they usually only have about 1-2 pks a day maybe unless theres a war.
-
Not to belittle your system, but as it is, effects of death are not discussed, amount of players are not discussed, but assuming it is DAoC for most things.
1st we will probably only support one server, unlike other MMORPGS, the reason is one will be hard enough to support as is.
2nd all the players are on the same side so to speak, the goals of this game are not the same a DAoC, while I like that concept a lot and tried to go with that style?we will not.
3rd Guilds will act in a way as nations?if your guild is into PvP you will get a lot of PvP, if not you won?t.
So it is not just a system?DAoC is a good one, but a reason and at this time there is no reason, and I doubt there might even be one till way after production, but PvP is not the focus of the game.
On the flip side, the high end game is a very important area that few games (none so far in my opinion) do really well. That is a content issue more then anything. Simply in most games to do anything productive at high levels you need to take 100+ of your friends along with you. So most of the time you are just waiting around.
But we have a while to wait for that.
The real issue is not that we won?t have PvP we will to a large extent, it is more the pure Pk aspect. And honestly I have not seen a system that I like as of yet. Shadowbane has a good system?but too easily abused unless you are only within your Guild, (the focus of that game) as this game is not like that?we won?t work things that way.
Shadowbane is one of those odd games that has many innovations but not a good overall package.
-
I Put a detailed system up in the PVP section. I\'ve never played Dark Ages so I don\'t know what their system is like. Although I\'ve read about the game and its unique constant war system but thats not to realistic and wouldn\'t do it for me. I know what your getting at with the whole guild is nation thing. One server by the way isn\'t that going to be mightly laggy once you get over 500-1000 people playing. It would be cool if you could get a few different servers and test them out one NO PVP, another free range on PVP and another moderated PVP. but whatever I understand your conundrum with being able to get the servers.
-
It might or might not be laggy with one server, but that\'s one of the problems a MMORPG has to encounter.
Project-Entropia can take 1000 000 people on the same server btw.
EDIT: Correction: \"Should be able\" to take 1000 000 people on the same server :D
-
Project Entropia also has the worst lag I have ever encountered in a game, the reason I stopped playing it. But anyway I think this thread is pretty pointless. Dark leave the developing to the Devs. Post suggestions, don\'t tell them what they should be doing.
-
What I posted was a suggestion. The topic is also WISH list so that is sorta what I wish for in a game. Who knows maybe it caught the eye of one of the devs, the least I can hope for.
-
I\'d actually like to see an RPG with no visible stats and none of this \'kill monster! level up!\' silliness for once... it\'s kind of turning into an old formula and it\'s not very exciting to hear people talking about their lvl 28 ranger with 53 strength instead of the mighty warrior who killed a dragon by beating it to death with it\'s own limbs :P
but that\'s just me... I\'m awkward like that ^~
-
We had ideas of only using word descripters for stats, Weak, feable, normal, strong?Muy Macho. But then we where looking at race variances and how we would need a lot of descriptors and just decided on numbers.
Same went for skills and all things.
But I would love to make a game where you don?t get many more HP then you start off with and your stats don?t change?you just get better at defense and such, but players would not see their characters progress much and that was over ruled.
Not really an issue. But those are some of the ideas that got shot down in times past.
-
the easiest way to do things is to represent them graphically and as for \'skills\' just treat them like the perks and flaws system in fallout or in one of the char screen thingies that\'s already in PS :)
to represent things graphically you\'d have to have a ton of animations, that\'s the only downside to it but having your swing go from one that just about carries you off your feet because you\'re not used to balancing with a sword to a skilled, super-fast slash is something most people can see and appreciate ^^
it\'d also be better if skills went up via use rather than \'oh I killed an ogre, now I can cook mexican food better\' because that\'s just plain silly :P
of course it would have to be based on the difficulty compared with the current skill level... you\'re not gonna get great with a sword by hacking at trees forever, but you can start on trees and work your way up to dragons =D
In the background it could be taken further by having a less \'digital\' level system too... lots of little levels that have a small but almost percevable effect rather than the same thing for ages then PING!!! you\'re suddenly a lot better :D
Edit: someone better start arguing with me soon or I might actually start thinking I\'ve got a good idea here or something ;)
-
I agree with paxx, such a system would favor roleplaying. I like the Fallout approach. For becoming stronger, you had to make some surgical improvements, which took a lot of time (weeks in-game time, you had 90 days for the main quest). You only became better in skills like shooting or stealing.
-
in this type of game you might be able to improve stats and hp by magic gear or a very powerfull and expensive spell being cast on you... yea i like that one powerfull wizzards can cast perminant stat improving spells.... and they could use some very hard to get item or maybe a christal shard that you only get when a wizzard casts a spell on a willing subject and that subject looses a stat of his choice.... that would make this spell very expensive and hard to do
-
I think the more realistic the game is(to real life), the better it is.
-
Yes, especially with magic crystals, monsters, spells, gods etc.
Heh, or perhaps that wasn\'t what you meant? ;) J/K
-
this is a fantacy game!!!! meaning we have magic wizzards, healing clerics, and fire breathing enemies........ how is this realistic???
i agree some things need to be but not all. if it was too realistic then it would not provide the escape from reality that we all like
-
Good Point Nadius.
I like the graphical approach, but its sort of hard to gauge your performance because people need something concrete that they can see to tell them how strong they are so they can compare themselves to others. Also it makes killing of monsters a little harder because while you might be able to land an attack on a rat how can you gauge if you can land an attack on a Dragon and thus should you go and fight a dragon. Whereas in other games its like well you need 45 int and 45 wis and Chainlightning spell and you can drop dragons in two spells or 70 strength and a decent sword.
Instead of number based skills the idea of having words describe them is a great idea. The first MUD I ever played whose name I sorta forgot but it was pay per play so I Didn\'t play it long had that system. They had skills like Sword fighting, Shielding, Fishing, Baking, Club Fighting, Exploring, Speed, hunting, ... And there were like 20 levels and you start out as inexperienced but you can progess over time. Another cool thing was that to progress you could only do that in 2 ways. You could learn the skill from another player by \"training\" with them in which someone who might be a master hunter training a novice hunter and gets them to a fledgling hunter. There were also certain NPC\'s that could train for a price and there was always the option that the longer you did such skills such as sword fighting the more it would go up. I personally like that system the most. It is one of the most unique I have ever seen and has moved away from the unrealistic system of numbers to display skills/stats.
-
bleh... people are always after a silly safety net :P
in RO or PSO you can\'t really tell if you\'re ready for something or not unless you try and fight it or go look at a fansite. where\'s your sense of adventure? :D
other clues could be put in via sound, graphics and music. your character could take up a slightly less certain stance if the monster\'s a bit too much for you, the model could be scaled up a little bit to make it look bigger and meaner and you could drop the light a little to make it seem darker ^^
If you were subtle enough with those kinds of effects then people would pick up on them without thinking, and before someone starts being silly I\'m talking about small changes, almost barely percievable not a storm while your character quivers and the rat grows to 2000 times it\'s size.
of course being silly is half of what forum arguements seem to be about; if you\'re smacking rats about easily then it\'s a pretty good clue that they\'re not quite challenging you but it\'s not like it\'s a world of rats and dragons is it? what kind of fantasy world would that be? =P
there would be a wealth of creatures to test your skill on between a rat and a dragon and by using the advice and experience of others (remember the social part of MMO? ;) ) you can pretty much work out what\'s good for you to tangle with =D
and what\'s with RPGs always being about fighting 24/7? It\'s taken long enough for people to realise that merchants and healers might be a good idea, I hate to see how long before it takes before imaginations pick up enough for other types of RPG career on a more widespread scale like entertainers and other non-combat roles that are fun or challenging without being boring :rolleyes:
-
I didn\'t mean realistin in that way, I realize that it\'s medieval approach with wizardry and such.
By realistic I mean, feeling like you are in another world, not just in a game :)
that means, NPCS that don\'t just stand there everyday, that can start converstation with you.
creeps that don\'t just spawn like in the game, that are actually born and if you kill too many, you can wipe out the species.
You know, VERY REALISTIC. That\'s in MY optinion a good mmorpg. But ofcourse its hard to create such a thing.
P.s. I only listed a few realistic things, but you get my drift...
-
Doing the stats with words rather than numbers would rock. Having something concrete that you can guage your abilities and progress also makes gaming much more enjoyable and less programming intense.
-
This is in response to an earlier statement about complex combat systems.
You get complex combat systems because it\'s a point where you can no longer role-play your way through the situation. Just because I\'m a warrior from the highlands doesn\'t mean I\'m automatically going to be victorious against the mud people of the plains. You can make decisions and tacitcal maneuvers for your character, but you can not simply role-play your way through the situation. \"I swing my sword and cut off his arm\" doesn\'t work. Atleast not without some other form of resolution.
I mean, I guess you could, but what\'s to keep someone from simply taking over the world in a sentence.
Also, about rogues and charisma. In order to do their job, the things that make them a rogue, they have to have dexterity ( or agility or whatever.) Being able to break into a safe doesn\'t take an ounce of charisma. It takes intelligence and the ability to move yoru fingers about precisely.
Charisma isn\'t a bad thing for a rogue, though. Becoming friends with the bank manager, getting him drunk and ferreting the combination out of him, while roguish in nature, can be done by anyone with the charisma to do so.
A rogues abilities lie in his expertise at manipulating his fingers hands and body well.
-
actually me and some friends used to play Dungeons and Dragons without dice or paper, we\'d just leave it up to the GM to work out if things worked/hit or not.
Made for some exciting adventures, though the reason we use dice-like systems and stuff in PC games is because it\'s kinda hard to make a AI GM with good judgement for thousands of players at once.
That and some people are so tied up in their stats, the idea of just playing for a sense of adventure and fun almost seems long lost :(
-
Originally posted by sashok20
I didn\'t mean realistin in that way, I realize that it\'s medieval approach with wizardry and such. By realistic I mean, feeling like you are in another world, not just in a game
Wasn\'t that pretty obvious? :)
-
this is my take on rpgs and mmorpgs what makes them popular.............
its all about compleating tasks... tasks set by you quests, making stuff and combat......
we need a stat system to make the game more addicting it been proven by medical studdies that games like this are chemically addicting....
i read a studdy that a person\'s dopemine levels where tripple normal when people leveled or completed a quest and up to 5 times normal levels when either winning a intense fight or pking
in order to make this game as fun as possible we need some sort of goal orented leveling system and either by words or numbers .......
and i personally like knowing for shure where im at.....
as exact as possible.. really helps with highscore type applications and the all powerfull bragging rights
i played some no dice no stats table top games but i stopped cause if i pissed off the dm whch i did from time to time id miss more see if you dint know where you where at you wounlt know what your character should be doing you could have a really good weppon but you are having a bad day and you dont hit often you might sell your nice wep and never know where you are at........
i wish we had numbers in real life cause then people might have more confidence in there self or know exactly what to work on
-
The wonderful thing about the \"UO\" style online-games is that everybody has their own goals, and everybody can do whatever they think is fun. They can become heroes, villains, mercenaries, soldiers, thiefs etc.
Or they can choose a more peaceful path and become farmers, mercants, beggars, crafters, lumberjacks, bards, animal trainers etc.
That\'s the difference between the \"UO\" style and the \"Tibia\" style.
Freedom to choose your own path.
-
you mentioned 4 things there that the study found addictive. Levelling, Quests, Intense Fighting and PKing.
I\'ve never seen anything in an MMO outside of fighting my way through a dungeon to whack the boss that I\'d really call a quest, so lets just say for a moment that this is lacking, so far most mmos have 3 of the points you were talking about. Now... Intense fighting, if you\'re actively involved like in an FPS or something like PSO where you have a lot of real-time control over the combat almost every fight is intense in some way but when it\'s like DAoC or Diablo or whatever, it\'s \'tension\' mainly comes from watching a stupid energy bar and freaking out when it looks like it might not last the fight :rolleyes:
My suggestion is to make the levelling take care of itself and be more subtle (more analogue, less digital) while increasing the emphasis on quests and just generally intense stuff as much as possible. You don\'t read cool epic stories about how Kaleff sat in a field killing monsters all day to reach her 27th level and put some points into archery, you read stories about how she killed the dragon after fighting off it\'s endless minions, dodging the mountains various traps. The fact she gets better as she does this is in the background, it\'s the feat of killing the big bad boss and knicking his treasure that you really care about =3
If you really want to go whacking the psychology stuff you\'ll find that people have 4 primary elements in what they look for in a game, and these levels differ from person to person. They are...
- Challenge
- Curiousity
- Fantasy
- Control
based off what I enjoy it pretty much reads that I have high levels of curiosity and fantasy medium levels of control and pretty low levels of challenge :P
Guys in general tend to have higher levels of Challenge, that\'s where most of these games are aimed, especially with this levelling crud ><
anyways... there\'s a point buried in this post somewhere, I\'ve just went and lost it ^^;
-
you can\'t really define what makes a good game, simply because people have different play styles, some peeps like the hack and slash, some (like me) are creators, we like to have some say over the game world it\'self, others want to interact with other players socially, yet others just want to pk them, the difficult part is creating a game that suits all these things in a harmonious balance, which hasn\'t yet been done in my opinion.
-
A good game should be the one that makes happy most of the people (nobody is perfect) so it shouldn\'t be just Hack & Slash neither be only Role Play... you should have both, so you can attract all kinds of players...
suggestions i have that improves the desirability are these:
more than just the alls basic stats, when you have more stats to work you play more and play on a more diverse way (adding luck would be nice, it would help or penalyze a little on the other gains, Will is a good put, courage would also be nice by making you flee if something bad happens or giving bonuses on berserker acts... thats goes on...)
Charisma should not be just a idea that doesn\'t do a thing, it should really change your gameplay, like npcs be eager to talk with persons with high charisma (if they like you they will trust you and talk more, do more details about the subject or if you are too ugly the can be scared and run, refusing to talk to you) it would modify you chances to get a big deal when you buy or sell things, when people see your description it could say \"Ugly Mr. Hazbahal\" and all other uses of this so ignored stat...
also i think that should have plenty of quests scatered on the world (not only H & S ones, quest of deliveries to be done, people to give you hints when you are on a quest, crime solving and all those things that changes your play , making you stop for a while to just being a level raiser to really explore and discover the secrets of the world
PK should have, the idea of the outlaw flag is cool, but the idea of 5 min penalty in my opinion is awful, everyone hates to be stuck... the better idea is that if you are an outlaw you will be attacked by guards and peacekeeper creatures (you become the main target) and will be target by other players because they can kill you and will not be outlaw... (with that a bounty system cam be used to be a good reason to hunt outlaws, that will make groups of players to joinf forces to attack the outlaws wanting the reward)
the improving of the char should not be just \"you rose a level so every stat you have has improved\" it to improve the game should be based on what you do (it\'s pointless to gain more mana just because you killed many enemies with a sword, you should improve your mana and spellcasting by using it... it helps a lot in making the players more diverse if you want to improve your magic, use magic, to improve strenght use it... just like we do in the real world (i know it is not THE real world, but follow principles helps the player the \"enter\" the play
well, i wrote so many things but now i have to go... more to come when i return...
-
there\'s one reason why open pk never works on more than a one out of many server basis... greifers, and there\'s really very little you can do about griefers, unless you limit pks to one a day or put up a lvl restriction, because they like to kill and hunt low lvl characters. so likely, you\'ll never see anyone implement pk on a large scale unless the designers are individual pkers designing a game specifically for pk
-
I agree, graphics are always a must. For every aspect of the game. Ive seen alot of muds and mmorpgs that would have been alot better if was more graphic. And pk is also a big must because then people tend to form clans and kingdoms. Then eventually armies start forming and its really cool. But there should also be pk police and you should be able to hire a body guard, that way the newbies (such as myself) can get around without having to avoid anywhere profitable or fun just to avoid being killed for sport.
-
First, I think the stats and skills should go by numbers, so the limits are much higher. Once you reach max on a skill it\'s like...ok, no more point in working on that, then you move to the next one. I like things where there really is no max. You should level up only in the skills you are using, as in Morrowind, for the sake of realism. Once you level up in enough skills you gain a level and get extra hp and maybe a stat point to put on any stat of your choice. Having lower standards on stats, but higher standards on skills tends to work well, as skills increase more often than stats do, but each point on a stat should make a noticible difference, while points on skills barely even show. Ok...I\'m done ranting for now... :D
-
the problem with that is that an exceptional person(or character{and the chances are we all want to play exceptional characters, rather than mediochre} in rpgs) learns from what he sees as well as what he does, therefore, he would learn to an extent the basics of what he watches others do as well, which would be nearly impossible to impliment. how do you set up a system where a character can learn from other people\'s actions around him?
-
You could have it that when a character nearby gets xp in a skill, if you are performing the same task, you could get a bit of xp also, say 5% of what they gained, if that is what you mean.