Print

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

[WillowLuman]

Yeah, they're due to be replaced. However, good doesn't mean "unspoilt nature, defend rabidly", good means "benevolent, empathic, sympathetic, kind, etc."

Murdering someone for being "DnD neutral" and not "good" seems more evil to me. TBH, nature spirits that murder defiliers are usually grouped into some kind of DnD neutral. The whole "nature trying to kill you" seems like the point of Savage regions.

For good regions, I imagine them being more like "the giving tree," giving their resources to those who need them but wind up exploited and thus slowly disappear.

[Babylon]

So why must gnomes be shorter clones of elves? Seriously, we already have elves that worship trees and kill people who chop them.

Why must Good regions be lethal at all? The point of them is to be more hospitable, not to murder your dwarves or make them useless.

So in your system what are neutral regions for?

Currently most races can't settle in good regions in world Gen, presumably that is because they are more challenging to settle in, that ought to be reflected in play, it would also make the game more interesting to have the three different alignments represent three different ways of playing (vanilla for neutral, scary like we have now for evil and challenging in some other interesting way for good)  the point of this thread is to examine that "challenging in some other interesting way" approach.

[Babylon]

Evil regions got a major revamp recently with evil mists and reanimation.  I don't see why Good couldn't also recieve an update relatively soon.

[WillowLuman]

We've had this argument before. It's pointless to say the same things again, in the same thread.

But good regions are unlikely to get a revamp, since Toady plans to replace them with sphere-aligned regions relatively soon.

[auris2]

So why must gnomes be shorter clones of elves? Seriously, we already have elves that worship trees and kill people who chop them.

Why must Good regions be lethal at all? The point of them is to be more hospitable, not to murder your dwarves or make them useless.

Well, the point most people are trying to get across is that dwarves generally aren't a good-aligned race but usually (lawful?) neutral, not taking the actions of the player into account, and as such would most likely be considered invaders in a good region. Besides, we also already have the Benign/Neutral/Savage distinctions on top of it to allow for further variation.

If one where to settle a good region and not cut down any trees, dig up the ground too much, hunt the wildlife etc, you'd probably be accepted and not set upon by its magical denizens. Generally though, most players playing normally would upset the magical forces present and should suffer as a result. In a benign good region (Serene) there shouldn't be that many dangers. But a savage good region (Joyous wilds) should have you beset by Ents, Unicorns, Satyrs etc if you disturb the peace, in my opinion

Then again, arguing over how to interpret the "good" part of good regions is kind of moot since they'll most likely be revamped into the sphere alignment regions before any major changes are done :>

can you expand on what sphere alignment will be?

[auris2]

Yeah, they're due to be replaced. However, good doesn't mean "unspoilt nature, defend rabidly", good means "benevolent, empathic, sympathetic, kind, etc."

Murdering someone for being "DnD neutral" and not "good" seems more evil to me. TBH, nature spirits that murder defiliers are usually grouped into some kind of DnD neutral. The whole "nature trying to kill you" seems like the point of Savage regions.

For good regions, I imagine them being more like "the giving tree," giving their resources to those who need them but wind up exploited and thus slowly disappear.

the joyous wilds region type is categorized as savage-good

[WillowLuman]

ninja'd

Simple: regions aligned with the thematic spheres: http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/v0.31:Sphere

For example, a "nature" aligned region might be somewhat like what you suggest for good regions, a "food" aligned zone might make crops and livestock more bountiful (or have plants that make pies), a "love" aligned zone might make dwarves fall in love more often, etc.

[loose nut]

THAT'S IT

Good regions periodically turn your dwarves into Philosopher nobles!

Well, if terrain is aligned with thematic spheres that won't happen; however, a lot of the spheres seem like they should have interesting effects on their inhabitants. For example Trickery, Treachery, Rebirth, Mercy, Lightning, Depravity... as well as more prosaic/ easily-translated ones like Labor, Courage, Jewels, Agriculture...

[auris2]

ninja'd

Simple: regions aligned with the thematic spheres: http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/v0.31:Sphere

For example, a "nature" aligned region might be somewhat like what you suggest for good regions, a "food" aligned zone might make crops and livestock more bountiful (or have plants that make pies), a "love" aligned zone might make dwarves fall in love more often, etc.

cool! thanks for the link and reply, so it seems like spheres will entirely replace the 'surrounding' biomes mechanic in the next version, is this true?

[WillowLuman]

Probably not in the next version, but sometime in the near future.

[Wastedlabor]

One realistic thing to do would be that, lacking external threats to unify the fortress, dwarf factions would start to plot and turn against each other more often.

[Pinstar]

I could see this working with syndromes and the up and coming personality traits.

I imagine one of the new personality traits that a dwarf could have that could deviate from "dwarven society norms" is a kind of pacifism. They refuse to join a squad, they refuse to pick up a weapon and would rather run than fight. They also will never have a violent tantrum. You might get one or two stray individuals in your fort with this trait naturally, but it'll be easy enough to stick them with some civilian job where they won't be expected to fight.

Now imagine a cloud that induces this personality trait on anyone who it envelops. Imagine your well-trained military suddenly gets caught in it. While it wont' kill or send a single dwarf to the hospital, it has none the less rendered your military useless.

[ZodGilla]

I really don't understand. Good regions are supposed to be...Good. Easier. It doesn't make sense to make a good region more dangerous than a neutral region. Then it wouldn't be good.
Instead of suggesting a revamp of the Good Regions and how they are easier...Try an Evil Region.

[Bumber]

I really don't understand. Good regions are supposed to be...Good. Easier. It doesn't make sense to make a good region more dangerous than a neutral region. Then it wouldn't be good.
Instead of suggesting a revamp of the Good Regions and how they are easier...Try an Evil Region.

Because dwarves aren't good, they're neutral. Expect to be punished (e.g. turned into an ent or tree) for defiling sacred forests and stuff.

Elves (good aligned) may be filthy tree huggers, but they aren't pacifists, you know.

[Babylon]

I could see this working with syndromes and the up and coming personality traits.

I imagine one of the new personality traits that a dwarf could have that could deviate from "dwarven society norms" is a kind of pacifism. They refuse to join a squad, they refuse to pick up a weapon and would rather run than fight. They also will never have a violent tantrum. You might get one or two stray individuals in your fort with this trait naturally, but it'll be easy enough to stick them with some civilian job where they won't be expected to fight.

Now imagine a cloud that induces this personality trait on anyone who it envelops. Imagine your well-trained military suddenly gets caught in it. While it wont' kill or send a single dwarf to the hospital, it has none the less rendered your military useless.

That would be awesome.