I decided to update my MSSP support to include the new variables, and I've come up with a few issues I'm not sure about. I could probably guess and come up with sensible answers, but I'd rather get a second opinion (and perhaps see if we can better clarify some of these issues for future muds).


I recently added support for triggers, although the system is still fairly basic, and currently only supports hardcoded triggers - however they're very much like mobprogs from a design perspective. Should these be included, or is the option only intended for muds which support softcode scripts?


TMC has the following:

1. Non-adult oriented
2. Generally adult-oriented
3. Sexually-oriented material
4. Adult-oriented violence
5. Both sexually-oriented and adult-level violence

I selected the 4th option on TMC because my combat messages are frequently brutal and graphically detailed. There's no sexual material in my mud however, and although I have werewolves and werefoxes I wouldn't want people mistaking GW2 for a furry MUCK!

How would I reflect this with the MSSP option?


On the one hand, I've got newbie areas, newbie quests, a newbie channel, loads of documentation (including newbie help files and a tutorial), a quickstart character creation option, and a context-sensitive hint system that walks you through the basics.

On the other hand, I've got a learning curve which was once described as being "like a brick wall", and unless you're really willing to go through all the information provided you're going to have serious trouble working out what's going on. Even the positive reviews of my game usually refer to it as being highly complex.

I've come to think of it as "friendly to mud newbies, unfriendly to mud veterans", but that's mostly because newbies tend to actually read the documentation and hints, while veterans usually assume they already know what they're doing.

I'm still not really sure how to translate that to a boolean. On TMC I just ignore the question, maybe I should do the same here?


What's the difference between a clan and a guild? Typically muds use one or the other, but they represent the same thing - a player-controlled organisation.


The above are based on TMC's categorisation, which I always felt was rather limited. It'd be nice to have an "Exp" training system, for muds in which you spend your exp like a currency to buy different bonuses and enhancements for your character (note that almost all GW muds work like this, as do a number of other muds, so it's not exactly an uncommon approach).


TMC lists the option as "Yes", "No", "Restricted", "Pure PK" and "Not Applicable". Presumably "Full" translates to "Yes"? And I guess if you list MOBILES as 0 it would instead be "Pure PK"?


I'm assuming "Integrated" is for quests which are integrated into the areas?

- Progs, triggers. Your questions are the reason why many people are rather uncomfortable with this option, because it doesn't really mean much unless you're in a relatively narrow range of codebases.

- Adult material. I think the intention is to say whether there is sexual content or not, but I think that what you showed is better.

- Newbie friendly. We have a whole thread about that actually… My feeling is that it shouldn't be called "friendly" but should instead be a list of what is actually there, objectively speaking.

- Clans vs. guilds. :shrug: Again, a distinction that I think makes sense only in certain codebases. I believe that in some bases a guild is class-based whereas clans are free-form.

- Playerkilling. I think that you are correct.

- Quests. I guess that is correct although it begs the question as to the difference between automated and integrated. Perhaps automated is supposed to mean automatically generated.

- mudprogs/triggers. I don't see why hardcoded systems shouldn't be included, though I guess getting the line count could be difficult.

- adult material. Might be easiest the add "ADULT VIOLENCE" - "0" or "1" ? The genre field has an "Adult" option for Moan and Groan muds, or whatever they're officially called. So people looking for a furry mud would likely look at the genre and subgenre field.

- newbie stuff. Has been discussed, but there wasn't enough input to reach consensus.

- player guilds. Guilds are generally used to describe class guilds, so in order to become a warrior the warrior guild (player run) has to accept the player. It's a mechanism to encourage RP.

- training system. Is there a difference between level and experience based training? I never really got the whole training thing and I think it's covered by the level, skill, and class-less options. I'd personally suggest removing that entry.

- playerkilling. A pure pk mud would list itself as 'player versus player' with the gameplay variable. I guess this option is useful for people who want to play a RP mud that has no PK.

- quest system. Might look cooler if it read: "None", "Manual", Automated", Integrated". I'd say integrated implies quests build into the areas, and automated to mean some kind of global generic auto quest system as popular on rom muds.

At this point, one starts to wonder what counts as "mudprog/trigger" and what counts as normal game logic.


Yes, the one involves gaining xp to go up in levels at which point skills get better, and the other involves gaining xp to spend on skills directly. I would not suggest removing this distinction.


I would suggest calling so-called automated quests "generated" instead, because the so-called integrated quests are just as automated (in the sense that no immortal intervention is required).

My Trigger module stores the triggers in a separate file, so I could just list the line count of that (unless you want it omitting stuff like copyright notices and blank lines - then it would need to be parsed).


I don't mind doing that, or leaving it as it is. I just don't want some mud site automatically updating my listing to "sexually explicit" or something.


But for the standard, as it's defined now, what does "newbie friendly" currently mean?


So player-run classes, basically? In the original God Wars, if you wanted to become a vampire you had to find another vampire to bite you (and which point you'd automatically be inducted into their clan) - likewise to become a werewolf, another werewolf had to claw you (and thus induct you into their tribe), and so on. I'm not sure that any GodWars mud would think to list themselves as having guilds though…the standard could really benefit from having descriptions added to the fields, to explain this sort of thing.


The entry is required by TMC, so it's probably worth keeping.

Level-based training is the typical Diku means of advancement - you do things to earn exp, and when your exp reaches a certain point you gain a level.

Skill-based training is where your skills go up through use - if you use your sword a lot, your sword skill improves.

It's probably best to do what is easiest, which I assume would be to report the line count of the file, including blank lines and comments.


I'd leave it at 0 then, could start a thread for the adult violence thing, or just add the adult violence boolean variable.


I would say the same as on TMC, but it's probably better to replace it with the "newbie support" variable that's been under discussion.


That's player run, but lacks the organization structure that would clearly make it a guild.


The article is freely editable, so feel free to make changes and improvements you think are needed.


Maybe:
TRAINING SYSTEM - None, Level, Time, Usage
PRACTICE SYSTEM - None, Level, Time, Usage

Not sure if there are any muds though where sitting on your ass all day causes your strength to deteriorate - and being active causes it to go up.


I don't see how level and experience are fundamentally different concepts, with the exception that level is the generic term, and experience is just a common variable name used to display the intermediate stage between levels. So in my opinion using experience to train a skill would advance you to a new level, whether the mud explicitly displays this or not.

Plain D&D rules make it obvious how the concepts are fundamentally different. Saving throws go up with levels, whereas in a system where you can spend experience points on things directly, you can improve a given saving throw without going "up a level".

People aren't talking about the obvious case of experience meaning more levels, in which case yes, the difference isn't interesting. Anyhow, just give it a longer think, there are good reasons why people are insisting these are different even if you haven't seen a game that works this way.


I would rather that the issue be fixed instead of skirted, personally.


What meaning is there in such a thing?

In that case you still go up a sub-level, which is a level within a level, in other words a level, aka lvl.

I'm not entirely opposed though cause the average player doesn't know or care about the difference and will happily prefer bashing gobble worms for 5 hours to get his sword skill to 100, instead of spending 1 hour to gain a level and get his sword skill to 100 with practice points. The ability to fish in the pond of dissatisfied players with memes is an art in itself. But from a categorization perspective I have to disagree.

If you think that character levels and levels in a skill are fundamentally the same thing and yield identical gameplay, it's frankly not very surprising that you don't see why people are asking for this. I guess at this point the wisest thing might be to accommodate people whose games work differently than your mental model, because the distinction is important to a lot of people (unless you can conclusively argue that they're all wrong, of course).

I'm simply giving my opinion. The extended variable section of the article is freely editable.

What organisation structure is that? Could you come up with a concrete definition?


That's very Diku centric. I don't think it's necessary to distinguish between "training" and "practice".


Stat and skill decay have been discussed in the past, but I'm not aware of any muds which use it. IMO it's one of those concepts that sounds "cool" in theory, but sucks in practice.


In a level-based system, experience is just an indicator of how far you've progressed towards your next level - with your level representing your overall skill and experience. It doesn't matter whether you earned that experience from killing bunnies, baking bread or bandaging wounds, the outcome will be the same. You can become a master baker exclusively through mass-murder.

In a skill-based system, you're required to use the skills you wish to improve. The only way to become a master baker is by baking.

The exp-based system I mentioned works much like a level-based system, except that you can choose what improves rather than getting a "package deal" every so often. Advancement is more granular, and the player has greater control.

Each approach has its pros and cons, and each has its fans.

I've seen guilds with people actually "in charge" of inducting; that is, I can induct others into the guild just by virtue of being in the guild, one of the leaders has to do it.

That said, I still think that the distinction is very codebase-dependent, and many people wouldn't consider there to be much of a distinction.

My MUD distinguishes between them purely for RP reasons, but nobody really uses class-based guilds anyhow.

My historic knowledge on the subject is basic, but based on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guild#Organ...

I would define it as: Access to classes is controlled by player run organizations? "1" : "0"


I see training as physical, and practice as mental attributes. Not sure if that's Diku centric.


Looks like "SKILL SYSTEM" might be a better variable name than "TRAINING SYSTEM" in that case, which should solve most of the issues.

This distinction between "training" and "practice" is one that I've never seen before. Not even in Diku. I'm not sure what value it adds to be honest.

To expand on this a little bit for my old stomping grounds, BatMUD, there are also muds which have more than one "level". BatMUD featured a physical level, which determined your physical attributes and abilities, and a totally seperate set of class and skill levels, which determined your trained abilities. To advance in any kind of level, you spent experience points. You could also spend experience points to improve attributes up to a level-based cap.

So, it was entirely possible to be a level 1 human, level 50 infernal knight, who had immensely powerful spells and abilities, but still had a measly 20 hit points and couldn't carry half the loot from a single kill.

To make it more interesting, you lost any unspent experience you had on you when you died… so you could risk saving it up for big purchases, and level faster in that aspect as a result, or try to spend it and keep everything more-or-less even.

So, in this case it's a level based system, but experience doesn't act as an indicator, it acts like a currency which could be spent to advance a particular level.