Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Babylon]

Wait, why are we all discussing ethics? Why do we care about in-game ethics.

THIS IS BAY12FORUMS. WE ARE IMMORAL. YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED.

Because the dwarves care.

Dwarven Ethics are part of the game in a fairly important way.  Sure, the player may not share them, but working with the fact that the dwarves care is part of the fun.

[Jeoshua]

I would like to point out that many of the horrible things people make Dwarves do end up backfiring on them and creating things like Tantrum spirals.

I've personally never had one of them.  I've had to bake my whole medical ward in magma to clean out infections, shredded intruding armies of goblins with repeating spikes, done all kinds of horrible things in the name of keeping the Fortress alive, safe, and productive.

But no tantrum spirals.

(I did have one ghost outbreak after a particularly bad winter tho.  That was bad.)

[GreatWyrmGold]

I'm glad I'm not alone here. Now that we've clearly shown them that the majority of the community's against them, can we get back to discussing...propaganda?

[slothen]

To answer the OP directly, I believe the idea of propaganda is a fine one, and one I would want to incorporate into a more thorough reinvention of the internal fortress dynamic. 

That is, however, just it: The internal fortress operations are simply not sophisticated enough right now for propaganda to work.  This needs to be a point in a much larger and more sweeping change that would probably only work after Personality Rewrites and Guild Politics are complete.

Boom, propoganda question answered.  In the current system, propoganda exists in the form of your legendary counselor/pacifier mayor (btw, I've seen a good mayor send someone from 0 happiness/miserable to "fine" from just one meeting).

[rtg593]

If I understand what you are saying correctly,.. <snip>

Spoiler:  misunderstanding clarification... I think :p (click to show/hide)

 To clarify, I meant there was no reason to explain or argue against slavery, because I had just finished saying that portion of my post was me expressing my amusement, and not arguing to put slavery in. I then said I most likely wouldn't use it, not a fan of the idea, and apologized that my brief comment caused a derail. I wasn't meaning I had replied to your specific points already, just that there was no point in repeating what I had already said by saying it all again to you.

<snip>

Back on topic, I think a propaganda idea is cool. If, as you say, dwarves will be more difficult to make happy, then this could very well be useful.

I'm more interested in the civil uprisings that could happen. See the same group of dwarves going "on break" at the same time, all heading to the same area, away from other dwarves, occasionally and steadily increasing in number by pulling in the dwarves around them. Work quality dropping lower and lower, as well as production rates, then suddenly you get the alert, "Urist McCharasmatic has led an uprising! Quell them, quick!" or something like that, with most or all of those dorfs changing to a temporary enemy civ. Subtle use of propoganda can reduce the chance of it happening, great use can increase it. And the leader of the uprising would be using it, as well, to draw in rebels. You could have some highly loyal dwarves report the meetings, allowing you to punish those involved in "civil unrest," which may or may not make things better or worse... They could even kill the dwarf before he could report them, leaving you with a mysterious death with no witnesses.

This, of course, would all be controlled from a init file tag, or series of tags, allowing you to turn this off if you do desire...

I could see all sorts of tragic hilarious situations arising from having civ members temporarily turn hostile to your civ. "He talked with a child lately. He has participated in an uprising. He took joy in slaughter. He has witnessed death. He lost a son to tragedy recently."

Heh, nice. Also "distrustful of leader's propaganda" or "comforted by leader's wise words lately."

Of course, then those imprisoned for rioting/taking part in a uprising would probably be more susceptible to the influence of propaganda in the future. Or less :p But that is the main purpose of propaganda, is it not? To sway the opinion of the masses to your own?

Huh. Thought. Dwarven conspiracy theorist. Lol.

[Niyazov]

Also "distrustful of leader's propaganda" or "comforted by leader's wise words lately."

This already exists! Personality traits determine whether or not a dwarf gets a good or bad thought from interacting with an authority figure.

[rtg593]

Also "distrustful of leader's propaganda" or "comforted by leader's wise words lately."

This already exists! Personality traits determine whether or not a dwarf gets a good or bad thought from interacting with an authority figure.

Ya, I know there's happy/sad from meeting/yelling/crying interactions, I was meaning in response to propoganda campaigns you run, like the OP examples.

[Jeoshua]

If propaganda were to be considered at all, very much thought would have to be given, not just to what it can do, but how it could bite you in the ass.  Just like everything in DF, there has to be some pushback.  Making Dwarves do things they're not supposed to want to do isn't easy.  And making them do something directly against their nature could have serious consequences.  We've already touched on the tantrum spirals, yes?  Imagine trying to make Dwarves enslave their own people somehow.  Now imagine what happens when their families, friends, and loved ones get upset about that.

[NW_Kohaku]

Propaganda may just have a cost to perform for one thing.

In Jared Diamond's Collapse, one of the great Native American cities of Mexico (whose name I can't really spell, and isn't all that important to the story), actually destroyed its own environment because it would continuously update the plasters that displayed propaganda along the walls of its city.  Boiling down the materials for the plaster took wood for fuel that eventually led to them deforesting their area to such a degree that soil erosion destroyed their farms. 

The other thing may be an unruly or jingoist populace that arises over time.  If you tell people that elves are the source of all your troubles as a society for long enough, they may think that you're "soft on elves" if you don't spend what resources you still have left invading an elven retreat.  They may try to take your more reasonable leaders out to establish someone who is qualified by having the most irrational hatred of elves ever seen, to the point where the dwarves grow out of your control and act without you.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Propaganda may just have a cost to perform for one thing.

In Jared Diamond's Collapse, one of the great Native American cities of Mexico (whose name I can't really spell, and isn't all that important to the story), actually destroyed its own environment because it would continuously update the plasters that displayed propaganda along the walls of its city.  Boiling down the materials for the plaster took wood for fuel that eventually led to them deforesting their area to such a degree that soil erosion destroyed their farms. 

Ah, yes, excellent book. I believe you're talking about the Mayans. Of course, the issue with that idea is that not all propaganda requires physical materials. (And that erosion typically happens on a timescale too slow to really be modelled in DF...)

The other thing may be an unruly or jingoist populace that arises over time.  If you tell people that elves are the source of all your troubles as a society for long enough, they may think that you're "soft on elves" if you don't spend what resources you still have left invading an elven retreat.  They may try to take your more reasonable leaders out to establish someone who is qualified by having the most irrational hatred of elves ever seen, to the point where the dwarves grow out of your control and act without you.

Heh. That would be entertaining. Another possibility could be the opposite--dwarves who spend time with elves, for whatever reason, are in danger of talking to--or at least hearing--elves. Either you'd need to spread some more rumors about the words of elves causing dwarves to lose their senses (which would require more labor, incite more "jingoist" movements, and worsen the problem I'm describing), or the dwarves would probably listen, and some might hear what the elves say about them not being horrible monsters that eat babies. ("Are you confusing us with goblins again? They're the ones who rape the land with their metal weapons--OW! That whip really hurts!") If the elves' attempt at convincing the dwarves of their non-monstrosity succeeds, then that dwarf might be able to convince others (or at least get them to listen), leading to a group of dwarves who believe that their government is a horrible group that exists to harrass elves and oppress the dwarves. This could lead to revolution, or at least revolt. This would lead to Fun...

[Carp McDwarfEater]

The other thing may be an unruly or jingoist populace that arises over time.  If you tell people that elves are the source of all your troubles as a society for long enough, they may think that you're "soft on elves" if you don't spend what resources you still have left invading an elven retreat.  They may try to take your more reasonable leaders out to establish someone who is qualified by having the most irrational hatred of elves ever seen, to the point where the dwarves grow out of your control and act without you.

Maybe it could also let you just flat-out lie to your citizens as well. If you have the monarch in your fort, he could order your civ's army to prevent elves from coming into your city. You could then just say that the forest retreat had been destroyed, and your people probably wouldn't know any better since they wouldn't be seeing any elven traders (you don't let them come to your fort) and the elves wouldn't siege (there isn't an all-out war).