Print

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

[CaptainLambcake]

no.. lovechild is on to something.  then you could stud their leather armor with all sorts of fabulous gems.

[Sutremaine]

I'm starting to feel ashamed for associating with you people.

We're indirectly weaponising homosexuality. It's the Bay12 way.

[Neonivek]

Why would adding homosexuality be a political statement in and of itself?

because stupid people.

Then why is dwarf fortress' apparent gender equality not seen as a political statement? Are people less stupid about that subject? I think not.

Because stupid people.

I don't know why people are so against political statements.

[GreatWyrmGold]

And I don't know why the mere presence of homosexuality is a political statement.

[10ebbor10]

And I don't know why the mere presence of homosexuality is a political statement.

It's a political statement to those who think it doesn't exist, I suppose.

[Rowanas]

Ummm. Whether you're for it or against it, I don't think anyone believes they don't exist (Unless your name is Ahmadinejad)

[Aerie]

Mechanically, this could be easily done by allowing members of the male cast to marry the male caste, and females to marry the females, and so forth. Could possibly implement an ethics token in the entity file, allowing some civs (dwarves, elves) to openly tolerate homosexuality, while others (humans, goblins) would shun it and some (kobolds, subterranean) wouldn't even understand the concept. It's an incredibly simple addition that takes only a couple lines of raws-editing and anyone could do it by themselves unless they were pants-on-head-retarded.

Also, please stop this horrible tardgument. There's really not a single reason why it couldn't be implemented barring time.

[Naryar]

Oh look, a flamebait thread.

I don't think adding homosexuality would bring much to the game, honestly.

I'm all for it. Fewer babies this way.

Now that is a damn good point...

[Loud Whispers]

I don't think adding homosexuality would bring much to the game, honestly.

Adding more types of relationships, why not? Seems like something that shouldn't really be an issue. Or at least one that's so apparently so controversial.

[DrPoo]

Just a bit more depth i guess. Some civilisations could have it more tolerable than others. You could set your own policies on such in your own fortress and face either controversy or praising from your mountainhomes.

Its interesting with levels of depth that might not add much to the game other than depth. I always liked studying the resulting soceity from my fortresses, even doing some picture psychology by having UristMcAverage grab a pick and engrave a few walls. Also it would be really cool to have to manage things such as workers morale, make sure the homosexuals(or hetero's, if the homosexuals balance out, entirely possible) arent getting bullied or discriminated. Of course there would come some asshole noble and ban homosexuality based on the fack that the giant cheese of striking, their object of worship prohibiths that. But that is what unfortunate accidents are for!

As a proud member of the LGBT community i approve of this feature.

[Loud Whispers]

Allow me to divulge in more detail my view; this is such a small issue (or rather should be) yet it is something that should already be in the game. As it stands relationships are nigh on 2 dimensional and have barely any worth in how historical figures interact with each other; they act on the whims of numbers and have little discernible motives for their actions, with rare exceptions.

To those who find it somehow abhorrent or cannot imagine a fantasy world simulator set in a bronze/iron age world, in Pagan Rome heterosexuality was not the social norm, and throughout ancient literature we see homosexual relationships being driving forces for narratives that present more than rescuing the damsel in distress, like the stories of the Egyptian Gods Set and Horus, The Greek heroes Achilles and Patroclus of the Trojan War, Ganymede and the Greek God Zeus also in the Iliad, Emperor Hadrian and Antinous, Sappho and her poetry.
The list, it goes on. A person's sexual identity being used to label them is a very recent thing spurned on by the advent of Abrahamic religion and the Western world, much like Creationism appearing around the advent of the theory of Evolution.

[Naryar]

I'm not against adding homosexuality to the game, I just think there are far more important things to be added.

Game-wise, it basically just adds the difference between a plot and another. It's all quite a similar story : "you killed my friend/husband/wife/gay lover/son/father/friend, prepare to die !"

and maybe a minor source of happy thoughs to gay dwarves when they spend time with each other.

I'm totally OK with adding it while the game is nearing complexion. I mean, yes, "omg ! Hector you bastard, you killed my loved one ! let's go kill Trojans instead of angsting in my tent !" makes for a very good story, but  I'd rather have Toady focus first on more general things, like the army arc and other core goals.

[Scoops Novel]

We're not saying immediately, we're saying once relationships matter. Also, Aerie, don't try to convince someone to stop being biased by labeling them with more hate speech. Calling this a "tardargument" will make you no friends, and this isn't 4chan.

[Loud Whispers]

I'm not against adding homosexuality to the game, I just think there are far more important things to be added.

Game-wise, it basically just adds the difference between a plot and another. It's all quite a similar story : "you killed my friend/husband/wife/gay lover/son/father/friend, prepare to die !"'

Horus is the son of a mummy King of the afterlife and the Goddess of the outcasts and Set and Horus's relationship is one of the other trying to prove they are the dominant to gain control of a nation.
Achilles, literally invincible is only ever seen vulnerable when Patroclus is slain, and it becomes his sole driving motivation towards the end to staying in the conflicts of the Trojan war.
Ganymede is offered immortality and eternal youth to be the cup bearer of the Gods. Hera is not amused.
Hadrian forms a city and a religion around Antinous after his death to possibly rule in control over the Greeks.
Sappho wrote poetry.
Sparta.

We've just covered comedy, tragedy, society and story with the addition of one thing.
[/end rant]

I'd rather have Toady focus first on more general things, like the army arc and other core goals.

I don't see anyone claiming any one of their suggestions should hold priority over another, nor do I see it in this thread. Best leave it out of any argument unless it is specifically brought up.

[Hyndis]

One thing that I think should always be considered is how does a suggestion improve gameplay?

What benefit is there for gameplay to add other gender pairings or even groupings? How does this improve gameplay? Just suggesting something isn't enough. The pro's and con's of gameplay should also be considered when suggesting something new.


I could perhaps see something in the civ ethics for things such as homosexual pairings, polygamy, or polyandry. Maybe some sort of goblin civilization, with the goblin king having a harem of wives, so a single male could have a vast number of children due to having multiple wives?

Or maybe some sort of free-love situation where a creature can marry any number of creatures of any gender. Hippie elves might do that.

Or even something as simple as being able to marry again, should a spouse end up dead. Currently you can have very long lived creatures who remain single for hundreds of years, because their spouse was killed by a groundhog early on. After hundreds of years they never remarried, and never had any additional children? Seems like a bit of an oversight for an immortal creature, like a goblin or elf.