Pasted below is my copy of the design doc I made for this upcoming project. It's a fairly hefty one, but I think I will be able to do it in pieces effectively. If anyone has any advice on any of the below elements or systems of the project that sound familiar to them (ie. you've done it before) I would love a pointer to the right lib or forum or such. If anyone else has any general advice, I would also be so happy to receive that. My plan so far is to do this with the use of standard datums (ie. verbs, mobs, etc) but maybe I'll change my mind if someone has a better idea
---------------
D&D 3.5 Tabletop Client Design Document
February 05, 2005
Summary
Have you tried playing Dungeons and Dragons online, only to find the current services either costly, laggy or simply not well designed for D&D gaming? The goal of this project is to design a client that will alow a Dungeon Master and a group of players to log into Byond and play table top D&D seamlessly.
Features:
+ Necessary role play chat functions, such as in character and OOC communication
+ Integrated Dice Roller that can even intelligently makes certain rolls for the player or DM in appropriate situations
+ Comprehensive D&D 3.5 character sheets and interactive character creation system
+ Many important tables and equipment lists from the D&D Core Rules for quick access during play
+ Optional Square Battle Grid map that can either be played blank or fully customized by the DM into all out graphical dungeon maps
+ Dungeon Narration feature: The DM can create custom room/area descriptions and even NPC dialogue scripts before play
+ Dungeon Command System: Players can use Byond-made commands to take care of simple actions, or send simple messages to the DM that would normally require much typing
+ Player portrait and character icons linkable from the web, so that players can express themselves as they wish
+ Will come with a sizable amount of icons, but will also allow for DM to import custom graphics
Sincerely,
=$= Big J Money =$=
PS -- I'm not really sure how predisposed the Byond community is to D&D, but I know that if I am successful, my project will provide very useful to general D&D online players out there in the cyber wilds. I plan to advertise on RPGhost if I ever reach that point.
ID:153074
 Feb 5 2005, 4:19 pm
|
|
Ter13 wrote:
Don't base it solely off of 3.5. I believe there is already another project in Beta that does exactly that. The core of my project, however, is that it is solely based on D&D 3.5; and that is going to change. Basically, make it mutable and you should be fine. What does mutable mean? Like mute all sounds? Thanks for feedback. I'm not sure why my post was moved to this forum, although I don't mind. I thought I had posted in the appropriate forum in the first place, since it is a 'game announcement'. =$= | |
Ter13 wrote:
Don't base it solely off of 3.5. I wouldn't stretch that too far, actually. First of all, a very nice and extremely open-ended tabletop client is Shadowdarkes BYONDTabletopGaming: http://games.byond.com/hub/Shadowdarke/BYONDTabletopGaming Next, if you make it open-ended it will lack depth. If you limit yourself to the D&D Universe and its rules, you can make a really detailed, specialized application that will make any D&D enthusiast jump with joy. For many people want to roleplay with the D&D system, so why not give them that, in a great package? If they want to use GURPS or another ruleset, there are other alternatives. But this one is *the* D&D roleplay application. /Gazoot | |
Thanks Zoot. You got the idea :) Now, maybe I'll get lucky and someone will come by and give me a pointer on the hardest of the features: the one that allows the DM to design maps and then use them, in game. I haven't started working on it yet, but when I do, I'm not really sure I will know where to start. I mean, I was thinking along the lines of having a 'tiles' directory where the DM/host can copy all of his 32x32 pixel images to as .bmp files, and then they would become available to him in some kind of GUI editor where he can select them from a list and then manually place them on the map. When finished, the DM can 'save' the map as a map, and can then load it when he likes. When not in edit mode, the DM can load maps, lock or unlock the map (ie. for players to place their 'miniatures' on it), and move pieces around on it (players can move pieces around on it too.
Another alternative to this would presumably be that the DM (when it edit mode) can load tiles and then simply 'place' them on the map like little pieces themselves. If he saves the 'map' what he would really be saving is a configuration of pieces that he can load later. This way he could make maps on the fly, during a gaming session. I think I like this better. Anyway, suggestions welcome. =$= | |
Saving, Loading, and Designing maps at runtime? You're probably looking for hub://LummoxJR.SwapMaps!
| |
Yes, but anyone who has done any roleplaying will argue with your point. In any one game there are an infinite number of things that DMs can change. If you hard-code player statistics, or even rolls/rules, it defies the purpose of having the DM. The DM makes the decisions, the DM makes the rules. The handbooks are more like guidelines, and not rules.
If you make it too in-depth, you squander creativity and originality. | |
i would suggest developing a 'template' system ofsome sort so that your AD&D engine can be used for other game systems. now you can do this all yourself (one for AD&D, one for GURPS, one for Traveller, etc.), or make it generic enough and publish the template standard (in XML maybe?) so that others can add their own. it's a bit of work, but would be nice.
but, as Gazoot suggested, starting off with a strictly AD&D one is not a bad idea. will help you to focus on a specific system (especially if you do not have much expereince in others). | |
I'm not sure if he means AD&D. The latest D&D is 3.5, so I assume that's what he means, although I may be wrong.
| |
well since wizards of the coast took over, it seems they dropped the 'Advanced' part of the name. But up until recently it was still referred to as Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (AD&D).
the D&D I refer to is the early system from the mid-to-late 1970's. the 1st Edition AD&D books were first published in 1977 (I still have an original set of all the main books from 1979-1980 printing, all still in good condition). 2nd Edition AD&D appeared in the 1980's. quoted from history: 'In 2000, Wizards of the Coast (who had purchased TSR two years earlier) decided to reinvent the franchise, and they released a whole new revision of AD&D. As part of an effort to simplfy the game, they dropped the word "Advanced," and simply called it "Dungeons & Dragons." (There was no reason to call it "Advanced" anymore, as the "basic" version was dropped.) This version has informally been referred to by fans and players as a "third" edition of D&D, often abbreviated as "3E D&D." ' D&D 3.5 arrived in 2003 as mostly an effort to get people to buy things again. Even though I've been playing off-n-on for over 20 years, I still consider 3.5 'AD&D' sometimes (it differs greatly from the orignal basic and expert D&D systems in my opinion). though you are right, it is now just referred to as 'D&D'. | |
There are millions of "fun" building "games" on BYOND. Knowing this, surely you could allow DM's to "build" maps with the click of a button! Not sure how you would save them though =P
| |
the 1st Edition AD&D books were first published in 1977 (I still have an original set of all the main books from 1979-1980 printing, all still in good condition). As do I. Hardcover copies of the AD&D 1st Edition, second printing. There's some errata in them which I've penciled over, and the book has become ever-so-slightly yellowed from the test of time, but otherwise they're pristine. =) The original AD&D books are some of the best thought-out systems -- though not necessarily best-balanced -- in the whole of the D&D franchise. They were designed for completeness, rather than smoothness of play. It depends on your tastes, of course, but I prefer completeness, myself. (I'm playing a "pen-and-paper" RPG over IRC at the moment, and it's probably one of the most complete RPGs I've ever seen.) | |
Ter13 wrote:
Yes, but anyone who has done any roleplaying will argue with your point. In any one game there are an infinite number of things that DMs can change. If you hard-code player statistics, or even rolls/rules, it defies the purpose of having the DM. The DM makes the decisions, the DM makes the rules. The handbooks are more like guidelines, and not rules. Anyone that has tried to make a generic system of any kind will tell you that it is extremely difficult. Some rules just have to be hard-coded. But most of the rules and rolls should of course be XML like Digi suggested, for easy DM-tweaking. If you make it too in-depth, you squander creativity and originality. Why? If I put you in the middle of Middle Earth with all its details, would you feel limited? /Gazoot | |
Okay, I have philosophy question #1, for those willing to participate.
Here is the setup: I was thinking it would be nice for players to be able to change the color of their chat text, so as to be able to tell themselves apart from other players. Here is the question: Would it be better to give a player the ability to select the color of their text to be displayed to others, or to give a player the ability to select the color of the text displayed in their client for each of the other players in the chat room? NOTE: "Game(chat) sessions" can be saved, and so player IDs and settings are retained upon logout. =$= | |
BigJMoney wrote:
Here is the question: Would it be better to give a player the ability to select the color of their text to be displayed to others, or to give a player the ability to select the color of the text displayed in their client for each of the other players in the chat room? Both. A player, player A, could choose what his name looked like to others, but if player B doesn't like it, then he can make player A's text look the way player B wants it to. Player C, however, would see player A's text as player A wants it to be seen, because player C didn't change the settings for player A's text. | |
Don't mind him, he's just thinking outside the box. ;-)
He's right though, in this case; any setting that could be potentially annoying to other players should ideally be able to be ignored. Chat text colour, custom player icons, and so on all fit into this category. Or you could just restrict the selection to colours that you deem non-annoying, but that can be annoyingly limited. | |
Make it open-ended, so that you can incorporate the needs of any roleplaying game. For instance, client-formed character sheets.
Basically, make it mutable and you should be fine.