Print

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

[KodKod]

My condolences, by the way, on your tragic circumstances. I had noted your sig before, but there isn't often an appropriate interweb time to mention something like that.

That which does not kill me serves to make me angry.

Why do I get the feeling it involved facebook, a digital camera, and a lot of "woman scorned"?

1 out of 3, sadly. Not terrible for a random guess though. "Heaven hath no rage like love to hatred turned, nor hell a fury like a woman scorned" were words I used, right down to the letter.

But... Armok DEMANDS that there is NO end to the slaughter!  While your preference for 'prey' that actually resists makes sense in a predatory mindset, remember that what the greenskins lack in reluctance they compensate for in sheer numbers (and liters of blood for donation to Armok's dinner table).  However if you 'feed' the mongrels enough to encourage a full-out assault you may be able to appease his bloodlust for a short time... but I have not been able to recreate that scenario since my first fortress attempt, and even then from what I now know that still is not enough to sate His thirst.

That being said please continue with your butchery as it reminds those of non-dwarven heritage that we are not to be trifled with, and to do so anyway results in their undoing.

The two problems tend to resolve themselves. One way or another an awful lot of caravans tend to die on my embarks. Whether it's because I embark on evil biomes, or because elves, or a mixture of the two. Either way that gives the kobolds plenty of pickings to be had... clothing and seeds, or useless wooden weapons that I don't want.

This of course gives me further excuse to exterminate them, as well as sending them to me in force. I also mod the [SIEGER] tag into their entity raws for added kobold related slaughter.

And again @Kodkod, I am both fearful and intrigued by your retribution against your former fiancee and potential mate.  Did it involve magma like a true dwarven undertaking (literally or figuratively) or was of a more Human or even (bleh) Elven nature?

Sadly no magma was involved, though had the opportunity presented itself I would have jumped at the chance. The rest... I shouldn't put incriminating things on a public forum.

[MetalHead]

Ah, wisdom in balance with rage.  Clever thinking mixed with undying fury can result in the best (or worst, depending on where you're standing) results.

Also, by 'magma (... or figuratively)' i meant inner rage.  As a fellow resident of the internet I commend both your discretion in public acknowledgment and your methods of retribution, as well the fury in which you pursued your newfound enemy.

I will also add my condolences to the impact of your fiancees infidelity, and wish them a thousand magma-baths when their time has come.  Remember that your strength lies not only in the will of your spirit but also the adamantine which you have infused it with while gracing the world of DF and our sacred halls of insanity and madness

[KodKod]

Also, by 'magma (... or figuratively)' i meant inner rage.

Inner rage. Outer rage. Existential rage. Brooklyn rage...

I'm available in all flavours of heavy-handed aggression.

[Hotaru]

I believe all non-egg layers still reproduce by "spores", meaning females are impregnated automatically as long as a male (in this case their husband) is anywhere on the map.

Just getting back on the topic slightly. Does this imply that egg layers no longer reproduce by spores? As in, actual contact between spouses being required?

Because then modding dwarves to lay eggs would make population control rather easy. Of course it makes it rather easy anyway since they would rather eat the eggs they lay than hatch them, but yeah.

[MetalHead]

I believe all non-egg layers still reproduce by "spores", meaning females are impregnated automatically as long as a male (in this case their husband) is anywhere on the map.

Just getting back on the topic slightly. Does this imply that egg layers no longer reproduce by spores? As in, actual contact between spouses being required?

Because then modding dwarves to lay eggs would make population control rather easy. Of course it makes it rather easy anyway since they would rather eat the eggs they lay than hatch them, but yeah.

AFAIK egg-layers still technically use spores.  The females just lay eggs and THEN check for mates I think.  This is interrupted by hungry dorfs looking for tasty treats.

And now back to our regularly-scheduled derailment:

Remember folks, Nothin' Solves Drama Like Blunt-Force Trauma!

[King DZA]

I checked this thread for interesting discussion concerning dwarven pregnancy.

Instead, I got senseless slaughter, acts of vengeance, and gay Greek porn. Guess I won't need that coffee to wake me up after all.

[MetalHead]

I checked this thread for interesting discussion concerning dwarven pregnancy.

Instead, I got senseless slaughter, acts of vengeance, and gay Greek porn. Guess I won't need that coffee to wake me up after all.

It's in here somewhere, but it's buried under the corpses and the Greek orgy participants.

[slink]

Dwarven sex is very simple - it doesn't exist.  Dwarves are actually a form of fungi.  Despite their cultural description, they secretly practice cannibalism on their plump helmet brethren.

[wierd]

Nonsense!

Dwarven babies are "born" from the interaction of male spores with the female's beard. Similar to the pollen interacting with corn silk.

During the "romantic involvement" stage of the courtship ritual, the female becomes biologically sensitized to the ambient spore emissions from the male's beard. When the female has become fully sensitized, they immediately "marry", which is merely a formal declaration of this condition.

From that point onward, the female's beard will collect spores released by the male, the spores will travel up the hair shaft,  and initiate a "pregnancy".

The pregnancy itself is just a nodular growth that forms on the female's back. This growth goes completely unnoticed and unannounced, until it erupts.  Upon eruption, a "dwarven baby" will fall out, and the previous point of attachment semi-scabs over, forming a rudimentary "teat". The mother will collect the (at this stage of development) parasitical infant, and place it in proximity to the reat, where it latches on powerfully.  Scientific experiments involving high pressure water have shown to be able to dislodge the infant, where most other methods fail. There the infant siphons blood alcohol from the mother, until it grows large enough to consume solid food. This method of nourishment is why the female of the species exhibits a clear and complete lack of mammary glands in the conventional sense. The strength and voracity of the infant as it clings to the mother is quite remarkable, requiring almost complete submersion in fast moving current to dislodge it. This position on the female's back makes it highly susceptible to projectile injury, however. The "grown on the back" nature is also clearly exhibited by the frequency of miscarriages when expecting mothers are clubbed, or have things dropped on them.

[KodKod]

I am highly disturbed.

[wierd]

That was the whole idea!  Its so over the top, its epically dawrven! (Therefor, it must be true!)

[acehawk]

Wow. Just, wow.

That was absolutely amazing, thank you.

[white_darkness]

Except they'll drop their babies if they path through 1/7 and 2/7 water sloshing around as you're trying to fill that washing pool in the entrance to 2/7, before they rediscovered the wonders of clothing.

[wierd]

Perhaps the point of attachment is not limited to the broad surface of the back, but to any place besides the face of the dwarven female?

Or, perhaps water has a decidedly repellent effect on the infants in question?

[slink]

So you are saying that Dwarves are a species of corn, and that baby Dwarves live on corn smut?