Re: hps of classes

[Peter Mardahl <peterm@soda.berkeley.edu>]

In message <9405250821.AA01143@diamond.cm.cf.ac.uk>, Simon McIntosh-Smith write
s:

>I'd say it was the other way around. My natural abilities are intellectual;
  Yes, and I bet you'd rate a stat in strength, con, dex of 8-9 in each, yes?
If you had higher stats in those areas, you'd be a good fighter as well as
a good mage, would you not?  Your natural abilities would be intellectual
AND physical.  Not EVERYONE is one-sided.
>no matter how hard I try I will not be as good an athlete or as competitive
>in sport as some of my friends. Similarly, my friends may not be able to
  Start taking vitamins (steroids!) and you might be suprised.  In the
game it's simpler, you just quaff a potion.....

>So it should be with wizards and fighters. A character is a wizard BECAUSE
>he is more in tune with magic. The skill comes first, leading on to the
  He's more in tune because he's smarter.  What if he's BOTH smart
AND strong?  If he divides his time, he learns slower in each skill
division, but he CAN learn.  That is exactly what skill areas will do.
I daresay YOU could divide YOUR time between intellectual and physical,
and increase your abilities in both.  And you might want to do that anyway,
because it DOES feel good to be in shape.  :)

>system for calculating results of actions from a characters stats. Drinking
>a potion may make you stronger or more intelligent, but no-one would claim
>that this would naturally make you a better fighter or magician. A fighter
  Yes, I agree here.  What it would do is give you the stats which would
make practicing fighting work better for you.  You'd gain fighting experience
faster because of your higher stats.  You would not become a better fighter
without going and getting experience....  Just like it is now.

  Key to my argument is that you get fighting experience by killing
with weapons, you get mage experience by blasting out spells, and
you get cleric experience by clericing, and you get thief experience
by thieving.  You must devote time to each area to advance.

  The biggest differences between your scheme and mine are:
I say:  if you practice, you become better
You say:  you are what you are and can be nothing more
I say:  advancement and experience come from actions in the game
         related to that skill
You say:  you go out and get experience in the field (always by
	  killing monsters), and return
         to the guild for advancement (The guild is then like
	 a potion that you take when you've got enought 'points',
	 whether or not your skill is related to how you got the
	 'points'.)

>What does everyone think about this kind of idea?

  I've made my biases eminently clear.  :)  I've been brainwashed
by Omega.  Playing that game made me think that its system of advancement
is the coolest I've played under.

  Regardless of the direction crossfire takes, i think this argument
has been fun, and will do crossfire good.  I've already made some
changes which will sharpen the differences between classes a bit,
and hopefully add color to the game.

>can only use weapons they are proficient in - other weapons can be used
>but at a penalty. I wonder if we could incorperate this idea into
  This makes sense.....  It's another complexity to the code, however.


Regards,

PeterM