Mapping

[ProphetSword]

Going back to the original purpose for this, wouldn't it be easier to use one quest item for each event anyway if there's enough spare as I described? Otherwise the events would have to happen in a certain order. How simple is it to set up all the stage events to happen in any order?

You can.  But, you'd only have around 40 to put to use, which means only 40ish unique events.  And that assumes you aren't already using Quest variables anywhere else in the module.  The hard part will be turning them all off later if you want to use them for something else.  If you turned on 35 Quest events, but needed to use them later in the module, that means that a chain would have to exist somewhere with 35 separate events to set them all back to 0.

So, yeah, you can do it.  I don't think it's worth the trouble, given that the purpose of the thread is to disable the area view, and I've already demonstrated how easy it is to enable it anyway.  So, it would be a waste of time, as it won't thwart a player who wants it on anyway...so why go to that much effort?

[Platinum Bearer]

For the people who do want to play it properly. If the player wants to go in and turn the map on that's up to them but all you can is make it as good as you can by assuming that the player will play it in the right way.

I like the idea of the player having to have an in game reason to get the area map. That's why I used it in my module, but it was something that always happens. I'm going to make a few maps for future chapters that can have area maps but only if the player does something first, or while they're there.

I don't think it's too much hassle to give a quest item for one time events and them remove them all at once at the end of the level. I did far more complicated things for the first two chapters.

[Nol Drek]

make it as good as you can by assuming that the player will play it in the right way.

The right way for a player to play is the way the player wants to play.

[Platinum Bearer]

Then why bother to put any enemies in the combats? A player can easily go into the design and change the amount or type of enemies themselves so why not just leave them blank and let the player decide what enemies and how many of them to fight as they go along?

Same thing!

You do it because you assume the player isn't going to do that. If they want to that's up to them. The right way as in the way the author intended.

[ProphetSword]

Players have the option to change whatever they want. I have changed the combat icons, frame or font in a hacked game because I didn't like the choices the author made. I played one module where the fights were so tough that I gave my party two additional levels to make it feel more balanced on my second play through. If an area is an annoying maze with nothing but pointless random encounters, I will enable area view if the rest of the game is worth finishing.

Once you finish a game, you have no control how people will play it. I once found out that someone played my module, built for first level characters, with a 40th level party... but they enjoyed the story, so that's all that matters.

I always strive to play how authors intend, but sometimes I don't. Depends on the design.

[hans]

...Once you finish a game, you have no control how people will play it...

 

Very true.  Which nobody should consider a bad thing.  Tastes vary.  Vive la difference.  Et vive la liberté.

An author should build a mod exactly the way they would like to play it, themselves, following the axiom to please themselves first.  If an author can please himself (or herself), that is the deepest and purest satisfaction to be found for them in their efforts. 

Since nobody else who ever plays the mod is exactly like the author, their experience will always differ, to large or small degrees, from the author's, even if they technically play it, move for move, exactly like the author.  Their perceptions and esteemings of every point and detail will reflect their own individual personality --their own way of looking at things, evoking entirely individualized reactions.  They can never play it as the author.  They can only play it as themselves.     

[Platinum Bearer]

An author should build a mod exactly the way they would like to play it, themselves, following the axiom to please themselves first.  If an author can please himself (or herself), that is the deepest and purest satisfaction to be found for them in their efforts.

That's exactly my point. It's not pointless to set up an in-game reason far the players to have or not have an area view depending on whether a certain condition is met for the same reason that it's not pointless to set up anything else that the player can change. What's the difference?

[ProphetSword]

What's the difference?

Some of those things require work on the part of the player. Some, like area maps, have tools that completely automate the process of making them viewable, and I have heard some people do it whenever they start playing a mod.

Feel free to do whatever you want, though. No one is saying you can't.

[Platinum Bearer]

I think I'll add a note to my readme file for part 2 saying that it's a good idea not to automatically have the area map on. One of my maps would make no sense with it on. Then if they still want to they've been warned.

[Nol Drek]

Then why bother to put any enemies in the combats? A player can easily go into the design and change the amount or type of enemies themselves so why not just leave them blank and let the player decide what enemies and how many of them to fight as they go along?

If a player wants to change the number of monsters or the type of monsters in combats, they can easily do that. I would not say that doing so is playing the game the wrong way.

[Platinum Bearer]

Then why is there supposed to by password protection to prevent them from doing it?

The right way to me is the way the artist made it. You wouldn't get a painting and start editing it. Hmm, let's make her strange half-smile into a cheesy grin.

I might do that actually and use it as my avatar.

[ProphetSword]

Then why is there supposed to by password protection to prevent them from doing it?

I'm sure SSI didn't intend for players to alter the designs.  But, then again, they didn't use a very good password protection scheme.  Without using any tools, I can break a password on a UA module in less than a minute.  You cannot keep people out of your UA designs.  It's a fact of life.

Which brings me back full circle to what I said before:  You can go to all the trouble to make two maps (one with area view on and one with it off) and put a lot of time and effort into tracking different quest variables to keep all the events working as intended.  And it can be thwarted by someone with twenty seconds of effort who doesn't want to bother with not having the area view on.

Personally, I'd rather spend all that time and effort into developing the story, balancing encounters and doing other things that won't annoy the player so that they will want to continue playing the game and will spare me precious resources in a game engine that doesn't have a lot of them to begin with.  But, that's my choice.

[Platinum Bearer]

"All the trouble" is simply adding a quest item when there's a one-time event and then removing them at the end of the level. That's it!

Why would it annoy the players? And why would it have any effect on the amount of attention I put into story development, combat balancing and other things?

I don't care if the player wants to edit stuff. I can only make it the way I want to be and I think it would be a nice touch. Why is this causing so much contention?

[ProphetSword]

Why is this causing so much contention?

It isn't.  You only think it is. 

I'm just telling you what I know based on having been a member of the community since 1994.  These things have come up in conversation a few times when the community existed only on a mailing list and didn't have a forum.  I'm sharing with you how some people play and how a lot of folks once said that they hate maps without area view.  It's the reason that someone wrote a tool to automate turning all those area maps on in the first place.  If no one wanted it, there wouldn't be a tool for it.  I imagine it's the same reason why Gold-Box Companion also includes mapping (people who don't play FRUA and who do play just the standard Gold-Box games don't seem to like going without a map either).

I have already stated that you should do whatever you want to do.  I just said it's not what I would do, and I would spend my time doing something a lot more important for the module rather than spending several hours or whatever for something that might have no effect right out the gate because someone used a tool to thwart it.  That, and I don't see the sense in wasting module resources to do what was suggested at the beginning of this thread.

 

"All the trouble" is simply adding a quest item when there's a one-time event and then removing them at the end of the level. That's it!

Really?  Tell me how this would work if you have 35 unique one-time events on the level, then.  I know I frequently design areas with this many or more.

[Platinum Bearer]

Really?  Tell me how this would work if you have 35 unique one-time events on the level, then.  I know I frequently design areas with this many or more.

I'm not talking about a level with 35 unique one-time events. I'm talking about a levels that will probably have 10-20.

It's not going to take hours to simply put in an if has QI* and then add a give quest item whenever there's a one-time event and remove them at the end of the level.

It is contentious. I've been pulled up for saying that the way the author intended is the right way (I don't think that's an unreasonable statement) and you've told me that I'm basically wasting my time and implied that it means I'm going to it at the cost of story development and game balancing for some reason.