in reply to Re: Daft text adventure project
in thread Daft text adventure project

On copyright points: There was a degree of sarcasm inherent in my earlier allusion to the Open Gaming Licence. For reference, this is not going to be a MUD/MOO in the normal sense, nor is it going to be distributed. (Although, of course, if it were made suitably modular, rewriting certain elements could produce an engine that was OGL-friendly, so that I could distribute. But all that is far in the future. For the time being, this project may be considered a utility for personal use only. I can't be investing in GURPS. I'm out of bookshelf space, and as I write for the RPGA, I am somewhat tied to D&D. 3e is much, much more modular and coder-friendly than earlier versions - that's what inspired my dream of automating the system. (Although combat will be a kludge, since I'm _not_ providing floorplans of every room.)

Again, I understand the principles of OO that you describe, in the same way that I understand, say, heavier-than-air flight. I understand that it's possible, and could explain it to someone else, but I couldn't do it personally. Not yet. To continue the analogy, the present implentation is a hot air balloon (QBasic was diving off a church tower with feathers glued to my arms), and the OO version will be my aeroplane (or helicopter).

Perl may make references easy, but I have to confess I'm floored, even by merlyn's lovely books.

And obviously, if the PCs and the monsters were both subtypes of the same class, they could presumably possess the same movement routine, called in different ways. I think.