Re: CF: Re: "Monster" races

[Hwei Sheng TEOH <hsteoh@cs.toronto.edu>]

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999, Mark Wedel wrote:

> David Andrew Michael Noelle wrote:
> >
> > Well, I suppose if people really want to play a severely limited race
> > that has no significant benefits to balance it, we should probably let
> > them.  We'd just have to make it clear that those races aren't
> > expected to be played seriously, and can't really compete with the
> > balanced player races.  I'd hate to see what would happen to this game
> > if dog, cat, and green slime players decided they wanted to be
> > balanced with humans, elves, ogres, and beholders.  As long as we have
> > a clear seperation between serious, balanced races and "just for fun"
> > races, I don't have a problem with it.  Play a goldfish if you want.
> > Just don't expect your goldfish to become a powerful wizard.
> 
>  I agree with a lot of the above.  But there are a few things to consider:
[snip]
>  I think if anything, a first step would be to allow some of this/abilities via
> polymorph.  That way, a character can get some feel for these alternatives in a
> limited basis.  That may be interesting (imagine getting hit by polymorph and
> having to play a dog for a few minutes).  Since polymorph keeps the same mental,
> having that dog be able to read can then make sense.

Now *this* sounds cool. We could even have quests where to get a certain key
or quest item, the player must find a way to polymorph, say, into a mouse to
crawl through a tiny hole, or something to that effect. This approach of
letting players play "obscure" classes is much better, I think, than having to
play an entire character using something like a dog with very limited
abilities. It would also justify the effort of implementing "obscure classes"
for players -- not so much a class, but more of a temporary form encountered
on some quests.


T

-
[you can put yourself on the announcement list only or unsubscribe altogether
by sending an email stating your wishes to crossfire-request@ifi.uio.no]