Print

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

[Detoxicated]

With the introduction of the new (much improved and very fun) taming system, I came to the conclusion that some creatures, for instance troglodytes, should be considered Semi-Sapient. With the care of your animal trainers, they are beaten into valuable haulers, and possibly wall builders. When you have trained a Semi-Sapients, their grandchildren could become fully Sapient, if you kept your fortress that long (well it could happen at World Creation). This would make civilizations more interesting, and could also be the source of new ethics tags, as this would not be slavery per se but a form of colonization.

You could go as far that there would be a new preference in character: Xeno-Integration. So if a dwarven king is Xeno-Phobic, he would pass laws that would forbid integration, thus making non-dwarven citizens illegal, which would create an apartheid situation. On the other hand, a Xenophile would allow them to become full citizens, and with their new personality traits, the ethics could change a bit around, or could lead to !!FUN!!. This would make the new humanoid species more interesting, as it would be nice to eventually have sparrowman troops, in shiny armour, fighting on your side.

Regarding the armor, if an integrated sparrowman would become a smith, and reach an attainable high level, he would eventually become inventive and create an armor template for his race. So it would become possible for the player to create new armor for the new humanoids in the civilization.  (This could be the system to gradually make the weapons of other civs available, as well). I mean the taming system shows that the dwarves are actually able to learn new stuff and advance, as they are able to become adept at taming more varieties of animals during gameplay. 

So any thoughts?

[Splint]

I fully support this. Idea on integration:
Some kind of variable or ethic regarding non-dwarves in s settlement, with say Xenophobia and Xenophilia having 25% chance of occuring in a civ, and the remaing being indifference (as in so long as you keep it to yourself, the monarchs won't give two shits if you got badgermen bushrangers and tigerman auxilla)

Adding in a symbol for xenophobia/philia would also help figure out who would be most accomadting, with potential for badgerman/sparrowman/whateverman migrants showing up from time to time in xenophilic civs, while only those you tame yourself would be present in xenophobic ones.

[Sus]

Erm,

Code: [Select]

[ETHIC:SLAVERY:UNTHINKABLE], anyone?

[Ultimuh]

Erm,

Code: [Select]

[ETHIC:SLAVERY:UNTHINKABLE], anyone?

Why must you guys always bash an exellent idea with that stupid tag every single time?

[Detoxicated]

Also, if you had read the post, you would have noted that there is a difference between slaves and these sub-sapients. You see a slave is already a member of one civ, who was imprisoned by another civ. These integrated tribesmen are basically in a different position, as a dwarf might feel that he needs to beat civilization into a tribalist. Also i don't see why dwarves wouldn't enslave somebody. Isn't putting a forgotten beast in a chamber to produce limitless silk also a form of slavery, if you consider that forgotten beasts are sapient? The game does not recognize it as such, but if you think about it...

Also, even if the dwarves wouldn't do it, I could totally see the humans do it.

[Bytyan]

http://www1.assumption.edu/users/lknoles/douglassproslaveryargs.html
Detoxicated, read the exert from William greyson's "The hireling and the slave". Your argument walks a dangerous line.

[stabbymcstabstab]

Well, the differnece between slavery and using Them as cheap labor is if they have something to gain. First generation of them would be little more then babies your taking care of and teachinhg with little more then food and shelter being given, 2nd would likly be more like children learning skills for life and earning a few coins and trinkets here and there, and 3rd would be when they are adults, Able to carry their weight by Building, Defending, and Supplying the fortress and getting paid like any other dorf or Non dorf in the fort.

[Splint]

It is true both parties have things to gain from such an arrangment. The animal tribes can gain a stable home and food supply, the dwarves gain the extra muscle and an overland fighting force who can cross the sunlit ground more quickly than a vomit encrusted dorf.

[NW_Kohaku]

http://www1.assumption.edu/users/lknoles/douglassproslaveryargs.html
Detoxicated, read the exert from William greyson's "The hireling and the slave". Your argument walks a dangerous line.

We've had this sort of thread and this sort of argument before...

The thing is, when there is "racism" in DF against a goblin as being a little sociopath, it's because they literally are hard-wired to enjoy hurting other people.  A troglodyte really is a slow learner.  You can tell, because there's a [SLOW_LEARNER] token in its creature raws.

Likewise, it's not really racism to say that a modded caste of dwarves that have stone skin and breath fire might be better suited to front-line combat duty, while the smaller, squishier mushroom guys who have a magical bonus to farming might be better off left on the farm.

[Splint]

So trogs are a little slow..... No reason not to give them food, a home where spiders don't want to kill them and make them haul junk in exchange.

I'd honestly like to have animalman auxilliaries to fight on the surface while dwarves fought threats that got past them/come from the caverns....

[Bytyan]

There is a difference, I think, between saying that some individuals are suited to certain tasks and that a tribal group of people is better off in a forced labor camp so they can learn proper culture. A large part of why the theory of evolution was rejected so vehemently in victorian england was because it clearly stated that blacks were of the same approximate makeup as everyone else, as apposed to being a lesser being created to serve man, like dogs and oxen. Do I think it is necessarily a bad idea to have foomen folded into culture in a bigger way then they are now? No. Do I think that the proposed mechanism unsuitable for randomly generated fantasy anarchy? Not at all. But it is exactly slavery, right down to the moral justifications.

[Helgoland]

+1 from me-as long as you don't force them into service (as in slavery) but let them agree to it on their own. Might even tie in nicely with religious cults/cultural traditions that Toady will at some point be implementing...

[Ultimuh]

An idea just occured to me..
What would happen if a Dwarven civ has a tiger as Deity.
And they started intergrating Tigermen into their society?

[Siverix]

They would welcome their new tiger overlords.

[NW_Kohaku]

The same thing they do when they get elven kings/queens: nothing much different at all.