|
I will use Merc as an example, as it's the Diku derivative I'm most familiar with, and is the codebase that the majority of todays active Diku muds are derived from. In Merc, every creature has four hands - one for a weapon, one for a shield, one for a 'held' item (trophy, rock, etc) and one for a light source. You cannot use your light source slot for anything other than a light, and using a light has absolutely no affect on the rest of your setup. As such, there is no advantage whatsoever in not having a light - and so, everyone has one.
Some lights in Merc are permanent, while others gradually run out (and cannot be turned off). The latter reduces the light&dark feature to no more than an inconvenience which typically only affects newbies (who have little enough gold as it is), while the former (permanent lights) renders the light/dark feature completely obsolete.
Either way, the feature adds nothing to the gameplay; instead of going to all the trouble of implementing a light&dark system, the Merc team could have achieved practically the same result just by subtracting a few gold pieces each hour from all players below level 3.
As a counter-example, consider my mud; in God Wars II a humanoid has only two hands, and each is capable of holding any item. From a combat perspective, this divides your hand setup into the following choices:
1) Pure magic: Both hands are being used for casting spells.
2) Semi-magic (offensive): One hand for spellcasting, the other holding a weapon.
3) Semi-magic (defensive): One hand for spellcasting, the other holding a shield.
4) Unarmed: Fighting with fists, gloves, gauntlets, talons, etc.
5) Weapon: Using a weapon in one hand, the other fighting unarmed.
6) Shield: Using a shield in one hand, the other fighting unarmed.
7) Dual-weapon: Using two weapons.
9) Turtle: Using two shields.
9) Weapon+shield: A weapon in one hand and a shield in the other.
10) Two-handed: One weapon being used in a two-handed grip.
Each of the above have their own pros and cons, providing an wide array of possible tactics. Bring a light source into the equation and you add a whole range of new options. Consider for a moment what sort of light sources there are - for example (off the top of my head):
a) Torch: As well as providing light, a torch can also be used as an improvised club, although this will likely extinguish it. The flame itself can be used to burn, however, providing a good weapon against wild animals and certain undead. Goes out if left on the ground for more than a short time, although man-made dungeons may have brackets on the walls where the torch can be placed during battle.
b) Glass lantern: Can be placed on the ground during combat, although there is the risk of it being knocked over. May be hurled at an opponent, with a chance of breaking and engulfing them in fire - but opponents may also target your lantern, making it a potential liability. May be easily extinguished by the holder and hung from the belt. May also be lit and hung from the end of a pole.
c) Brass lamp: Much like the glass lantern, but more resilient, rending it ineffective as a weapon but more reliable as a light source. The lamp may also be reinforced and/or made from stronger materials.
d) Magical glowing items: Weapons, shields, armour and other items might glow as part of their magical bonus. This power would be at the expense of other magical bonuses, but would allow the character to utilise both hands for other activities.
e) Magic candles: These items could come in a variety of scents, providing bonuses to the party as well as illumination. A candle that keeps insect swarms at bay could be a life-saver, while others might ward off fear affects or provide other benefits. An excellent candidate for a crafting skill.
f) Natural illumination: Glowing moss or glowworms could be collected and placed in jars to provide light without the risk of fire. A wise choice when exploring gas-filled caverns.
g) Night vision: Certain races might have the ability to see in the dark naturally, allowing them to utilise both hands for other activities. The drawback, of course, is that this ability wouldn't extend to other members of your group/party - although on the plus side, it wouldn't extend to your enemies either.
h) Spells: Certain spells might provide a light source that follows the caster around, or allow the mage to imbue his party with night vision.
i) Pets/servants: That summoned fire elemental who follows you around would be more than just cannon fodder - it'd also be a living torch. Those without such resources could hire NPCs to act as torchbearers.
If I were to add light&dark support, I'd also be introducing the following options:
11) Semi-magic (lightbearer): One hand for spellcasting, the other holding a light source.
12) Light: One hand holding a light source, the other fighting unarmed.
13) Paired lights: A light source in each hand (think Aragorn vs the ring wraiths).
14) Weapon+light: A weapon in one hand, a light source in the other.
15) Light+shield: A light source in one hand, a shield in the other.
A torchbearer NPC might well use a torch and shield, reducing them to a mostly defensive role, while a typical adventurer exploring a dungeon solo might be more likely to pick a sword and torch, or a sword and lantern with a shield strapped across his back. Nightvision would suddenly become a really useful asset (as opposed to the completely redundant feature it is in Merc), and a glowing sword would become a coveted treasure.
Like all features, a light&dark system can be implemented well, or it can be implemented badly. In Merc, the entire feature is reduced to little more than a minor inconvenience for newbies, which is a shame IMO.
Merc does pretty much the same thing with eating and drinking - these are little more than irritating spam for most player - and as a result you'll see many people claiming that such a system should be removed. My view, however, is that there are few (if any) bad features, only bad implementations.
If a mud lacks the ability to design a creative light&dark system, or eating/drinking system, then sure - remove it. It'd be better than a bad implementation. However there's no reason why you can't turn such a feature into a strong asset for the mud, making it an integrated part of the overall game.
Your 'bodily waste' comment is another example of this - as a feature it's inherently neither good nor bad. Other than being potentially rather tasteless, there is no reason why such a feature cannot be integrated into a mud, other than lack of imagination or technical ability.
|