On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Bob Stewart wrote:

> At 12:01 PM 6/28/99 -0400, John Kim wrote:
> >Well, "mob" is technically more accurate. It refers to any
> >mobile entity that is controlled by the server.
>
> True and true. It is a leftover from the origin of this game in deep MUD.
>
> The true awkwardness here comes from game and program thinking rather than
> fantasy world thinking. If you think in terms of game and program there
> are beings you can't kill, PCs, and beings you can (more or less), NPCs.
> But that's a game artifact that impinges deeply on the fantasy world (for
> those of us not player killers).
>
> In live roleplaying or electronic I find it deeply disturbing to metagame
> and treat other beings very differently because I know they are PCs or
> NPCs. I thus believe it is best to limit making that distinction to those
> situations where you are talking about the game and not living the fantasy.

I agree with you. I try to use the terms "monster" or
"merchant" in the game instead of "mobs." My ideal for a
MMORPG (massively multiplayer online roleplaying game :-) is
one where the server does not know the difference between PCs
and mobs - i.e. monsters use the same rules as the PCs.

Unfortunately, none of the MMORPGs I've seen (and almost none
of the CRPGS) do this. It is just much easier for designers
to tweak the game for balance if you can adjust monsters
without adjusting players in the process, and vice versa. So
while the terminology may be disturbing to your suspension of
disbelief, the entire game engine is built upon the PC and mob
dichotomy. Sometimes you just have to use terms like "mob" to
accurately describe the things that go on in the fantasy
world.

--
John H. Kim
kim@...