Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Lanthum · 09-12-2006, 03:57 PM

I agree with you - and that's basically what I was trying to say before:

Unless you are making a strict RP-style mud (which I know little about since I have played very few), if the game is based around combat to any extent - the power gamers will find the best combo of race/class for any particular situation no matter what. I don't think there is anything wrong with it, let's face it - that's what power gamers do. While we, the designers, might think that every combo is viable (IE: fun to play and equally useful), to power gamers viable does not (necessarily) equal playable.

I wasn't advocating coding your game such that there was only one combo for each race/class. Quite the opposite. All I was meaning was that even if you do make in-depth, intricate changes to races (and classes), that the scenario of X race for Y class might (and probably will) eventually occur. What I was suggesting is that designers need to think about balancing races (and classes) such that they don't create a situation of only one choice, but instead create MORE choices.

But to answer the original poster's question, much like the others, yes I think original races are good and important. But most designers put too much importance on "new" or "original" races without spending enough (or any) time on fleshing them out. Personally, what I was planning on doing is offering 1 or 2 original races at the onset, and then "revealing" new ones later on.

BTW KaVir - nice idea on the background system you proposed. It seems akin to the idea I had of "traits" that I am going to use for my upcoming game - but you put it into words better than I did and you gave me a few more ideas! Thanks!

09-12-2006, 03:57 PM	#21
Lanthum Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Suburbs of Chicago Posts: 138	I agree with you - and that's basically what I was trying to say before: Unless you are making a strict RP-style mud (which I know little about since I have played very few), if the game is based around combat to any extent - the power gamers will find the best combo of race/class for any particular situation no matter what. I don't think there is anything wrong with it, let's face it - that's what power gamers do. While we, the designers, might think that every combo is viable (IE: fun to play and equally useful), to power gamers viable does not (necessarily) equal playable. I wasn't advocating coding your game such that there was only one combo for each race/class. Quite the opposite. All I was meaning was that even if you do make in-depth, intricate changes to races (and classes), that the scenario of X race for Y class might (and probably will) eventually occur. What I was suggesting is that designers need to think about balancing races (and classes) such that they don't create a situation of only one choice, but instead create MORE choices. But to answer the original poster's question, much like the others, yes I think original races are good and important. But most designers put too much importance on "new" or "original" races without spending enough (or any) time on fleshing them out. Personally, what I was planning on doing is offering 1 or 2 original races at the onset, and then "revealing" new ones later on. BTW KaVir - nice idea on the background system you proposed. It seems akin to the idea I had of "traits" that I am going to use for my upcoming game - but you put it into words better than I did and you gave me a few more ideas! Thanks!