Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: Better Civ for Animal People  (Read 1146 times)

King_of_Baboons

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Better Civ for Animal People
« on: December 30, 2014, 09:59:07 am »

I love how the civilizations interact with each other and I think maybe it's time to make some changes with the animal people and give them a proper civilization instead of just walking around in the wilderness and unify all kinds of animal people in single civ instead of a serpent man civ and repitile man civ.

You could make them act like the south american tribes since the animal people live in forests and rarely join human civs it would be nice to give their own tribal civ.

In fort mode,if the player manage to live in peace with them,they will leave piles of meat and other goods in your door as a gesture of peace.If otherwise they will start to ambush dwarves in the woods until the point where a army can be send to besiege your fortress.

In adventure a player can play as animal people if world does not have any civ besides goblins and kobolds or if only animal people exist.

These tribes should be superior than kobolds but weaker than elves.Their ethics are totally different from the other races:they only value craftsmanship for the construction of ritual items(dolls,totems,sacrificial knifes,etc)and hunting weapons such as bows and daggers.They wear little to no clothing.They don't worship deity's or forces and believe that their origin is related to the Great Spirits of nature.Lastly animal people will often make duels and rituals to appeal said Spirits, like dances,offerings,and sacrifices.

"A medium-sized creature that is half-men and half-animal.They believe in hunt and family.Better let them alone than provoke any conflict."

(In the meantime can anyone link me a mod that make them a actual civ?)
Logged
A medium-sized creature prone to madness and insanity.

Witty

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Better Civ for Animal People
« Reply #1 on: December 30, 2014, 11:37:51 am »

I do agree that animal people should receive their own civs, but I don't understand why they'd unify under one entity. Toady has stated in the past that subterranean animal people are technologically and culturally more advanced then their overworld counterparts, so I'd imagine that their civ would possibly be on-par if not below the "level" of kobolds. Ultimately, this a is pretty big hole to fill and there just isn't enough diversity in the entity system as of now to really accommodate them properly.
Logged
Quote from: Toady One
I understand that it is disappointing when a dwarf makes a spiked loincloth instead of an axe.

than402

  • Bay Watcher
  • DF2014:we all knew it was inevitable
    • View Profile
Re: Better Civ for Animal People
« Reply #2 on: December 30, 2014, 11:52:48 am »

kobolds are more advanced than underground animal people. at least they know how to smelt metal
Logged

Witty

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Better Civ for Animal People
« Reply #3 on: December 30, 2014, 01:40:30 pm »

True, but the comments in their entity section seem to suggest that this capability is just a placeholder.
Logged
Quote from: Toady One
I understand that it is disappointing when a dwarf makes a spiked loincloth instead of an axe.

Urist McMontesOca

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Better Civ for Animal People
« Reply #4 on: December 30, 2014, 11:04:29 pm »

Well, I don't think that animal people, if you compare them to south american tribes, would leave food or goods at your door.

More likely they're going to try to avoid civilization like the plague and try to attack you if you invade their lands.

Even more, I wouldn't put them all under the same civilization at all. I mean, tribes, as small as they are, are separate groups from each other. Their own internal conflicts/wars might be even more messy that the chaos you read when you navigate through Legend mode.

I don't know. To make them a civ, makes me think about an homogeneous community that may as well have their own centralized government, when every separate tribe would be more like a civilization in itself. :-\
Logged

IndigoFenix

  • Bay Watcher
  • All things die, but nothing dies forever.
    • View Profile
    • Boundworlds: A Browser-Based Multiverse Creation and Exploration Game
Re: Better Civ for Animal People
« Reply #5 on: December 31, 2014, 03:39:29 pm »

The simplest way to accomplish this would be to make it possible for a civ to be 'all bandits' - no centralized empire, just scattered independent camps.  Each camp could then be interacted with independently, as if it were its own independent entity.

mate888

  • Bay Watcher
  • [CRAZED]
    • View Profile
Re: Better Civ for Animal People
« Reply #6 on: December 31, 2014, 06:57:45 pm »

The simplest way to accomplish this would be to make it possible for a civ to be 'all bandits' - no centralized empire, just scattered independent camps.  Each camp could then be interacted with independently, as if it were its own independent entity.
That sounds very plausible, and I actually think it should be the same with kobolds, as they are just tiny rat-dog cavemen, they should have their internal conflicts and tribal wars, only not shown in the legends mode unless something important is involved in any of the warring states. (Like Asax the cave swallow man's tribe, that never appeared until Asax decided to go badass).
Logged
My second turn's unnoficial goal was to turn everyone into vampires, and it backfired so bad, I ended up making the fort a more efficient, safer and friendlier place.
Apparently they evolved a taste for everything I love and care about

Adragis

  • Bay Watcher
  • Edgelady Supreme
    • View Profile
Re: Better Civ for Animal People
« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2015, 05:44:38 am »

The simplest way to accomplish this would be to make it possible for a civ to be 'all bandits' - no centralized empire, just scattered independent camps.  Each camp could then be interacted with independently, as if it were its own independent entity.
That'd be how I'd do it, although perhaps differentiating between 'passive' camps (animal people, refugees etc.) and 'hostile' camps (bandits, armies, etc.).
Logged
thincake