several messages

[Ling]

Just figured out how to do multiple replies.  Whee!

On Fri, 9 May 1997, Marian Griffith wrote:

> Ling <K.L.Lo-94 at student.lut.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Anyone considering implementing pseudo-random plotlines in their mud?

[Goblin raids being stopped and complicating things somewhat by chain of
events snipped]

> There's nothing much complicated in this, just a matter of deciding how
> some key figures in your plotlines are going to react to certain kinds of
> events, and creating list of how each can be achieved, and what sub goal
> it is going to cause that must be met before the general plot-line can go
> on. It may be though that actually coding is rather more complicated?

I suppose it isn't all that complex to get a basic one up, but the aim
would be to be actually interesting to the players.  Otherwise it all
turns a bit samey after a while.  That's why I want creators to be
able to take control of npcs and give the plots a bit more meat.

The above stuff you wrote involved a group mind which, I think, is kinda
tricky, usually npcs are exactly that, they would never band together.  If
the goblins wanted revenge for the destruction of their own tribes, then
each goblin would go about it individually, that's where some voodoo needs
to be spliced in.

> > They would probably be classed as variable/random quests in the usenet.  I
> > was thinking that if I could get an engine to make things up, like a
> > company would want its new drug to be approved so they employ some
> > players to 'convince' a few people on the approval committee, etc.
> 
> This would not make it very random would it, though it would mean a quest

That was an example off the top of my head, so you could see what I was
trying to get at.  The above would be one of many possible scenarios.  If
the above was the only scenario, there would have to be an awful number of
drugs to be approved. :)


*** Next person ***

On Fri, 9 May 1997 clawrenc at cup.hp.com wrote:

> Aside: I've been really hoping to get some more RP type members in
> here.  I suspect we tend to get more than a little buried in the
> technical aspects of the games and lose sight of the RP underpinnings
> (me especially as I don't RP at all).

The list has been a bit too tekkie for me lately.  Even though I
actually understand it all, I still have to say:  Ugh! :)



*** Next ***

> As a start on such, given a coordinate space say, (and no, the user
> won't ever see X,Y,Z coordinates) the question is how to parse and
> handle prepositions.  I know the LIMA MUDLib can do it -- anybody here
> familiar with it, or want to dig into it?

Most of that is in the driver.  There's this amazing little function
called parse_sentance() which does all the handling for the mudlib.  I'm
taking a peek at it right now, here's a cut and paste of the code for the
put verb, I'll break it down into pseudo code if anyone wants:

/*
** put.c
**
*/

#include <move.h>

inherit VERB_OB;

void do_put_obj_wrd_obj(object ob1, string p, object ob2) {
    mixed tmp;
    string prep;

    if( ob2->is_living())
    {
       write( "Try giving it.\n");
        return;
    }

    if (!try_to_acquire(ob1))
        return;

    tmp = ob1->move(ob2, p);
    if (tmp == MOVE_OK) {
        switch (p) {
        case "in":
            prep = "into";
            break;
        case "on":
            prep = "onto";
            break;
        }
        write("Done.\n");
        this_body()->other_action("$N $vput a $o " + prep + " the $o1.",
ob1, ob
2);
        return;
    }
    if (!tmp) tmp = "That doesn't seem possible.\n";
    write(tmp);
}

void do_put_obs_wrd_obj(array info, string p, object ob2) {
    handle_obs(info, (: do_put_obj_wrd_obj :), p, ob2);
}


array query_verb_info()
{
    return ({
      ({ "OBS WRD OBJ" }), ({ "insert", "place", "stuff", "hide" })
    });

    /*
    ** "hide OBS next to OBJ" -> "put OBS next to OBJ"
    ** "hide OBS beside OBJ" -> "put OBS beside OBJ"
    ** "hide OBS with OBJ" -> "put OBS with OBJ"
    */
}



That oughta shed a little light on it.  Personally, I'm going to draw a
pentagram around the CPU and keep the candles burning.



*** Another person ***


On Sat, 10 May 1997, Jon A. Lambert wrote:

> I  have the entire collection of "Sim" games and find them quite
> fascinating.  While changes at the micro level have effects that can 
> be easily determinable, the changes on the macro level are much less
> readily perceived (for the average human that is ).
> 
> I have no idea how easily programmable these simulations are.  I have
> my suspicions that they are not that complicated for each machine.
> What really impresses me is the level of game balance that is achieved
> with net sum of the hundreds of these machines changing the state
> of the system.  

My suspicions on their workings is that each of those little machines is
precisely that.  A simple cellular automata doing its own little thing and
the net result is one complex environment, artificial life and all that.
Emergent behaviour?  (sorry, can't spell)

I've only had experience with SimEarth and SimCity, what I dislike about
those is the fact that all interactions are indirect.  If you could pop
down onto your SimStreets, walk around and speak to the SimPeeps, perhaps
you might be a little more impressed?

I imagine random plotlines more along the lines of Syndicate.


  |    Ling				"Mental slavery,
_O_O_  Freshwater fish since 1976	 set my spirit free"