Print

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

[RailroadRider]

As in, would it be possible to start with two dwarfs (Male+female) and have them get married, have kids, let those kids have kids, so that it is all one big family?

[Gnomeknows]

From what I know you can't start with less than 7, but you could wait until 2 dorfs shack up, then kill off the rest.  You'd have to set max population, and deal with the first 2 hard-coded migrant waves. 

[ImagoDeo]

From what I know you can't start with less than 7, but you could wait until 2 dorfs shack up, then kill off the rest.  You'd have to set max population, and deal with the first 2 hard-coded migrant waves.

Yeah. Basically this.

It would be quite a challenge, and it would take a really long time to build an entire fort that way. If you can, start the fort on a world with an extinct dwarven civilization so that you don't get any migrant waves past the first two. That restricts the need for slabbing the migrants that you allow to die.

The first two dwarves will be your only working dwarves for the first thirteen years or so. In that time, they would be quite easily capable of constructing a relatively extensive fort, and when their children start to mature you'll see exponential growth. Within thirty years, you should have two generations comprising around fourteen working dwarves, and the original couple's grandchildren. Fifty years and you'd have four full generations working.

[Button]

I'm pretty sure dwarves can't marry their siblings... you'd have to import spouses for the second generation.

[sal880612m]

DFHack command "fix/population-cap force" will let you forego the two hard coded immigration waves provided your pop-cap is already met. So it is entirely possible to start a fort with only your original seven. This will give you potentially up to three initial couples and I think someone around here did some testing and discovered that while dwarves won't marry their siblings or parents, their cousins, aunts and uncles were fair game.

[slothen]

a single family, as in from one couple, probably won't work.

I would suggest reducing the age at which dwarves reach adulthood from 12 down to maybe 6.  It would help a lot.

[wierd]

They can marry "in family" at second cousin level, but not before.

With some VERY carefully controlled eugenics, you might be able to have say, 3 or 4 starting families, cross pollinate them to get cousins, then prune it back aggressively.

As long as you can keep a sufficient number of dwarves at second cousin degree of separation after that, you can keep the fortress running.

[dennislp3]

I find this kind of surprising...I wonder if their are plans to ever have genetic disorders...which would be a system that would easily open up closer marriages with potential side effects

[Crinkles]

They can marry "in family" at second cousin level, but not before.

With some VERY carefully controlled eugenics, you might be able to have say, 3 or 4 starting families, cross pollinate them to get cousins, then prune it back aggressively.

As long as you can keep a sufficient number of dwarves at second cousin degree of separation after that, you can keep the fortress running.

I recall someone recently demonstrating that first cousins will marry and procreate. That means a minimum starting population is three--a male and a female to initially marry and to procreate, and one "stranger" to procreate with one of the offspring. The second generation will be able to procreate with the first generation, and you have a self-sustaining population. (With the high maximum age for dwarves, one wonders if intergenerational marriage would sensibly be a cultural issue.)

[sal880612m]

^Dwarfs are limited in partners to within ten years of each other I think and since embark dwarfs tend to be between 50 and 90 you would need at least four dwarfs to be viable if cousins could marry. Aunts and uncles I think were allowed but they had to respect the age gap as well but given how dwarven population growth and child birth work it is highly likely to get aunts and uncles in their age group.

I must have seen the same post.

[krenshala]

^Dwarfs are limited in partners to within ten years of each other I think and since embark dwarfs tend to be between 50 and 90 you would need at least four dwarfs to be viable if cousins could marry. Aunts and uncles I think were allowed but they had to respect the age gap as well but given how dwarven population growth and child birth work it is highly likely to get aunts and uncles in their age group.

I must have seen the same post.

Considering one couple in my current fortress are among the first of their kind (its the year 88) and they just had a baby, and some of their adult grand-children are at the fortress and married, it is entirely possible for marriage back into the family this way.

[Larix]

I got first cousins (sharing the same four grandparents) to marry and procreate. The display of actual relationship among extended family is wonky - parents/children and siblings automatically constitute friend-like relations (talked with father/mother/a child/a sibling lately etc.), while extended family is _listed_ above friends/lovers but doesn't seem to be considered a meaningful relationship. There are no associated conversation thoughts for cousins/grandparents etc., instead they go through the standard acquaintance-friend-(optionally lover) sequence, with the relevant thoughts and going all the way to marriage if possible.

What muddies the waters is that unless such relatives are married, the relationship screen will only display the irrelevant extended-family relation, not the actually important friendship/acquaintance/romance  (although lovers can be identified from the thoughts screen). It's quite telling when children have "made a friend lately" and "talked with a friend" thoughts, but not a single "friend" in their relatives list.

[krenshala]

If two dwarves are romantically involved (as listed on the thoughts screen) then their sig.other will show up on the relationship screen as "Lover".

[Larix]

Not when they're also extended family. I currently have two romantically involved dwarfs, and they list each other as "cousin", not "lover".

Extended family status really obscures the relevant friend/lover relations, probably because it's rated higher in the relationship ranking. Spouses rank at the very top, so that beats "cousin" and gets displayed. I'm actually checking this while i type, this isn't speculation or anecdotal memory.

"Lover" is ranked behind all familial relations and just before "Deity".

[Blastbeard]

A swamp embark where everyone's inbred and the fort's only export is banjos? Why has nobody thought of this before?