Print

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

[Daniel the Finlander]

Will there be roadside inns outside of towns in the next update? I don't recall you mentioning in the devblog, just in the development notes.

In the case the new update is released before the end of this month and the next FotF reply, this question is pointless.

[Cruxador]

Are petitions purely a player decision, or do other members of your civ have opinions? In other words, can unpopular decisions in immigration policy result in poor public happiness and unrest?

[Shonai_Dweller]

The end of Dwarven Childcare is in sight. All you have to do now is switch to Adventurer, send a talented speaker to your fortress and argue with each of the children until they 'don't feel anything any more'. Run your fortress secure in the knowledge that the next generation won't freak out whenever a goblin loses a tooth or a leg in the entranceway.

Some will always prefer spikes, pits and dogs of course...

- I assume that's possible anyhow, is feeling horror at goblin corpses a 'value'?

[Lielac]

(or if you want, put forth an argument you don't agree with just to start trouble)

-evil cackling- Playing devil's advocate is now a possibility! Can we shout an argument for everybody in earshot to hear to start trouble faster, or do we have to piss off everybody individually?

[Silverybearded]

What, exactly, does the player do when he argues with someone? Do I get a prompt saying "Argue [ETHICS:TORTURE_FOR_FUN:PUNISH_CAPITAL], because it degrades the fabric of society", or something like that?

[Dirst]

What, exactly, does the player do when he argues with someone? Do I get a prompt saying "Argue [ETHICS:TORTURE_FOR_FUN:PUNISH_CAPITAL], because it degrades the fabric of society", or something like that?

Well, since that line of argument is torturing for fun, it really wouldn't be in your interest to argue for capital punishment, now would it?

[Silverybearded]

What, exactly, does the player do when he argues with someone? Do I get a prompt saying "Argue [ETHICS:TORTURE_FOR_FUN:PUNISH_CAPITAL], because it degrades the fabric of society", or something like that?

Well, since that line of argument is torturing for fun, it really wouldn't be in your interest to argue for capital punishment, now would it?

Please. The entire premise of DF is torturing for fun. Thus, this line of reasoning could be a game-breaker.

[Putnam]

no

[Knight Otu]

- I assume that's possible anyhow, is feeling horror at goblin corpses a 'value'?

No, it's an emotional response to seeing a goblin corpse.

What, exactly, does the player do when he argues with someone? Do I get a prompt saying "Argue [ETHICS:TORTURE_FOR_FUN:PUNISH_CAPITAL], because it degrades the fabric of society", or something like that?

Most likely, you'll see a string similar to the ones displayed for values in the dwarf descriptions (something like "I believe that family is one of the most important things in life." or "Anyone with half a brain should find the idea of family loathsome.") or that dwarves already say to illustrate their values ("There's nothing like a good friend." as with Toady's example on Twitter a few days ago.) Also note that ethics aren't values, and I believe Toady has only mentioned arguing about values.

[Chaoseed]

(or if you want, put forth an argument you don't agree with just to start trouble)

-evil cackling- Playing devil's advocate is now a possibility!

"Hello, I'd like to start an argument..."

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Putnam]

no you don't

[vjmdhzgr]

Let's say I've modded the game to include 20ish possible civilizations and they don't all show up in worldgen.  Would it be possible for the races that weren't generated as civilizations to show up as visitors?  Also, if a civilization goes extinct during history, can people from it still appear as visitors later? 

The first part of that question is no unless you do some weird modding I'll explain in a moment which from what has been said will probably work. The second question would definitely be yes, if the people still exist. Most of the time neither civilizations or the creatures making those civilizations never really go extinct. There's often a king hiding around in a cave somewhere, or maybe a few creatures not from the initial civilization still populating it somehow. Or in the case of the creatures, there'd likely be some outcasts hiding in the wilds, or some that had been abducted by goblins, or just living in another civilization in some form. It will be very unlikely that they'll visit since there'd be very few of them, but maybe if you make a tavern right next to the cave of the old king of the last dwarf civilization, he might come visit.

So while the answer first question in the most basic sense is no, I'm pretty sure you could do some odd things to get it to work. Basically you'd need a way for the creatures from the civilization that never generated to exist without the civilization. In vanilla I think all creatures that have entities only show up from those entities and are never in the wild or something. However, with the next update there'll be creatures like crundles, and aboveground animal people which can join civilizations despite never having had one themselves. So you could add in a    [BIOME:SUBTERRANEAN_WATER] [UNDERGROUND_DEPTH:1:2] to dwarves and then if their civilization never showed up a few wild dwarves might still join a civilization and you'd get them as guests potentially. You might need them to be a seperate [CREATURE:WILD_DWARF] though, I don't know if creatures can both be in a civilization and in the wild, it might work, but that could be a backup plan. Of course this would result in the creature being found in the wild and uncivilized, and the visitors you get would only have values and knowledge or whatever from the civilization they joined rather than their own, but it is a way it could probably be done.

[cochramd]

Will future editions have certain metalworking tasks involve casting, and possibly not involve an anvil at all? I'm no expert on the production of metal statues, but cursory research indicates that it involves only casting and polishing, not banging on it with a hammer. Furthermore, if casting is implemented, will mold-making be a different skill and/or labor than casting? How will the skills interact in terms of determining the quality of the output? I can see it working like the clothing industry: the master model has a quality level, and turning that master model into a mold adds another quality level. The mold is then used to cast the final product, which might add another quality level. This would make cast items exceptionally valuable due to their multiple quality levels. Note also that casting would probably need to be simplified to 2 time period appropriate options:

• The lost wax method: a master model would be created from wax, then destroyed in order to create the mold, which itself would be destroyed to create the casting.
• Sand casting: a master model would be made of some sturdy material such as rock or metal, then used to create molds. This does not destroy the master model, though the casting would still destroy the mold. This process has the advantage of not needing to create a new master model, but also the disadvantage that some complex shapes are hard or impossible to cast with this method; this would probably be best represented in the game by this method being unable to create some or all statues and figurines.

Both methods require sand and water, or alternately clay, as well as plaster or dedicated mold-boxes made of a wood, stone or metal.

[Button]

Does this number tag indicate the exact number of units to be used per reaction, the max number of units to be used per reaction, the max number of products per reaction, or the exact number of products per reaction?

How will this new tag interact with multiple-reagent reactions?

It's the max number of times it generates a batch of products per reaction (so it is a reaction tag, not a product or reagent tag).  Reagents are used up until the max is reached -- and this just applies to those kinds of reagents which led to multiple products to begin with (bone stacks, etc.).  Many reactions involve bringing a simple non-stacked/non-divisible item over as at least one of the reagents, and those wouldn't be affected, since only one batch is possible.

Well, what I really want to know is how it'll interact with reactions which take more than one stacking item. This doesn't come up much in vanilla obviously, but let's say I make a mixed-fruit brewing reaction that requires two fruit and produces 10 fruit punch. I want to limit the size of the product to 20, to keep it in line with other brewing reactions in terms of how fast you can crank it out. So I use [MAXREACTIONS:2] or whatever the tag is.

Now here's the tricky bit: let's say the brewer picked up a 5-stack of strawberries and a 1-stack of pomegranates (in that order). In the current system, brewing these together would form a 30-stack of fruit punch - even though the reagents are defined in identical quantities, they function as absolute minimums, and proportions are ignored.

In the new version with [MAXREACTIONS:2], what happens? Do we get a 10-stack of fruit punch and 4 leftover strawberries; a 20-stack of fruit punch and 2 leftover strawberries; or a 20-stack of fruit punch, 1 leftover strawberry and 1 leftover pomegranate (because the strawberries were picked up first, so the game pulls from the strawberry pile until it hits the reaction cap)?

[Dirst]

Ahh, but the strawberries that's... that's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with... geometric logic... that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox DID exist, and I'd have produced that key if they hadn't of pulled the Caine out of action. I, I, I know now they were only trying to protect some fellow officers...