Print

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

[WordsandChaos]

Now you’ve implemented procedural instruments, with their various parts, and mentioned possibly recipes and games in the future, it’s probable we’ll want to weaponise the procedural mechanic. Such is our psychotic bent. I think you’ve mused about the potential for multi-part weapons, with different pieces and materials, etc at some point in the future. Apologies if I’m just making that up. I was doing some mild research the other day on cultural differences between weapons and armour, so this is how I ended up here:

What are your thoughts on wholesale procedurally generating weapons and armour by culture? As an example, in one world your typical Dwarven civilisation’s armoury would have the equivalent of a cup-hilted Gladius, with double edged, straight, short wide blade, and they’d be more prone to wearing crested round top caps. In another they’d be forging cross-guarded single edged elongated kukri-style curved blades and their head -gear would be flat-topped crusader style full helms.

[Random_Dragon]

So long as we don't use the instrument naming scheme for them. I don't want to find out the hard way that a gnolbis or whatever turns out to be some sort of blender-halberd with bayonet and a guthook on the other end. :V

[WordsandChaos]

So long as we don't use the instrument naming scheme for them. I don't want to find out the hard way that a gnolbis or whatever turns out to be some sort of blender-halberd with bayonet and a guthook on the other end. :V

Yeah, I 'd assume naming-convention wise you wouldn't really need to go instrument route, due to the broad categories that weapons fall into, while instruments are a lot more niche despite their general broader categorisations, eg: you wouldn't necessarily call a Carillon a keyboard. It's a whole lot more complicated than that - but Dwarf Fortress can generate it (literally how I know the Carillon exists). Whereas, for the most part, an axe is an axe. Regardless of variance, it's function is roughly the same. I mean, all the multitudinous varieties of polearm in the world are still pretty much just polearms. I guess you could still put a Dwarven name on it in the description.

[Dirst]

I would much rather the weapons be of stock types with some flavor text, to prevent indecipherable names and game balance issues.  For example, maybe the gnolbis long sword has a shorter and heavier blade than other long swords (in essence a broad sword), while the tynbir mace has a hexagonal head and a textured grip.

Armor should use whatever system eventually emerges for clothing fashions.

[Button]

Can you give some insight into what circumstances cause non-sapient creatures to become historical figures in fortress mode?

[NW_Kohaku]

So long as we don't use the instrument naming scheme for them. I don't want to find out the hard way that a gnolbis or whatever turns out to be some sort of blender-halberd with bayonet and a guthook on the other end. :V

Yeah, I 'd assume naming-convention wise you wouldn't really need to go instrument route, due to the broad categories that weapons fall into, while instruments are a lot more niche despite their general broader categorisations, eg: you wouldn't necessarily call a Carillon a keyboard. It's a whole lot more complicated than that - but Dwarf Fortress can generate it (literally how I know the Carillon exists). Whereas, for the most part, an axe is an axe. Regardless of variance, it's function is roughly the same. I mean, all the multitudinous varieties of polearm in the world are still pretty much just polearms. I guess you could still put a Dwarven name on it in the description.

It would honestly make more sense if the game was more capable of morphing existing words.  (Here's hoping for a Language arc sometime soon...)

For example, in real life, you have the danish axe, which was famously used by the Danes. Or, you have the Bec de Corbin, which is in French (crow's beak) because it's a French weapon.

You could have a dwarven Toltotthocit, or raven spike, as your preferred close-range defense weapon against ravages of undead ravens.

[Random_Dragon]

This again falls under my "hell no" list. Same reason I'm against deadly beasts use in-game languages as their names. Instruments sure, but not having ANY idea what the fuck you're looking at is not a bright idea when it's something that will get you killed. :V

[NW_Kohaku]

Hopefully, with some advances of Language Arc, you can have the option to toggle in-game languages. (Preferably, "native tongue", "dwarven tongue only", and "English".)

If it were called a "ravenspike", in the same way that dwarves are surnamed "Bonebraided", it wouldn't be confusing for most, but those who really wanted to wallow in the language could do so.

[Untrustedlife]

I imagine it will be quite a long time until he gets to the real crazy language things.

[Random_Dragon]

Ravenspike at least implies things about it, more useful to players than using the in-game language. o3o

[NW_Kohaku]

I imagine it will be quite a long time until he gets to the real crazy language things.

Why? With the current myth stuff making procedural language more important than ever, I would hope that Toady get around to Language Arc sooner rather than later.

It will hopefully mean the end of (or at least, evolution of) those fill-in-the-blank conversations where every statement has the exact same sentence structure and only the nouns changing.

[Inarius]

Can you give some insight into what circumstances cause non-sapient creatures to become historical figures in fortress mode?

Well, generally it's when they kill someone (a sapient someone), isn't it ?

About language, I think that it will part of a "Culture" arc, because there are a LOT of things to do (and very interesting one) to differenciate cultures. Look at what Ultima Ratio Regum has tried to do on this part.

 But about dialogue and conversation I wondered something.

Some RPG have very advanced (of course, scripted) talks between you and your PNJ companions (such as, for example most Obsidian games), while others have very minimal or no "psychological" interaction. How do you envision interaction between you and your companion(s) ? Are you happy with the current state of this part of the game, do you plan in a middle/long term to change it, and if yes, how (=to what) ?

[Dirst]

We've already come a long way from "It was inevitable"

Of course, it was inevitable that we would.

[NW_Kohaku]

Well, generally it's when they kill someone (a sapient someone), isn't it ?

That's a fairly easy one to pull off, but there is also being a child of a historical figure, being some sort of explorer or adventurer, being a leader of any kind, or making some sort of notable object whether it is an artifact or just some masterwork crafts and becoming a legendary crafter.

About language, I think that it will part of a "Culture" arc, because there are a LOT of things to do (and very interesting one) to differenciate cultures. Look at what Ultima Ratio Regum has tried to do on this part.

 But about dialogue and conversation I wondered something.

Some RPG have very advanced (of course, scripted) talks between you and your PNJ companions (such as, for example most Obsidian games), while others have very minimal or no "psychological" interaction. How do you envision interaction between you and your companion(s) ? Are you happy with the current state of this part of the game, do you plan in a middle/long term to change it, and if yes, how (=to what) ?

Toady wants to allow marriage and romance at some point, and if you can have romance with anyone, why not your followers?

In any event, as long as there's a Language Arc in the future, I can't imagine there isn't further rewrites of dialogue that will go with it.

[Button]

Can you give some insight into what circumstances cause non-sapient creatures to become historical figures in fortress mode?

Well, generally it's when they kill someone (a sapient someone), isn't it ?

Well, generally it's when they kill someone (a sapient someone), isn't it ?

That's a fairly easy one to pull off, but there is also being a child of a historical figure, being some sort of explorer or adventurer, being a leader of any kind, or making some sort of notable object whether it is an artifact or just some masterwork crafts and becoming a legendary crafter.

There are new ones. I had a weasel become a historical figure after doing nothing except chill in a cage and get re-trained every time he reverted to wild. Eventually he died of old age. When I checked legends later, he was a historical figure.

We're also seeing some strange behavior in the Accelerated Modest Mod which suggests that a lot more critters are historical figures than would have been in 40.x.