Crossfire Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Classes, Race, Experience proposal



> 
>     This leads me into one of the major problems I have about crossfire.
> Lately, most of the discussion has been abut gameplay mechanics thigns.
> Frankly, everyone here is going to have vastly different opinions about
> this.  Right now I can see a discussion going on between the strong 
> class-differentiation and weak-or-no class-differentiation camps.
> 
> 	There's good points and bad points to either.  Getting everyone to
> agree on one or the other just isn't going to happen.  There's too many 
> differing opinions on how what the best, most playable, way to model our
> little crossfire reality.  
> 
> 	Really, what would be best to do would be to put all the game-play
> mechanics aside, perhaps in their own directory, for the individual server
> admins to customize as they see fit.  Generalize the rules and action
> tests of teh game as much as possible in the core source, and let the 
> 'game-play' library decide how whether these succeed or not. Then we're
> writing a metagame, and then everyone can tune the game running under the
> metagame however they want.

 There is lots of discussion going on at the moment, but I would hope that 
after a while we might reach some sort of consensus. When we do it will be
all the better for the amount of discussion going on. I don't like the idea 
of a generalized mechanics because I think that Crossfire needs an identity.
In the same way that Omega, Nethack, Larn, etc have a particular feel, I
believe that Crossfire should have one too. 

 It also allows us to balance the game play much better. If everyone is
running their own mechanics then they have to balance it themselves
which is a non trivial exercise, but if hundreds (thousands, millions
!!!) are playing the same mechanics then there will be more flaws
discovered. I think game balance is being underrated at the moment.  We
have all been excitedly adding new cool features to Crossfire without
some overall balancing going on. Now people get bored with the game
because they can easily make themselves mega-powerful and romp over any
challenge.

[...]
> 
> The cynic in me says, however, that we'll just end up with a stupid class
> system, since its so much easier to code.  And then we'll have splinter
> groups trying to write much saner game systems.  It'd be nicer, however,
> if it was easier to keep them all together with the same core source.
> 
> I say this all because, quite frankly, I'm not in the 'classes' camp. I
> only play D&D when I want to show how ridiculous that game is.  D&D is
> simple to make it playable.  We DONT need to do that here, because we've
> got this wonderful computerized DM to handle all the annoying little
> details.
> 

I agree full-heartedly. I play AD&D, but I have no fixation on sticking to
a class system. Crossfire is a action/adventure computer game - not a 
paper and pencils role playing game. Let's make the mechanics fit the type
of game we are creating.

> 
>  Eric Mehlhaff, mehlhaff@crl.com
> 


Rupert