MUD-Dev
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: Why have a combat state?
To throw in the other side here, though i too have played with the diea of
a one-state world...
(1) Combat, to be fair and to encourage stratgey, as oppsoed to teh gu
ywith the best conenction and amcro package, has to be timed and sequenced.
Timing and sequencing all other motion coudl get pretty monotonous "no, you
cant push that button or walk over there yet because Harry hasnt done his
combat action..."
This is why most pen nad peper RPgs have two time scales, oen in combat
and one out of combat .
(2) Enagagement is an important concept for battle strategy. You CAN still
have engagement in a one-state if that state is always in combat time (see
(1))above), but someone was mentioning "just wlakign off" so I thought i
shoudl mention it. Engagement simulates the fact that seriosu combat is a
constant give and take of offense and defense, if yo udrop your defenses,
even foir a moment, yer gonna get tagged.
JK
- Thread context:
- Re: [MUD-Dev] (fwd) Re: Issues from the digests and Wout's list, (continued)
- Me,
Raz raz#mushroom,demon.co.uknospam, Fri 25 Apr 1997, 12:11 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: Why have a combat state?,
Jeff Kesselman jeffk#tenetwork,com, Fri 25 Apr 1997, 02:06 GMT
- Re: Verb binding,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Thu 24 Apr 1997, 21:46 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]