Print

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

[Volour]

What the hell happened to this suggestion thread?

Politics happened.

[Cool Guy]

Guys, I really don't care anymore. I just want to play Dwarf Fortress and have fun. If my dwarves want to go down the hall to my farming district and have sex with my goats I'll let them, it's not that big a deal in my eyes.

[Xantalos]

Guys, I really don't care anymore. I just want to play Dwarf Fortress and have fun. If my dwarves want to go down the hall to my farming district and have sex with my goats I'll let them, it's not that big a deal in my eyes.

[Robosaur]

I want complex levels of sexual orientation AND ethics involving them.
Not for realism... for SHENANIGANS!

I will play as a gay human and murder every human in my way of legalizing homosexuality.
because it would be FUN!

[Damiac]

This thread has a few groups arguing different things.

Group A says, it's in real life, why not add it in DF.
Group B is clearly pushing a political agenda, and wants to pick and choose very current beliefs about the subject to push their politics on others.
Group C says homosexuality is offensive to some, keep it out.

I agree with the idea that it could just be another variable, just like in the sims.  There's marriage in the game, so if there's gay dwarves, why the hell not let them marry eachother.

I also agree that it really wouldn't matter at all right now, except for the people who want to push their politics, and see "Gay" under the dwarf's description.

If you're going to have it as a personal detail, and dwarves can not like other dwarves for various personal details, then this sexuality should be the same.
Some dwarves don't like big noses, some don't like long hair, some don't like gay dwarves, some don't like light skinned dwarves.  OR just don't have dwarves dislike any other dwarf for any reason.  Whatever.

It's random, and it's a game.  If you want to just pick and choose these details, until they just make the dwarves form the world you want to see in real life, you're just trying to push politics.

If you just don't want gay dwarves in anyone's game, you're just pushing politics.

My opinion is, there's no framework for romance anyway, so it's completely pointless at this time.  When romance is added, go ahead and have some dwarves randomly homosexual.  I just don't want to end up with a fortress where I can only kill off the white, straight, male, adult dwarves, because killing off other ones would cause controversy.  Please don't make me play PC fortress.

[misko27]

Damiac chooses Group d, those who say "Not now, not yet"

Frankly, I'm more pining for the day where a young human, about 18 yrs old or so, thinks of me as her idol. Like a hero should be.

unfortunately that brings up relationships, which bring up marriage, which brings up the lack of a sex mechanic.

[Phlum]

Damiac chooses Group d, those who say "Not now, not yet"

Ahh group D, the group that's too Wimpy nice to pick a side! Go group A!

[misko27]

Nooo. Its the group that says, NOT NOW.
 
Practicalists. I'd much rather be chopping down elf homes before I learn that the dwarf doing it is gay.

[G-Flex]

I also agree that it really wouldn't matter at all right now, except for the people who want to push their politics, and see "Gay" under the dwarf's description.

I don't get it. Why is that necessarily "pushing politics"? Is it also a political statement that we have dwarves with blonde hair or dark skin, or small noses?

[GoombaGeek]

I also agree that it really wouldn't matter at all right now, except for the people who want to push their politics, and see "Gay" under the dwarf's description.

I don't get it. Why is that necessarily "pushing politics"? Is it also a political statement that we have dwarves with blonde hair or dark skin, or small noses?

I don't get where this argument is going because now it's all like "oh man politics is good" and then "no there is not politics in the game" which doesn't prove very much of a point.

[Damiac]

It would be a statement of some kind to add in, all of the sudden, dwarves with blue or green hair, or dwarves that like MLP, just because someone wants it.  If there were such a thing as romance in DF, then you might as well add in homosexuality, but what would be the point of adding it right now?

When Toady gets to a point where it would be at all relevant, why not just add in a 10%(since that seems to be the average figure) chance of dwarves being homosexual. 

If it was already in the game, I wouldn't care, it just doesn't seem like it matters at all right now.  But hell, if Toady felt like adding it in, that's his call too, I wouldn't care.  My only argument is that it would do absolutely nothing for gameplay, at the moment.  It would just be yet another insignificant detail. 

I think that's why people are bringing up the idea of dwarves not liking other dwarves with various details.  If that happened, you'd want a large selection of details available, for more interesting interactions.  And yeah, sometimes the RNG would give you dwarves that don't like dark skin, or homosexuality.  Not because it was specifically programmed to be that way, just because that's one of the many possibilities, along with not liking dwarves that like spiders, or not liking dwarves that put braids in their beards, or even not liking dwarves who don't like dwarves.  I guess those would be your PC dwarves, which in and of itself would be pretty hilarious, if that happened due to procedural circumstance, and not because it was specifically programmed to happen.

[dwarf_sadist]

This thread has a few groups arguing different things.

Group A says, it's in real life, why not add it in DF.
Group B is clearly pushing a political agenda, and wants to pick and choose very current beliefs about the subject to push their politics on others.
Group C says homosexuality is offensive to some, keep it out.

I agree with the idea that it could just be another variable, just like in the sims.  There's marriage in the game, so if there's gay dwarves, why the hell not let them marry eachother.

I also agree that it really wouldn't matter at all right now, except for the people who want to push their politics, and see "Gay" under the dwarf's description.

If you're going to have it as a personal detail, and dwarves can not like other dwarves for various personal details, then this sexuality should be the same.
Some dwarves don't like big noses, some don't like long hair, some don't like gay dwarves, some don't like light skinned dwarves.  OR just don't have dwarves dislike any other dwarf for any reason.  Whatever.

It's random, and it's a game.  If you want to just pick and choose these details, until they just make the dwarves form the world you want to see in real life, you're just trying to push politics.

If you just don't want gay dwarves in anyone's game, you're just pushing politics.

My opinion is, there's no framework for romance anyway, so it's completely pointless at this time.  When romance is added, go ahead and have some dwarves randomly homosexual.  I just don't want to end up with a fortress where I can only kill off the white, straight, male, adult dwarves, because killing off other ones would cause controversy.  Please don't make me play PC fortress.

I'll pick group F; all talks of sexuality will eventually degrade into politics and political correctness, with no side agreeing on even basic principles.

In essence, wait until proper evolution and behaviour is implemented and if homosexuality is determined through procedural behaviour, keep it.

[GoombaGeek]

Group A says, it's in real life, why not add it in DF.
Group B is clearly pushing a political agenda, and wants to pick and choose very current beliefs about the subject to push their politics on others.
Group C says homosexuality is offensive to some, keep it out.

Group A says, ha ha I'm the first to think of this group comparison scheme and can use it to make anyone who isn't me look terrible
Group B says, why aren't we portrayed as favorably as Group A, we must be pushing a political agenda because we disagree with someone, be quiet I'm trying to PUSH MY POLITICS RIGHT INTO THIS THREAD OH YEAH YOU LIKE THAT
Group C says, oh man we're so much better than those corrupt republican group B people

Group Everyone says what

[Damiac]

Heh, well I was trying to summarize, everyone's their own group in a sense.  I think some people are pushing politics, one way or the other, and some people are looking at it from a gameplay perspective.

Dividing people into groups never works out anyway. 
I belong to group Z2S45, who attempts to simplify complex arguments into easier to argue chunks.

That's right.  I called you a chunk.

[Baccar Wozat]

That's right.  I called you a chunk.

It could be argued that fat admirers outnumber homosexuals, so we should add one if we're going to add the other.

BTW I like the descriptions in the game...

has what was once a thin frame, now bearing enormous, thick layers of fat
has a once-thin frame, now belarded
carries massive amounts of fat, especially for one so short
has a very short body buttressed by rolls of lard
etc.