Delerak posted: I can classify people in the real world.
Yes, people are classifiable, but think about this. A Jewish man is about to be born, he speaks with God, and during this conversation he choses his hair, eyes, stature, a string of text that defines him to others, and a name his friends can call him. He really wants to be painter... but no, Jewish men dont get the Painter class choice, so he has to be a merchant....
I do not know about you, but if I was going to compare Role-Play Mud char. creation to RL, then I would think it through....
Classifiably I am Classless. I like to read, cook, womanize, mud, study, photograph, play musical intruments, statical theory fascinates me, philosophy, theology, meta-physics, make buisness stratedgies, and fight. That is me IRL to a degree... The only thing truely classifiable about me is that I am a white caucasian male, early twenties, and sexy.
I prefer a Class-less Skill-Based Mud. By which I mean that not only is it classless, but your skill increases by using the skill in a manner realistic to learning irl, not by accumulation of XP. For example IRL I am a guitar player, if I play what i already know I dont get better, if I attempt something too hard I do not get better either... I have to find the most effecient material to practice given my time commitment and skill. A true Skill Based system, done well, uses this type of system.
The question of balance has come up early in the thread too...
Some distinguish balance issues being different in PvP. It is. However balance is not always solved by obvious means... OnyxFlame mentioned that in Dartmud a young fighter has the advantage over a young mage... In toe to toe fighting this would be true... however there is no mention of any reason why the mage would not run away, being that death by a pure fighter in DM is not exactly instant, especially if the fighter is young. The young mage has the advantage of a different social enviroment than the fighter... most fighters are solitary, young mages have many friends whom just by being associated with would make a would be assassine think twice. Young mages also have spells that help them survive easier than a young fighter. What OnyxFlame meant I believe is that if a young mage and young fighter fought till the death the fighter would win... this isnt the nature of Dartmud so it is a moot point... Balance is a broader issue than just winning fist to fist.
The next question in relation is Permadeath... wether or not you have Permadeath greatly effects how you design skills and classes and such in your mud. Permadeath makes everything you do important... who your friends are, who your enemies are, what image you project, etc... nothing is then meanial... because you could die because of it... perma. Becoming an expert acrobat for instance... is it really worth it ? Attempting your first swan dive into a pool, land wrong and break your head, no one is around, your corpse rots and your soul is taken by the goddess ? Being able to evolve in an unrestricted PvP perma-death mud is essential to survival, classless-ness allows you the freedom to move through changing political structures, social circles, and economic malfunctions with greater ease. There are penalties involved in learning skills that conflict with each other, so as to not have demi-gods running around. Being a phenom of a "multi-classer" in Dartmud takes time and wit, so if a char can live that long without ****ing off the wrong group of people then they earned having the flexiblity and power of being a jack of all trades. But a good assasine, or mage with wit could kill the multiclasser just as easily as the other way around... But the mutliclasser is more powerfull in less tangable ways. It is complex, my post and the rest of this thread really dont do this issue justice... there are many nuances to consider.
Despite the outwardly non-logical statement Jiles made, if you pick his brain you will find he has very detailed thoughts on these things, and if given the opportunity has very valuable insite to Mud Creation. Honestly his statement did make sense. How I read it: Noone likes to be put in a box, boxes define people who are enslaved to some title, free minds dont define themselves by their skills, they define themselve by who they are. Their skills are a secondary effect of who they are. The purpose that drives us toward learning one thing or another defines more acturately than the skill itself.
Correct me if I am wrong Jiles.
LittleJohn, *I* do not define myself by my occupation... *I* am not a Crimminal Justice Professional... *I* am *I*. Nor do I define my mud characters by their skills or their class, I define them by what part of myself I am choosing to express and the purpose or "role" that character will have within a given enviroment, skills I choose to learn will help to fullfill that purpose.
|