Print

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

[dakenho]

Dwarf Fortress has a fairly simple 1-1 ratio on a great deal of things but many people seem to feel the system does not work in specific areas, the big one being leather.    The solution to this maybe to base leather goods (and animal skin/leather) on the weight of the animal/leather.   In this way a quiver may require 1lb of leather and maybe that fur vest 3-4lbs of leather.   In this way a bear that may give you 15lb of leather will give you more then a dog or a cat and it would level things out considerably.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Making animals give different amounts of skin and, therefore, leather is planned; at that point, it will presumably be based on having animals "drop" more leather.

Until then, you can make skin be globs that aren't cleaned and make tanning require skin globs. Warning: Generates lots more leather.

[Starver]

Where I thought this thread was going to go is something that I 'do', even though it doesn't matter... When I aim to pander to my CDO by kitting out my military in identical uniforms, I tend to go for rhinoceros Leather rather than the macaque leather, given a simple choice between the two[1] in material choices.  Bigger, heavier animals (or thicker-skinned ones, which probably needs animal-RAWs definition, if not already there, given I'd trust small hippos would have thicker hides than the largest giraffes) give more resilient (heavier, per given area) leathers from their hides.

But, as GWG has indicated, I believe there's overhauls planned anyway (whether or not including the full fruition of my above excellent(!) suggestion), so "Watch This Space"?


[1] In reality, it's often a "simple choice between dozens and dozens of different leather types", when it comes to influencing imports.  (And often also when it comes to managing my own ever-expanding menagerie.)  Still, I'd plump for rhino or elephant over cat, even if I couldn't currently self-farm my own major herbivores and was still trade-dependent for such materials.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Having thicker hide work better than thinner hide makes sense. It's probably planned already, but it makes sense.

[Bytyan]

Thiner hide should more luxurious, while not being worth any extra. Just give a better thought. Also, whose to say that small fantasy creature might not have tough hides?

[Hyndis]

Some hides already have special properties. Dragonhide is fire proof, IIRC. All other leather will readily burn.

However so far as I can tell all leather items have the same protective value, which seems a bit silly. A piece of armor made from cow leather and a piece of armor made from dragonhide should be vastly different in terms of protective value.

Dragonhide should be better than steel. Lighter than steel, yet it should be more protective than steel when made into armor. Dragonhide or dragonscale armor is pretty much the pinnacle of armor in any fantasy setting. If skin/leather had different strengths then that would be quite interesting. A creature with a stronger hide would produce better armor.

[10ebbor10]

Some hides already have special properties. Dragonhide is fire proof, IIRC. All other leather will readily burn.

However so far as I can tell all leather items have the same protective value, which seems a bit silly. A piece of armor made from cow leather and a piece of armor made from dragonhide should be vastly different in terms of protective value.

Dragonhide should be better than steel. Lighter than steel, yet it should be more protective than steel when made into armor. Dragonhide or dragonscale armor is pretty much the pinnacle of armor in any fantasy setting. If skin/leather had different strengths then that would be quite interesting. A creature with a stronger hide would produce better armor.

Note that the latter implies that any Dragon will have a better than steel hide, turning them into Bronze collosi with firebreath. (Not really, they still have organs)

So, I'd rather won't have that happen, since a dragon needs to stay somewhat defeatable. Instead, I'd put it's protectionability below most metals, but far above normal leather, and make up for it with being lightweight, (dragon)fireproof, and maybe inherently magical. Also, by supply and demand, very valuable.

[Hyndis]

I think dragons do need a significant buff. In game a dragon can be easily slain by a ranged weapons. Crossbow bolts cause pain, and enough pain will knock the dragon out. An unconscious dragon is a dead dragon. Even wooden bolts can cause enough pain to knock a dragon out, then you just need one dwarf with an axe to finish the dragon off. Dragons also bleed, and so can be easily slain by death of a thousand cuts.

I'd much prefer a dragon that is a serious threat. A dragon should be fearsome, rather than just a case of letting the recruit marksdwarves handle it.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Some hides already have special properties. Dragonhide is fire proof, IIRC. All other leather will readily burn.
However so far as I can tell all leather items have the same protective value, which seems a bit silly. A piece of armor made from cow leather and a piece of armor made from dragonhide should be vastly different in terms of protective value.

Which is exactly the problem. Pretty much only fireproof creatures have differing leather. Cat leather shouldn't protect as much as cow leather shouldn't protect as much as hippo hide shouldn't protect as much as dragonhide. Although about that last one...

Dragonhide should be better than steel. Lighter than steel, yet it should be more protective than steel when made into armor. Dragonhide or dragonscale armor is pretty much the pinnacle of armor in any fantasy setting. If skin/leather had different strengths then that would be quite interesting. A creature with a stronger hide would produce better armor.

...in D&D (one of the archetypal fantasy games, the first RPG, inspiration for much of fantasy, etc etc), dragonhide isn't any better than armor, just lighter and druid-friendly. And you could potentially save that red dragonhide armor when the gold dragon incinerated you.
Oh, and you can't make dragonhide anything yet.

Thiner hide should more luxurious, while not being worth any extra. Just give a better thought. Also, whose to say that small fantasy creature might not have tough hides?

Who's to say indeed? But cats aren't fantasy creatures...nor are cows...or dogs...or rabbits...

I think dragons do need a significant buff. In game a dragon can be easily slain by a ranged weapons. Crossbow bolts cause pain, and enough pain will knock the dragon out. An unconscious dragon is a dead dragon. Even wooden bolts can cause enough pain to knock a dragon out, then you just need one dwarf with an axe to finish the dragon off. Dragons also bleed, and so can be easily slain by death of a thousand cuts.
I'd much prefer a dragon that is a serious threat. A dragon should be fearsome, rather than just a case of letting the recruit marksdwarves handle it.

Give them magic greater than a mere wizard's, hide like armor, and the ability to rain their deadly blows on all around them, and intelligence past that of the smartest men (plus perhaps longer range with their fire), they'll be much scarier...right now they're giant firebreathing aligators.

[Bytyan]

Thiner hide should more luxurious, while not being worth any extra. Just give a better thought. Also, whose to say that small fantasy creature might not have tough hides?

Who's to say indeed? But cats aren't fantasy creatures...nor are cows...or dogs...or rabbits...

Dralthas, perhaps. Or Jabberers. Drunians and wamblers.

[DG]

Some hides already have special properties. Dragonhide is fire proof, IIRC. All other leather will readily burn.

Fire imp leather is apparently fire proof too but I haven't butchered one in a long long time so
I can't confirm.

As for dragons, I agree that their hides probably shouldn't be stronger than steel, but their scales could be. On the dragon itself there may be space between the scales to make it a little bit susceptible to death, but when making dragon scale armour you could fit them more tightly and thus get some pretty snazzy armour. Sounds fairly plausible to me anyway.

[10ebbor10]

Oh, and just a note. The dragon passing out thing is a known issue of the combat system. Go into the area and pit an elephant against 3 [Insert small creature here].  Eventually, the elephant will die. It's just a problem that pain isn't scaled to wound size, but a constant. Dragons would need serious wounds to pass out, not a barrage of LQ archers.

@DG: Makes not much for a creature to evolve that way. Not even by magic.

[DG]

@DG: Makes not much [sense] for a creature to evolve that way. Not even by magic.

With spaces between the crazy-hard scales so that there's some possiblity of killing it with dwarf power? Yeah, pretty much agreed. I don't mind the idea of dragons being largely invincible, of course my tune might change if you asked me after one visited a beloved fort.

(And I do apologize to OP for risking a dreailment.)

[Hyndis]

I just think it would be nice if a dragon were a fearsome foe, rare enough that if a dragon did appear you'd be in serious trouble.

Recall another famous dragon, who defeated two powerful kingdoms. At the same time. By himself. In a single afternoon. Because he was bored. And he did it in his younger years. 

Of course should you down a creature like that you really ought to get more than 1 hide from it. It seems a bit silly to be able to make an entire piece of chest armor from a single cat hide, but also equally silly that you can only make a single hat out of an entire dragon. A dragon corpse, or any other very large creature, should produce a great deal of leather. Small creatures should only be able to produce small amounts of leather.

[Starver]

A note on dragon susceptibility...  You've got to hit them in the voonerables.  Nobody really knows where they are (although maybe those that survived do), but they're a quite specific area on the dragon's body.

The chances of hitting them might well be a million to one.  (But, as everyone knows, million-to-one chances succeed nine times out of ten...)