Where did i say they dragged me around? I said you are limited by your gm. You can't do whatever the heck you want. The gm may wing it or ask for the session to be delayed while they prepare something of better quality.
In any event, i mostly agree with you. I'd like to see a game where you could survive without fighting. But i don't think the majority see it that way. Devs know combat, and therefore they give you what they know.
I can't? Sure I can. I've had plenty of games where the GM wanted me to go left, I went right. I've been in games where they wanted me to get into a fight and I refused. Just because they script something a particular way doesn't mean I have to go where they want me to go. Sure, behind the scenes, they can flip-flop the left and right directions and I can go where they wanted, but I can completely and totally refuse to do what hey want me to do and never get into the adventure they planned for me to get into. I've had that situation happen on both sides of the GM screen.
Oh, and I can tell you lots of horror stories about tabletop GMs who literally dragged people around by the nose through adventures. When we tell them we're going over there and they insist that, no matter what you do, you're going over here, the best alternative is to just get up from the table and leave. I've done that.
In an MMO, combat is easy. It takes no effort to automate. It takes no intelligence. Therefore, devs push it because it's the easiest way to cater to the lowest common denominator. Unfortunately, I am not the lowest common denominator, therefore I don't really play MMOs very often anymore.
Oh, and I can tell you lots of horror stories about tabletop GMs who literally dragged people around by the nose through adventures. When we tell them we're going over there and they insist that, no matter what you do, you're going over here, the best alternative is to just get up from the table and leave. I've done that.
I can tell you horror stories about players who literally bogged down the fun over nothing, where you ask them politely to wrap it up, stop their whatevering, and it turns out the best alternative is to pack up your books and leave because nothing resembling fun is going to happen.
Besides, I think you're missing the point of what the other guy's saying...that sometimes the GM has to say "Ok, I didn't plan for this, let's wrap things up here while I think about it" which is rather different than what you're decrying.
Oh, and I can tell you lots of horror stories about tabletop GMs who literally dragged people around by the nose through adventures. When we tell them we're going over there and they insist that, no matter what you do, you're going over here, the best alternative is to just get up from the table and leave. I've done that.
I can tell you horror stories about players who literally bogged down the fun over nothing, where you ask them politely to wrap it up, stop their whatevering, and it turns out the best alternative is to pack up your books and leave because nothing resembling fun is going to happen.
Besides, I think you're missing the point of what the other guy's saying...that sometimes the GM has to say "Ok, I didn't plan for this, let's wrap things up here while I think about it" which is rather different than what you're decrying.
That's nothing! I can tell you horror stories about forum posters who literally used the word "literally" as though it meant "figuratively".
Oh, and I can tell you lots of horror stories about tabletop GMs who literally dragged people around by the nose through adventures. When we tell them we're going over there and they insist that, no matter what you do, you're going over here, the best alternative is to just get up from the table and leave. I've done that.
I can tell you horror stories about players who literally bogged down the fun over nothing, where you ask them politely to wrap it up, stop their whatevering, and it turns out the best alternative is to pack up your books and leave because nothing resembling fun is going to happen.
Besides, I think you're missing the point of what the other guy's saying...that sometimes the GM has to say "Ok, I didn't plan for this, let's wrap things up here while I think about it" which is rather different than what you're decrying.
That's nothing! I can tell you horror stories about forum posters who literally used the word "literally" as though it meant "figuratively".
Oh, and I can tell you lots of horror stories about tabletop GMs who literally dragged people around by the nose through adventures. When we tell them we're going over there and they insist that, no matter what you do, you're going over here, the best alternative is to just get up from the table and leave. I've done that.
I can tell you horror stories about players who literally bogged down the fun over nothing, where you ask them politely to wrap it up, stop their whatevering, and it turns out the best alternative is to pack up your books and leave because nothing resembling fun is going to happen.
Besides, I think you're missing the point of what the other guy's saying...that sometimes the GM has to say "Ok, I didn't plan for this, let's wrap things up here while I think about it" which is rather different than what you're decrying.
Yes. But an additional point i'd like to mention is that above and beyond the rules AD&D/Gurps/whatever, its the GM that will make or break the game. The rules are secondary.
Switching back to mmorpgs, classes/no classes, levels/skill based... its all secondary to the GM, the world/quest design.
Yes. But an additional point i'd like to mention is that above and beyond the rules AD&D/Gurps/whatever, its the GM that will make or break the game. The rules are secondary.
Switching back to mmorpgs, classes/no classes, levels/skill based... its all secondary to the GM, the world/quest design.
Shh! Don't let the system advocates here about your heresies! It's the one thing that will unite them!
From a design standpoint, patches are not the answer.
You create a spaghetti code nightmare if you do it this way.
When you make an MMORPG, MOST of them rely on servers. Yes EVE is one big game, but that's because most of the game empty space compared to rocks and trees and streams and towns and villages of a land based MMORPG.
So generally, you fill up a server, and then open up another one, like WoW.
In order to keep track of the game code, and not spend a bazillion dollars on full time programmes, every server must be identical.
Otherwise, instead of keeping track of one code for one game, you eventually have 100's of different games with different codes,a nd you need a programming team for each one.
for example, we start with two servers, each with 5K players. Let's say there is a scripted event. There's a fight over a bridge to Orc Land. If the players win, the bridge is destroyed, if the players lose, the bridge remains standing, and the Orcs take over Sleepy Town. Cool right?
But, the players on Server A win, the players on Server B lose.
Now we have two different games, that require upkeep of two different game codes.
Ok, so now we have new scripted events. The refugees of Sleepy Town on SErver B make and alliance with the Elves or something, where as the playes on Server A are plagued with giant rats. Now we have two more different outcomes.
Eventually, becaues o fall the code changes, Server A game code, is nothing like Server B game code. You have now doubled the programming team required. The team on Server A doesn't know what's going on in Server B, etc.
Now imagine you do this on a hundred servers.
The game will cost at least 100 dollars per month.
Let me comment on this. Eve actually uses cluster for their "only server". There is always possibility to make only one server even though it would be technically realized by many machines in cluster. The limit of Eve is actually number of players in one systems, which is limited to few thousands at most. Eve would have the problems if they have not 50k but 500k or 5m players, which would make their technical solution insufficient. It is very hard to cluster hundred of thousands players on one server, but theoretically it is technically possible if one does not plays fps - that is bullet have to be ray-traced, or does not require ultimate synchronized response of tens or hundred of thousands of people at the same time.
I think that what made these dynamic worlds of RPG in past (yes, they did exist) was a good DungeonMaster (maybe Game Master these days) who has tools to change objects in the game. It existed in the interesting form e.g. in Neverwinter nights, where dungeon masters could make game quite dynamic by spawning some objects.
Yes. But an additional point i'd like to mention is that above and beyond the rules AD&D/Gurps/whatever, its the GM that will make or break the game. The rules are secondary.
Switching back to mmorpgs, classes/no classes, levels/skill based... its all secondary to the GM, the world/quest design.
Shh! Don't let the system advocates here about your heresies! It's the one thing that will unite them!
But I rolled a natural 20.. I should be able to kill the evil antagonist even though Im only level one and the story just started..
Yes. But an additional point i'd like to mention is that above and beyond the rules AD&D/Gurps/whatever, its the GM that will make or break the game. The rules are secondary.
Switching back to mmorpgs, classes/no classes, levels/skill based... its all secondary to the GM, the world/quest design.
Shh! Don't let the system advocates here about your heresies! It's the one thing that will unite them!
But I rolled a natural 20.. I should be able to kill the evil antagonist even though Im only level one and the story just started..
Why not? I mean sure, it would be extremely difficult to do, but assuming that you had the skills and the gear and the rolls to get the job done, why not let the job be done?
Why not? I mean sure, it would be extremely difficult to do, but assuming that you had the skills and the gear and the rolls to get the job done, why not let the job be done?
Because then we have nothing to do the rest of the night. Also apparently the DM decided you didn't have the skill, or the gear, or the rolls.
I've only heard Fortnight used in movies, not many people use that word in America, or at least all the people I've ever talked to never use it. Now I hear bi-weekly all the time, maybe I should start using fortnight and it can make a comeback in the states.
Just to add to the fun, in the UK "bi-weekly" can mean either "every two weeks" or "twice a week". So it's not a great word to use.
...semi weekly would mean twice every week, bi weekly would mean every 2 weeks
Easy way to remember, semi is twice every X, bi means every two X
I've only heard Fortnight used in movies, not many people use that word in America, or at least all the people I've ever talked to never use it. Now I hear bi-weekly all the time, maybe I should start using fortnight and it can make a comeback in the states.
Just to add to the fun, in the UK "bi-weekly" can mean either "every two weeks" or "twice a week". So it's not a great word to use.
...semi weekly would mean twice every week, bi weekly would mean every 2 weeks
Easy way to remember, semi is twice every X, bi means every two X
I dunno.. semi-weekly and bi-weekly... they seem like bastard words.. IE more than one language at the time.. Television is another. Both Greek and Latin. Guess we learned to live with that one though. Bi-anual and Bi-centenial are not bastards though as they are all f the same origin.
I've only heard Fortnight used in movies, not many people use that word in America, or at least all the people I've ever talked to never use it. Now I hear bi-weekly all the time, maybe I should start using fortnight and it can make a comeback in the states.
Just to add to the fun, in the UK "bi-weekly" can mean either "every two weeks" or "twice a week". So it's not a great word to use.
...semi weekly would mean twice every week, bi weekly would mean every 2 weeks
Easy way to remember, semi is twice every X, bi means every two X
Semi means half not 2. Examples where 2 isn't correct; semi automatic, semihard, semi-erect, semipermeable, semipro, semicircle(half circle not 2 circles), semisweet.
Just so peopple aren't confused when confronted with semi in others circumstances.
Why not? I mean sure, it would be extremely difficult to do, but assuming that you had the skills and the gear and the rolls to get the job done, why not let the job be done?
Because then we have nothing to do the rest of the night. Also apparently the DM decided you didn't have the skill, or the gear, or the rolls.
Go figure.
My point exactly. I have been in a few PnP RPG groups where tweaking stats and forcing rolls on the GM was what it was all about. The players were too busy quoting the rule book or world book to actually play a personality. I didnt stay in those groups very long.
In MMORPGs it also seems like people spend more time speaking about lag, balance, or numbers than they do actually playing a person in a world, that has a purpose..
Someone mentioned Neverwinter Nights where people made their own adventures and people could drop by and play it.
Im sure it would be possible to do this on a bit larger scale. But the game would have to be designed for it ofcourse.
I dunno.. semi-weekly and bi-weekly... they seem like bastard words.. IE more than one language at the time.. Television is another. Both Greek and Latin. Guess we learned to live with that one though. Bi-anual and Bi-centenial are not bastards though as they are all f the same origin.
Why not? I mean sure, it would be extremely difficult to do, but assuming that you had the skills and the gear and the rolls to get the job done, why not let the job be done?
Because then we have nothing to do the rest of the night. Also apparently the DM decided you didn't have the skill, or the gear, or the rolls.
Go figure.
GMs don't always come up with the best adventures, sorry. Having a GM entirely alter the rules of the game just because they screwed up isn't any fun either. There's a matter of trust between the players and the GM where everyone has to play by the same rules no matter what happens.
Why not? I mean sure, it would be extremely difficult to do, but assuming that you had the skills and the gear and the rolls to get the job done, why not let the job be done?
Because then we have nothing to do the rest of the night. Also apparently the DM decided you didn't have the skill, or the gear, or the rolls.
Go figure.
GMs don't always come up with the best adventures, sorry. Having a GM entirely alter the rules of the game just because they screwed up isn't any fun either. There's a matter of trust between the players and the GM where everyone has to play by the same rules no matter what happens.
Go figure.
The GMs and the players should work together to shape the story.. and some times I guess they would be working against eachother. The players challenting the GM to take the story in a different direction than he had intended and the other way around.
But I recon there would be quite a lot of meta gaming involved.. and having a vounteer even team would also help.. someone to play the parts of key characters in the plot... But if the game rewards good stories by allowing them to influence where the game is going that would be interesting..
I know it sounds líke a lot of work and it probably is. but if the game allows the GMs to change all sorts of stats like town owner ship and faction relations.. and there is a code to smoothe it out and help with where NPCs should spawn then it could also be relativly simple..
Another way is to make most of the content player driven. Then people would make their own stories and reasons for attacking each other.
GMs don't always come up with the best adventures, sorry. Having a GM entirely alter the rules of the game just because they screwed up isn't any fun either. There's a matter of trust between the players and the GM where everyone has to play by the same rules no matter what happens.
Go figure.
Rule Zero is: Everybody is there to have a good time.
That's the real thing you have to rely upon each other to do.
If you, as the player, set about ruining the adventure just because you have a "better" idea, then you've broken that rule.
PS, don't assume the GM is entirely altering the rules of the game.
The GMs and the players should work together to shape the story.. and some times I guess they would be working against eachother. The players challenting the GM to take the story in a different direction than he had intended and the other way around.
There's actually a few systems that do that already, or it could even be just a shared world design. The trick is keeping that from antagonism.
It's hard enough in a small group of people, I shudder to think what might happen in an MMO.
Comments
I can't? Sure I can. I've had plenty of games where the GM wanted me to go left, I went right. I've been in games where they wanted me to get into a fight and I refused. Just because they script something a particular way doesn't mean I have to go where they want me to go. Sure, behind the scenes, they can flip-flop the left and right directions and I can go where they wanted, but I can completely and totally refuse to do what hey want me to do and never get into the adventure they planned for me to get into. I've had that situation happen on both sides of the GM screen.
Oh, and I can tell you lots of horror stories about tabletop GMs who literally dragged people around by the nose through adventures. When we tell them we're going over there and they insist that, no matter what you do, you're going over here, the best alternative is to just get up from the table and leave. I've done that.
In an MMO, combat is easy. It takes no effort to automate. It takes no intelligence. Therefore, devs push it because it's the easiest way to cater to the lowest common denominator. Unfortunately, I am not the lowest common denominator, therefore I don't really play MMOs very often anymore.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
I can tell you horror stories about players who literally bogged down the fun over nothing, where you ask them politely to wrap it up, stop their whatevering, and it turns out the best alternative is to pack up your books and leave because nothing resembling fun is going to happen.
Besides, I think you're missing the point of what the other guy's saying...that sometimes the GM has to say "Ok, I didn't plan for this, let's wrap things up here while I think about it" which is rather different than what you're decrying.
That's nothing! I can tell you horror stories about forum posters who literally used the word "literally" as though it meant "figuratively".
That'd be nice! Let's do that!
http://www.xkcd.com/725/
Yes. But an additional point i'd like to mention is that above and beyond the rules AD&D/Gurps/whatever, its the GM that will make or break the game. The rules are secondary.
Switching back to mmorpgs, classes/no classes, levels/skill based... its all secondary to the GM, the world/quest design.
Shh! Don't let the system advocates here about your heresies! It's the one thing that will unite them!
Let me comment on this. Eve actually uses cluster for their "only server". There is always possibility to make only one server even though it would be technically realized by many machines in cluster. The limit of Eve is actually number of players in one systems, which is limited to few thousands at most. Eve would have the problems if they have not 50k but 500k or 5m players, which would make their technical solution insufficient. It is very hard to cluster hundred of thousands players on one server, but theoretically it is technically possible if one does not plays fps - that is bullet have to be ray-traced, or does not require ultimate synchronized response of tens or hundred of thousands of people at the same time.
I think that what made these dynamic worlds of RPG in past (yes, they did exist) was a good DungeonMaster (maybe Game Master these days) who has tools to change objects in the game. It existed in the interesting form e.g. in Neverwinter nights, where dungeon masters could make game quite dynamic by spawning some objects.
But I rolled a natural 20.. I should be able to kill the evil antagonist even though Im only level one and the story just started..
Why not? I mean sure, it would be extremely difficult to do, but assuming that you had the skills and the gear and the rolls to get the job done, why not let the job be done?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Because then we have nothing to do the rest of the night. Also apparently the DM decided you didn't have the skill, or the gear, or the rolls.
Go figure.
...semi weekly would mean twice every week, bi weekly would mean every 2 weeks
Easy way to remember, semi is twice every X, bi means every two X
I dunno.. semi-weekly and bi-weekly... they seem like bastard words.. IE more than one language at the time.. Television is another. Both Greek and Latin. Guess we learned to live with that one though. Bi-anual and Bi-centenial are not bastards though as they are all f the same origin.
Semi means half not 2. Examples where 2 isn't correct; semi automatic, semihard, semi-erect, semipermeable, semipro, semicircle(half circle not 2 circles), semisweet.
Just so peopple aren't confused when confronted with semi in others circumstances.
My point exactly. I have been in a few PnP RPG groups where tweaking stats and forcing rolls on the GM was what it was all about. The players were too busy quoting the rule book or world book to actually play a personality. I didnt stay in those groups very long.
In MMORPGs it also seems like people spend more time speaking about lag, balance, or numbers than they do actually playing a person in a world, that has a purpose..
Someone mentioned Neverwinter Nights where people made their own adventures and people could drop by and play it.
Im sure it would be possible to do this on a bit larger scale. But the game would have to be designed for it ofcourse.
I think that is why we call them prefixes.
And then you'd still have people like the ones in this thread talking about semi, bi, fortnights and whatnot.
GMs don't always come up with the best adventures, sorry. Having a GM entirely alter the rules of the game just because they screwed up isn't any fun either. There's a matter of trust between the players and the GM where everyone has to play by the same rules no matter what happens.
Go figure.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
The GMs and the players should work together to shape the story.. and some times I guess they would be working against eachother. The players challenting the GM to take the story in a different direction than he had intended and the other way around.
But I recon there would be quite a lot of meta gaming involved.. and having a vounteer even team would also help.. someone to play the parts of key characters in the plot... But if the game rewards good stories by allowing them to influence where the game is going that would be interesting..
I know it sounds líke a lot of work and it probably is. but if the game allows the GMs to change all sorts of stats like town owner ship and faction relations.. and there is a code to smoothe it out and help with where NPCs should spawn then it could also be relativly simple..
Another way is to make most of the content player driven. Then people would make their own stories and reasons for attacking each other.
Rule Zero is: Everybody is there to have a good time.
That's the real thing you have to rely upon each other to do.
If you, as the player, set about ruining the adventure just because you have a "better" idea, then you've broken that rule.
PS, don't assume the GM is entirely altering the rules of the game.
There's actually a few systems that do that already, or it could even be just a shared world design. The trick is keeping that from antagonism.
It's hard enough in a small group of people, I shudder to think what might happen in an MMO.