Character Item Spaces

[The Crazy Animal]

I get what your saying, its just that the Mages, Priests would really suffer a real loss with out the AC of their clothing. Especially since they can?t wear any armor, plus most players will not wear something unless it offers something useful that can be viewed as roughly equal to its encumbrance since encumbrance is a major limiting attribute in combat and general movement speed.

TCA

[Valentine]

Let me explain it this way...clothing is something everyone can wear....a shirt, some trousers or a skirt....a sparkly belt....whatever...

Armor can be layered on top of it, and this is where the AC comes in...

Priests/Clerics/etc can wear clothes and have no AC, or wear robes and have AC. They wouldn't be losing anything because everyone else has Hanes on under their metal plated items.

...or am I not understanding what you are saying?

[The Crazy Animal]

You?re not quite getting what I?m saying:

No player will carry an item that does not give them something equal or better then the encumbrance that it requires to carry the item. Now I agree from a point of realism clothing is too thin to give any real AC but because of the couple of classes that can?t wear any actual armor the AC value of clothing was artificially inflated so that they would get some AC.

About the robe, a robe is a piece of over-clothing so if you just lump all of the AC onto that one piece of clothing why would anyone waste the encumbrance that the rest of the clothing takes up. Most MMUD players don?t normally take part in any RP type play so wearing something simply because it?s the proper thing to do doesn?t happen. In MMUD a robe simply took up the torso item slot this meant you wore either a shirt or a robe. Each individual piece of clothing got an AC value and together they gave the robe armor class AC.

Now with all of this what I?m saying is that unless clothing gets some type of unique ability that is valued from the point of view of the players, they will simply not wear it. Elemental protection is a nice idea but unless the amount of needed elemental protection is boosted. I mean boosted to the point were it becomes detrimental to a player not to wearing it then someone might wear it with out that there is no real function to it and at that point, it would simply not go make it into the game because playability is paramount to realism.

So for this to really work what would be needed to be done is allow the clothing to have some AC this give people a reason to wear it. Now let the robe be an armour and give that an AC. Anyone could then wear the clothing and when worn alone they would have small amount of AC. Now when someone puts armor on that player no longer is relying on the AC of the clothing since the player is now wearing some item over it. From here you could do two things; one turn off the ac of the clothing or two diminish it by a percentage allowing the remaining percentage to represent a small amount of padding that the clothing might have.

TCA

[Valentine]

Ok, I see where you're coming from...I seem to be assuming certain things about clothing that shouldn't be assumed.

In my little world floating around my head, the following apply:
1. Clothing does not give AC
2. Clothing does not give an encumbrance penalty
3. The benefit is you aren't wandering around naked, and this could be built into how you are treated by NPCs...like the aforementioned play off "No shirt, no shoes, no service"

Basically, you'd need clothes to do anything besides wander in the wilderness (ooh, could the bunnies point and laugh?).

Otherwise, armor would remain the same.

Magic classes should have innate armor by virtue of their aura (or whatever you want to call it), as well as enhanced armor due to robes, which gain their power from the blessings chanted over them, thus the robes are armor in their own right. It wouldn't be considered clothing in way I described clothing above. If anything, clothing would have a negative effect on the AC of robes because robes need to feed off the magical energies of the wearer and clothing would inhibit the transmission.

I'm drawing all this from my D&D experience; I apologize if I assume certain things that don't make sense in the mmud realm of existence.

[The Crazy Animal]

It?s ok that you assume things reconnecting with the roots of the game is good in some cases and it helps having people around that have differing perspectives on things.

A little bit about clothing in MMUD, clothing for all purposes was considered armor and was given abilities as such. AC, DR, encumbrance, magic in some cases and shared the same item slots. In MMUD when you start the game you started naked and have nothing but your wits there are some basic free items at the start of the game but these have to be bought and pretty much suck. Finally, when you die in MMUD you reappear naked in the temple and get to go recover you items some how.

Now because these naked states exist in the game you can?t deny service to the players since they need to be able to get provisions to start the game as well as recover items after a death.

All items in the game follow these basic rules:
If it?s a material item it needs to have a encumbrance.
If it costs money, players will only buy it if it does something equal to the value
Players will only use an item if it does something, and will try to replace it as soon as something better comes along.

Now with that being, said we still need a function for clothing in order for it to go into the game that is of course unless it remains unchanged.

This is why I was suggesting that clothing should have some AC this gives players a reason to wear it. Now let the robe be an armour and give that a boosted AC. Anyone could then wear the clothing and when worn alone they would have small amount of AC.

Now when someone puts armor on that player no longer is relying on the AC of the clothing since the player is now wearing some item over it. From here you could do two things; one turn off the ac of the clothing or two diminish it by a percentage allowing the remaining percentage to represent a small amount of padding that the clothing might have. I would go the root of diminishing when warn with armor because this would be a reason for players to continue wearing the clothing.

Now I like the idea that the robe wearing magic classes have some affinity with their robes giving them an innate armor but not being able to wear cloths under them would be counter productive to having clothing in the game. 

TCA

[Valentine]

Now because these naked states exist in the game you can?t deny service to the players since they need to be able to get provisions to start the game as well as recover items after a death.

Chars could spawn with basic clothing...that's easy...actually all of the things you mentioned can easily be changed. It's just a matter of whether or not the gmud gods (and I use the term loosely? ;D) want to change it.

Now with that being, said we still need a function for clothing in order for it to go into the game that is of course unless it remains unchanged.

I guess I just like to shake things up...just because it's always been a certain way doesn't mean it has to stay that way. You are correct that players won't use something unless they need it; hence the suggestion that if y'ain't wearing clothes, y'ain't getting service. Players will then wear clothes because if not they can't get weapons/armor/provisions. Whether or not they choose to keep the clothing on under their armor is up to them, but they would not lose anything by keeping it on.

Respawning naked makes sense, but the temple should have a stock of basic clothing items for the reborn crit to put on.

This is all just how I think things should be. I have a habit of thinking my way is right? ;)

Edit: And just because one class benefits from not having clothes under their armor (robes) doesn't negate the usefulness of clothing. It's just a class difference....kind of like a mage can't use a long sword...the sword isn't useless in game because of class restrictions...it's just useless to the class it's restricted from.

[The Crazy Animal]

I agree that things don?t have to stay the same but I don?t think that changing things so that an item becomes useful for the soul purpose denial of service is a good enough reason to change those things.

For the rest of it I guess I?ll have to explain how MMUD players whine:

We have a bunch of mages they pay out the ass for spells they complain about how much their spells cost.
To compensate we make their clothing and weapons cheaper
Now we have a bunch of paladins the now start whining that the mages get their gear so much cheaper
So now we fix that by making more items for the paladins and say well you get more items
Now the mages see that and say hey we don?t get enough items.
We give the mages more items.
Now the rangers see that and say hey you forgot about us were still wearing rigid leather..
So now, we have to give the rangers more gear
Now the mages say hey our ac is to low look at the leather class they just got a big boost
So we add in some new stuff for the mages
And it all goes in one big circle?

Now this is why items have to have their benefits looked at across the entire realm. So that means if clothing is good for one class then it should be good to some extent to all the others. Now if we do take away any ac benefit to wearing clothing under armor were not really changing anything since before classes had the choice between cloth armor and better armor.

In the case of a sword being useless to a mage its true they can?t use them so to make up for that the items/spells that a mage gets in place needs to be balanced against the damage and accuracy of that sword. Now after that?s done the cost and availability of those items also has to be taken into account other wise the balance of the realm falls out from beneath the players feet and they start to complain and once they start to complain its really hard to get them to stop.

TCA

[Valentine]

once they start to complain its really hard to get them to stop.

I always thought that's what an IP ban was for heehee...

I'm not suggesting that the realm be unbalanced...every class/race has its trade-off. I personally don't want to go into a post that takes into account every bonus/deficiency for the sake of balancing a scrap of clothing.

Clothing would mainly be an element of realism....and probably not worth quite this many posts!  :P I just don't see it as such a problem...but I'm a mmud virgin and maybe it really would ruin the whole concept of the game.

Arg....I'm tossing around grand generalizations...my psych reading is turning me into a mental patient.

[The Crazy Animal]

I?m not trying to make it sound like your idea would greatly unbalance the game but just that if it is changed to incorporate clothing that the clothing has to have a valued use beyond being a simple toss in of realism.

If you were to run out a play MMUD the first thing you would find is that it is simpler then most other MUDs out there. Second the only realism in the game is that swords are sharp and when you get hit you take damage and if you take to much damage you can die that?s about as far as realism goes in MMUD. Now let?s say we put an item in the game called lipstick and we just put it in to satisfy some female players wanting some female related objects. None of the female players will buy it until it does something. Now we decide to make this lipstick raise charm. Now as soon as we do this every male dwarf paladin that wants to raise their charm a little bit will buy and use it and nothing in the game will stop them from doing it. Now if we put some type of realism effect in to stop the male players from wearing the lipstick then they would complain. MMUD doesn?t bother with many of these social conventions that would be termed realistic so that it maintains maximum playability.

Your right every class/race has its trade-offs but when it comes to the most basic goods need to be treated with kid gloves these are things that need to benefit everyone.

We don?t have to go into a huge post on balancing a scrap of clothing though because I already mentioned how to do it. To do it is you let everyone wear it but diminish its small AC bonus when worn under an armor with a greater AC. You have to understand that MMUD players will by overly priced objects that will give them even the miniscule amount of 2 AC points. So, if you have a shirt that gives 10AC when unarmored but only 1AC when worn under say plate armor they would still buy it.

Now with this you?d still run into the problem of balancing the number of items each race/class gets but at least it would be fair across the board as AC is concerned.

However that being said with this many posts in the topic already and with out a comment from DC I would think that he probably just doesn?t like the idea..

TCA