RE: CF: ideas for next experiments

["Doug wilder" <>]

> > This is not my proposal, this is how things currently stand.
> > Magic is only an attacktype when it stands alone.  Otherwise, it > > is 
>an attacktype modifier.  Immunity to magic makes you immune to > > the 
>direct effects of any magic spell, and there are rather a
> > good number of magic immune creatures in the game.  The one
> > loophole that allows mages any chance of dealing with those
> > creatures is that magically summoned creatures have non-magical
> > attacks.  One of the reasons I'm proposing this God of Magic is to
> > put the most common magic immune creatures, beholders and skulls,
> > on his slaying list.

> >   Note that I believe the current reason for magic protection
> > working the way it likes is to probably sort of mimic the AD&D
> > idea of magic resistance in monsters.

> >  For background, some monsters in AD&D have some percentage value
> > of magic resistance.  When hit by a spell, roll the percentile > dice, 
>and if less than that value, the spell does nothing.

> >  This of course works easy in a real life game where the GM can
> > make judgement calls on what is magical and not magical and
> > should the monster get a roll or not, and so on.

Note: This is true in D&D  up to a point. After a certain level (11th i 
think) you get 5% per level that you subtract from magical resistance. Thus 
a critter with 100% magic resistance has a 95% against an 11th level mage, a 
90% against a 12th level and so on.

With levels as high as they are in crossfire some other plan should be in 
place. I don't think the D&D rule could apply here.



>----------------
>----------------
> > taking advantage of the existence of the server and having a more
> > persistent universe.  I think that would dovetail well with the
> > stated intent to become more RPG-oriented.  It would obviously  > have 
>some truly immense ramifications
> > to how maps are made and how quests are implemented and basically
> > how the game is played today.  However, I think it deserves some
> > thought, and some consideration as a long-term goal.
> >
> > Yow.  Major change there.  Even if that was adopted as a long term
> > goal, I don't know how we could move in that direction without >changing 
>the basic nature of the game.  Maybe a few non-resetting
> > rooms here and there in towns, but all of the dungeons are
> > designed on the principle of being reset frequently.  I suppose
> > artifacts could be made more unique by not placing
> > them on their maps if any player who is known to have one either
> > in their inventory or in their apartment(s) is currently in the
> > game.  That's about as far as I can see it going without a
> > complete replacement of all the maps.
>
>  There has been discussion about making some aspects more persistent.
>
>  Instead of a shop completely resetting, rotate portions of the
>inventory through.  So eventually all that stuff sold would
>disappear, and other stuff would rotate through the inventory.
>
>  The problem with doing this with dungeons is there is no current
>method of regenation - if cleared out, it is empty until it
>resets.  And to try to put programming logic in this would be very
>difficult.
>----------------
>I disagree.  See below.
>----------------
>
>  as an multiplayer game, you sort of need stuff to reset -
>otherwise, the first people that venture onto the server would do
>all the maps, and leave nothing for anyone else.
>----------------
>Maybe not.  Also see below.
>----------------
>
>  But it is unrealistic that stuff does just reappear - you
>completed the pirate quest, and two days later they are back again.
>
>  From an RPG perspective, that makes it less itneresting, because
>the player feels he didn't complete anything that has a permanent
>(or even long lasting) affects.
>----------------
>Very true.  We'll get back to that.
>----------------
>
>  I don't have a good solution to that however.
>----------------

This depends on what type of game we are trying to make. If we are trying to 
make a game that has a story line and to follow that story line we make 
dungeons so that they don't reset for the players we could do this. But 
correct me if im wrong, I thought the idea was to make crossfire a game you 
can continue to play. If we make crossfire a story line based game then you 
don't need to go up past say 50th level and once you have finished it you'll 
never need to play it again.

If we make it so that it constantly resets you can visit the areas you like 
the most or go to new areas. People can join the game at anytime and no that 
if there are lots of players on a server we can always go to the nubie 
dungeon with a first level character and start there.

I suggest this; (i don't know if its possible with coding) that the lower 
level dungeons reset at higher rates than the higher level ones. i believe 
right now that when the game resets it resets everything at once.

SUGGESTIONS?




______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-
[you can put yourself on the announcement list only or unsubscribe altogether
by sending an email stating your wishes to ]