> Allow me to say, first of all: Geez, Sam, when do you ever get any sleep?

Sometimes on the weekends.

> First, consider the feasibility of doing something similar to AGL with this game: writing an engine that can handle highly customizable levels and worlds, to leave open the possibility of reader-submitted plug-in dungeons in the future.

That will be difficult but not impossible. I'll keep it in mind. The customizable part may well involve actual C++ code, though, because my primary concern with this is speed of execution, as more moves will be executed for a game of this CRPG than for AGL. Reading in data files is an expensive operation, while compiled C/C++ code is about the fastest there is. So I'll try to set the code up so the parts that should be customizable have their own file(s) and have a fairly easy and well-defined format to them. Then, I suppose, I could publish the skeleton code and just have readers fill in the blanks.

Hmmm. I like this idea. A reader designing a new CRPG for this thing will also be a lot easier and quicker than designing a new game for AGL. You plug in the monsters, objects, and map you want, and that's pretty much it. Beyond that, you just have to write the code for the "special case" squares in the maze, where out of the ordinary things happen.

> Second--and this goes for those making suggestions as well as for Sam--do NOT suggest or implement any spell in the game that isn't actually EFFECTIVE.

My favorite CRPG was Wizardry. I used to play the original Wizardry game for hours on end, and I finally did beat it. Unlike with Wizardry II, where I mapped out the ENTIRE dungeon and didn't find ANYTHING. (Does anybody know if there even *is* a way to win that game?) Anyway, there were certain spells that were useless, and certain spells that were useful. I tried to remedy that with the game I wrote, and I will be using pretty much the same spells for this new game. For example, in Wizardry, the "silence monsters" and "paralyze monsters" spells *NEVER* worked, except on monsters weak enough to kill by breathing on them. In this game, those spells will be more effective. There aren't a lot of non-combat spells, but what few there are you kind of need.

> A computer "RPG" seldom includes much of the "RP" element, and instead is mostly a fighting-oriented game with a fantasy RPG setting.

That's why I'm careful to distinguish by using "CRPG" or "computer RPG" when I refer to the computer versions. Maybe that's why I *like* the computer RPGs. :-) There is no question they are two completely different genres of games. I find the computer ones to be insanely addicting -- at least the good ones. Alas, I don't think I care too much for most of the new crop of CRPGs, which tend to rely on real-time combat. (I prefer the thinking element present in turn-based combat.) So I can tell you that this game will be a proud member of the *computer* RPG genre, but I also understand that hacking through waves of monsters ad nauseum gets old quick. Exploration and discovery (finding new places/characters in the maze, and finding new types of objects) is important too.

> To successfully implement a "utility" (i.e., non-offensive and non-defensive) spell is going to take a lot of creativity and planning on your part. And those of us making suggestions for potential spells should be careful to suggest things that work well within the parameters of the computerized dungeon crawl genre.

Well, let's hear them. And don't be too careful with your suggestions -- I'd rather hear one I can't use than not hear one I can.