Thanks to MrWiggles, Alfrodo, Dirst, Shonai_Dweller, Knight Otu, vjmdhzgr, DG, Witty, Putnam and anybody I missed for helping to answer questions!
Would that same sort of "personal" interaction be expanded to stuff like priests and worshippers of a given deity being able to interact with/gain some sort of effect/curse via literally talking to/praying to their relevant god or gods?
Oh, actually, do you have any plans to expand the ask for directions options to include things like a temple, library, or tavern?
It's unclear if the interaction system I described would be an expansion itself of deity stuff or the other way around -- historical figures (like deities) already have a lot of the needed structures in place even if they don't use them. The deities shouldn't generally be less like people than the abstract forces, in any case, since those personality/individual/anthropomorphic characteristics are why they are considered "gods" in the game as it is (non-anthropomorphic concepts of a god would probably be considered a force in our game, structurally, even if the word is used more broadly in real life).
Better direction asking is in the short list of adv mode changes, so it'll come in before various other things, anyway, even if it doesn't have a timeline. We tend to work on several adv mode short list items with each adv mode update -- the next would be the adv mode parts of the artifact release.
Toady, would having unpredictable and dangerous magic be discovered in fortress mode really be a bad thing? Setting up a library, and presumably letting people into it who ponder magical things, would be a player choice. If the fact that things could go horribly horribly wrong was known then it would just be another thing that could be really... !!FUN!!
I realize this could also be rather frustrating in some ways, but from my personal perspective I find the idea of engineering around the problem really entertaining. I would be tickled pink if I got to design a series of "containment protocols"
That said, it's more than slightly distressing that Toady says he's deliberately adding something that he fully expects players will find "unsatisfying" in Fortress Mode because it's nothing more than a "your fort gets destroyed because LOL RANDUM MAGIC!" "feature"
...
That presumes there would be ways to engineer around the problem, and not, as most representations (including the one TOADY JUST GAVE) of the magic system would have it, simply having a text box pop up informing you that your fortress crumbled for no good reason because you were stupid enough to have a library.
I wanted to clear this up, since the thread became unnecessarily alarmist -- in my previous reply, I was not suggesting I want the unsatisfying option. That's why I called it unsatisfying. We used to have the demon end timer, and then we improved it, though I was still unsatisfied with adamantine spires, as I mentioned. And we want to continue improving, not going back to end timers or sticking with spire analogs. I'd rather not have magic in forts than just have it end the game randomly, which is why I said they wouldn't be safe or practical for fort mode and that it consequently wouldn't give those powers to fort mode races.
For fort magic, I think there's some room in between magma-ish "dangerous but predictable" on one hand and random end timers on the other, especially if it involves the player opting in, although I know that's been a huge argument in here about whether that's true.
Toady, how will players be expected to control dwarves with procedural magic, or procedurally created whatevers with magical powers that have dangerous effects?
Will their uses always be automated through usage hints, even if, say, "fading", to use the GDC example can mean that creatures will eventually kill themselves if players have no means of throttling their use outside extreme or indirect methods like forcing dwarves apart from enemies or whatever situation triggers use of magic? Or will there be ways to script conditions under which your charges can use magic or are told to hold their fire?
Likewise, is there going to be automated "needs"-style attempt to discharge negative consequences of magic like "fading" in the same way that a dwarf automatically goes to feed themselves when huger gets too high? Is this going to be some zone like a hospital or tavern, or would it be something you handle through goods production, or some sort of social behavior you need to script through some new interface?
Likewise likewise, magic in the GDC example uses "fuel" items to power magic - is this something you expect to be some sort of extension of the military uniforms to have fortress members equip "magic ammo", even if it means all civilians have to wear military uniforms? (Something of an exploit, but one players use on anyone not a miner or woodcutter, regardless...) Is this, alternately, something that you see occupying a different interface, like a unified magic-instruction interface?
Finally, if we're talking about libraries being places of magic research that blow up your fortress, will that mean there are methods of controlling what research actually takes place? To use the HFS example, one can always not dig, and one can have a good sense of how far you are digging to get a sense of what risks you are taking. Procedural tech trees, meanwhile, cannot so easily physically convey the concept of that danger, and is there even a way to stop such fortress-destroying research without outright shutting the library down or resorting to de facto demanding savescumming from players to prevent arbitrary fortress death?
I'm not sure how the specifics are going to work at this point, as usual.
A usage hint says what a power is for, roughly speaking -- there has always been more that the AI considers, and I don't see costs differently. They don't need to use powers until they die randomly. I don't think it's in the spirit of the game to have the player control exactly how dwarves behave, and it might be more of a personality matter how far they take their own side effects. It might be handy to allow some overall guidelines, especially if it concerns reagents and so on as well (which would presumably be produced or traded for, and hence something you have to moderate use of).
Specific effects from magically-induced states are the same as anything else. If a corrupted dwarf needs to drink more often, they'll drink more often. If they need anti-fading juice, perhaps you should have some around. The typical exposition problems for all random content apply, but we're not out to ruin the game and I'll endeavour to not force you to make a bunch of objects you don't know exist just to play, and if you do need some, you'll be given information about that.
Similarly for fuel items -- we'll need to tell you about them. Yeah, there are legitimate concerns about managing them, somewhere between drink and ammo depending on who uses them and how often. If it's too onerous, that sort of magic can be kept out of fort mode, but I don't think it'll come to that.
I've already addressed the specific library issue above, in terms of the end timer stuff, but overall, I assume people will be a little more eager to direct magic research than they are to direct research on other topics (at least while that research doesn't do anything). I don't have a problem with it telling you when you are going down a dangerous road and giving you a choice. That could end up being through a generated position or through petition. I'd rather not stop dwarves from sneaking off to do forbidden research if they want, but I'd simply stop it in the case of the apocalypse paths, most likely, while still contining to allow dwarves to become necromancers without asking you.
Well when you simplify it that much, it doesn't sound very deep, does it? I think he meant more about divinity being a state of mind rather than some some "I believe it so it's true" 40k ork thing. The sort of stuff that comes up in the (currently growing in popularity) more mystic fantasy which draws heavily on Indian myth for inspiration. Like the works of Kirkbride, which I believe he was referring to, or something like Kill Six Billion Demons. From stuff you've talked about, I know most of your fantasy reading tends to be grounded in a more western paradigm, but have you kept up with other fantasy movements like this? If not, it might interest you to at least read what there is of the K6BD comic, and/or perhaps the roleplaying game. Of course there's a lot more writings to go with that, which is common to the subgenre such as it is, but that's more peripheral.
From India, I read the Ramayana and the Mahabharata (or much shorter novelized versions of them that still amounted to ~2500 pages) in preparation for the myth stuff. With the lists of named, graded, mostly-combat spells obtained from godlike beings, people ascending to godlike status, lots of physical demon-type creatures being fought by heroes in battles of various sizes, and more, those myths are more aligned with older pnp and computer RPGs than the traditional Greek/Christian/etc. stories are (I'm not sure where the inspirations go through those and 20th century novelists and then through DND to computer games and all that, and how much is a coincidence -- I assume this is a discussion had many times). Of course, the Indian myths are also very distinct, which is where we tried to take inspiration for the myth generator (not all of that has made it in yet, though some has). I'm not familiar with more recent fantasy takes on it.
So, with some of the myths stating that there's like, a tower or a road to the heavens, does this mean that we will eventually be able to travel to them as physical places and kill the gods? Because some of the gods tend to be jerks, and they need to be taken down a notch.
If we can kill gods, what will that do to the world? Will creatures cursed by the gods that are killed suddenly be cured by their deaths?
There are separate issues. Traveling to planes is hoped for, but difficult. We'll get there eventually -- the current plan is that it overlaps significantly with dwarf-mode army stuff since the necessary changes for viewing distant sites are the same. Killing gods depends on whatever gods end up being and doing as we give them more featuers. If they physically manifest earlier, perhaps they'll be killable before planar travel, if killability is part of their deal. I have no idea what killability would imply. Nothing at first, then more as things get added -- it all has to be defined explicitly somewhere, at least in broad strokes, even if it's generated.
The myth generator demo showed you forcing the myths to include a race and a celestial object, and the myth generator seems to need to create the gift of death to justify nonimmortal races.
Are there any plans to be able to force it to include a particular magic as well? For instance, you write up a RAW for shooting fireballs and include it in the list of things. Game reads the tags on it, and the myth generator includes something like with 'humans are spawned from the sun, so they can shoot fireballs', or 'celestial sparks hover above the ground, letting you carve fireball-shooting runestones'
I haven't thought specifically about modded fixed interaction entries that aren't just part of the creature entry, though the game supports stuff like the ones in the interaction examples folder (which are just copied from the current generated raws), so they'll need to be included somehow, since the current deity/secret etc. system will all be reworked. It's anybody's guess right now what the inclusion tags will be (I don't remember how it works now for player-made interactions, if they just go in the random pool but sometimes don't come up) and whether forcing will be initially possible.
Toady, you mentioned in the last FOTF reply that you are planning an "artifact" release before the first myth release - which will include among other things more thieving. Do you intend to use that opportunity to give kobold sites the same overhaul that the other civ sites have gotten?
Yeah, that's in the short list for the artifact release, due to the increased importance of recovering artifacts from kobold sites.
Will conquered sites ever be transformed into other site types? Like, say, the humans conquer the goblins. They pull down the dark fortress, fill the underworld gate with rubble, build a keep, incorporate some of the towers into a wall, and fill the trenches with dirt. The dark fortress is now a town, with maybe a few signs of its former status. Sort of like how goblins build towers and trenches in sites they conquer right now.
The idea was to do more and more of that, but it's just sitting right now... I don't really like having different site types at all, though there have to be icons/names/etc. in some way, and those would have to change more or less discretely. I'm not sure when we'll get to additional changes along those lines.
Do Toady and ThreeToe get any inspiration from Tv-series / Movies and popular books that are currently in progress? Game of thrones for an example? If that's the case do you have any examples of features that have been implemented or might be planned?
Not so much these days, since we're so backlogged already. We've been keeping up on Game of Thrones, but I don't think it has been having much of an impact on the notes. I don't know what else is currently in progress like that which is also DF-adjacent.
Toady have you ever read discworld?
I think I read one of the books many years ago. Something Egyptish.
So you just added those various giant creatures, however according to the wiki there are no giant ants yet, do you plan to eventually add giant ants and associated colonies? I have a feeling they would be very fun to delve into in adventurer mode and even in fort mode.
Could giant insects build colonies? Like, giant beehives and ant colonies that you can find in Adventure Mode and Fortress Mode.
The colony was the issue. We wanted to do it properly, which puts it farther down the line.
With potential competition from the deep-dwarves, will the "animalmen-civilisation" see any kind of improvement upon their society structure? Rather than being primitive fodder for fortress mode smashing & adventure mode mercenaries, which all in all is a waste of their civilization generation entity file if they are going to be reduced to a turkey hunt.
If the 'layer linked' subterreanean races recieve any meaningful improvements or changes in the future, would this in turn be reflected upon 'native' pre-civilisation and pre-elven civ emigration races?
Given that if the aboveground animalmen tribes are not layer linked and therefore 'invisible', would possibly in future versions their settlements more visible from the embark screen and have a wider reach as a set number of variable small entities on the map if they were implemented more fully?
Not all civilizations have to be equally powerful, though they can afford to be more interesting. It's unclear quite how close the layer and non-layer animal people will be related in the end. We've continued to not work on either animal people or nomadic civilizations. The post-myth/magic law/status/property/customs release is probably the next chance for a shot at it, but it isn't guaranteed there either.
Why does carving a haft from a branch use carpentry instead of woodcrafting? And is there a reason you can take a masterfully-knapped sharp rock and never get quality out of a stone axe, because the reaction uses no skill?
And why are stone axes explictly a separate tool instead of a weapon? Hell, it'd make perfect sense if you were adding generic woodcutting axes for flavor, but you didn't add the token for making them out of metal, and didn't add it to any entities.
Why are splints craftable? You can't use them in adventure mode yet.
Because it looked like a table leg and not a figurine. Not that the skills make any sense overall. I don't know the situation with skill vs quality.
We were thinking of experimenting with item components with the stone axe, but it didn't end up happening, and things were going to migrate over to the tool framework.
There are lots of things that aren't usable in adventure mode.
I'm really glad you are finally taking stabs at making the 64 bits version. What forced you to take this step? There was something specific or simply to allow us have bigger games? What would be the main (practical)differences between the 32 and 64 versions for us players?
It wasn't a forced step. It's mostly a memory thing. People started bumping up against the limit more often a while ago though, and it'll just get worse if we don't update. Linux people tell me the situation is also an annoyance over there, since they don't always have 32 bit support without doing some work.
Toady, do you intend for plants with the same name as RL plants to share as many properties with the RL plants as possible?
If that's vague/confusing, here's a more concrete question: Is the bayberry tree supposed to act like real-life bayberry trees do, as much as possible?
Is DF bayberry supposed to be a specific species, or a blending of different IRL species? The linked thread points out that they grow fruit, but are in climates that non-edible species are found in.
I don't have an exact policy for this. If there's only one plant/creature entry, it'll probably end up being a blend of existing species, but sometimes I like to pick one or the other based on the information I've found (or lack of information). Of course, I'd like to fix outright errors with them as well.
In the preview for the myth generator you showed that all creation originated from a single primordial entity (Eternal mist, etc), will there be cases where multiple entities (eg Muspell + Niflheim) behave as the universe's progenitor?
Will there be deities with unknown / foreign origins to the main dynasty (eg Vanir to the Aesir)?
The myth generator has plenty of scenarios with multiple primordial entries. That's mostly how it is, though I don't remember which scenarios we had in the video. It'll sometimes start with coupled primordial gods + a primordial ocean + primordial sleeping animals, for instance. If they aren't primordial, they won't have unknown origins the way it is now (since all the non-primordial stuff comes from somewhere), but I think you can start with unrelated primordial titans and a primordial god, for instance.
Will adventurers be able to find uses for instruments that are similar to those they're familiar with? Like say, using a drum of one sort in place of a drum they don't have. Or maybe composing new songs that use instruments in their inventory, or selecting what they want to compose a song for, etc?
Because finding exactly what I need for the only forms of music I know can be annoying. Thing is, I have no idea what would be the easiest way to handle use of inexact instruments, code-wise. Though just allowing the use of different instruments of the same skill, for a skill penalty less severe than instrumentless improv, would be a massive improvement.
Yeah, it's sort of complicated which instrument would make a valid replacement. Just using any same-skilled instrument would be trouble since it might not even have different tones if those are required (so the current singing/humming simulation makes much more sense).
You mentioned that deities forces and such take turns when generating the creation myths, are there any plans for a player to participate in the creation of myths as a deity/force/comet or whatever.
We had something along those lines in the distance future dev notes. There it remains. We might see some race-creation stuff/etc. earlier than that, but going through and deciding how the planes are created etc. in some sort of menu would only happen on a lark.
Adventurer site building has the option to define taverns, libraries and temples as well as the mead halls you mentioned at the time of release. However, these don't seem to do anything right now. Unlike the meadhalls, they don't show up in Legends mode, so presumably are not defined as taverns, libraries or temples in the world and won't ever attract visitors. Is this just an unfinished feature, or is it supposed to work right now?
Will certain procedurally generated and adventure mode retired embark locations such as taverns and temples or even just structures in the world ever retain private ownership by who owns the site even if it overlays your embark? (with ownership being tranferred upon admittance of themselves or their relatives to your fortress?) With diplomatic reprecussions for attacking such as taking a diplomacy hit and angering the occupants/relative nation.
And if this was so, could our own fortress dwellers find relevance in assigned dwarves (say its a 'trading license' of sorts) taking over private shopfront property independently to build skills, conduct commerce and interact with the wider world. In the sense that wagons sell in bulk to fortresses but traders and tourists probably want to buy our roasts with coins to a vendor. Very Recettear i guess
Nah, it's not supposed to work yet, though I was hoping to do a bit more with it before it was released as it is. I'm not sure what I'm going to do at this point.
The post-myth/magic updates related to status/property/etc. are going to open this up a great deal, as we'll be able to talk about ownership/usage rights at all. I'm not sure how it'll manage overlapping sites or how the site concept will change, since there are many ways it could go and it'll depend on what's on the table. Dwarves used to own their own shops in the fortress many years ago, but that was broken. We'll return to variations of that once we have a better framework, and the game will also understand what's up with all the human town shops as well.
How difficult would it be to allow a caste to override the random selection of what caste to birth with a specific caste of the modder choice or even have a specific sub list of castes to produce?
I doubt it would be difficult, though the list of suggestions of not-difficult-to-add features is very long. If it's in the suggestions forum, it'll get added to the list.
Will ghosts require a certain minimum fantasy level in the myth generator before they appear?
And indeed, will the existence of ghosts altogether depend on the kind of afterlife and soul information output by mythgen?
Yeah, the ghost behavior is intended to be tied to both. In fantasy 1+ worlds, we'll likely bias the output toward dwarven ghosts until we have interesting-enough replacements possible.
Love the fixed fame/bandit/citizens relationships and hearthperson quests, btw, and I do a lot of variations of them in different worlds. In large towns and especially after having become known to random people I meet as a legendary hero I started to observe something. From time to time when I returned to report on and get a new quest I would go and take the side/back exits from the keep (only found them because of civilians liking to use them) and hit the nearest road to start traveling.
Shortly after entering the travel map you get a check for nearby armies and will often see a few pop up and start wandering the streets as usual, but in the case where you're a Big Damn Hero you often find one that will follow you slavishly, even to nearby hamlets and lairs. Upon dropping out of travel mode and investigating I've learned these will generally be a squad of 4~6 recruits and occasionally a couple of skilled soldiers like a marksdorf or hammerelf or whatnot. They always tend to be amazed to meet me, say they are on a mission, do not trigger ambushes when crossing their * on the map, and usually turn back after I get a couple of world map tiles from the home town.
Was this intended behavior, with them being support/back-up or fans, or just an emergent quirk?
There are reputation-dependent checks for people not attacking you, and also some weird behaviors with friendly patrols tracking you but then not
attacking (but still continuing to follow). It could be a combination of those things.
Q1: After spheres are expanded on and there are more Secrets, will the Secret of Life and Death be adjusted/altered at all? Or is it currently as it was originally intended?
Q2: Will there be other Spheres, Secrets or deity boons which might grant Immortality?
Q1: I'm not sure the secrets of life and death will survive the myth generator in their current form. I expect its form will be varied.
Q2: Over time, but I have no idea in what order it will all come in.
Why are demonic fortresses gone, and will they ever reappear? All I could find was a previous FOTF reply where you couldn't remember why you commented them out. Did you recall why?
In a similar vein, do you recall why deity-impersonating demons were removed as well?
Nope, the fortresses are just commented out and there's no indication of what was going wrong. I usually leave some sort of note for myself, but I must have been caught in the middle of it and then forgotten. Next chance for something to happen would be whatever happens with myth-related sites.
All of the impersonation code is still there, so I suspect that one is just a bug that came up as a side effect of some other change, though I might be forgetting something.
Will the myth generator have separate settings for 1. frequency of supernatural vs natural beings, 2. overall fantasy-ness of all creatures together and 3. maximum and minimum supernaturalness? Or will there only be an overall "fantasy"-rating for a given world and you'd have to add what else you want with raws?
So what I'm asking is, if I will be able to make one world with a few necromancers, maybe a handful of vampires, 10 forgotten beasts/titans, and no more than a dozen animal people/men, with the usual amount of regular animals and standard races; another world with the same kind of creatures, but more necromancers, vampires, werebeasts, titans, etc, compared to regular animals and races.
And a third one where slightly supernatural creatures (say, elves and dwarves) exist, and slightly more supernatural creatures (maybe vampires and unicorns, creatures with superhuman strength), but neither total fantasy stuff (flying guts, primordial serpent gods), nor completely mundane creatures (dog, cat, human, peach faced lovebird).
Given how the detailed parameters already look, I'd expect there to be more than just one number, but I'm really not sure how it is going to break down at this point.
Toady, the myth generator is an exciting new feature, and I understand that it is likely to be largely unmoddable at first. But will modders have the ability to use the fantasy-ness ratings at all? For example, a tag that makes a creature/interaction/whatever available only if the fantasy rating is in the range X% to Y%?
Yeah, the parts of the presentation that were in notepad are intended to be moddable, though I'm not sure the astronomical objects will start that way (due to how deeply hard-coded they are now). Whatever the fantasy rating ends up looking like will be fully out in the text.
Do you have any plans regarding when to fix giant desert scorpions and cannibalism? You've said before that giant desert scorpions will be reimplemented, but it's been a while.
I don't have a specific time in mind.
What toolchain are you using now?
On Windows I'm now using the free Visual Studio 2015, whatever it is called.
If you're only going to do one more bug fix release before rushing on, please aim it to clear out the worst bugs introduced in 0.42.X+. While I've found it encouraging to see a number of bugs fixed in the latest releases (and grabbing a bunch of "random" bugs now and then to squash is a good thing), it's a bit worrying that there doesn't seem to have been any directed effort to tidy up the issues created/revealed with zones/visitors. To make this into a question: what's your aim for bug fixing before moving on?
And piggy backing off PatrikLundell, do you intend to continue on with this phase of extended bug fixes after the 64-bit rewrite?
I'd like it to be playable more or less before moving on to a few months without releases. I don't plan to go on too much longer with these releases, since it has been months now, but it really depends on what we've got. From my perspective, I've already cleaned out the worst bugs from 0.42.X+, as it was a crashy mess before, but there are still many confirmed bugs to fix, and I'll clean up some more of them before I move on.
Are any crime and punishment arc elements planned for the artifact arc? Will stealing artifacts from an entity just turn the entire civilization you took it from against you like regular theft, or will people only request artifacts possessed by mega beasts or enemy civs until different entity sub-groups are more filled in? Will there be rumors about artifacts being moved around, who has stolen/liberated them, whether they've been spotted with someone in particular.
You've talked about tea making before, there's the partially implemented pearl-crafting in the game already, and you've suggested wax might have a resurgence once you get to the lighting arc. Are there any more industries you're planning to implement into the game that aren't explicitly laid out on the development log? Short or long term, I'm just interested in what might eventually be coming even if it's a long ways away.
We're not going to get into crimes and punishment until the law rewrite, so if anything happens it'll probably be drastic or just more people spitting on you, but regular civs will probably seek each other's artifacts, or at least actors within those civs. The artifact release (releases? dunno) will definitely see artifact rumor/quest/seeker/collection/hoard/wtvr additions for adv mode.
We're interested in actually implementing everything that now appears in the knowledge system, which includes all sorts of objects/industries, but it's unclear what we'll get to and in what order it will happen, and I'm sure there are many industries that will come up before we theoretically finish up the ones currently in the knowledge system. But I don't have any interesting ones to highlight, and nothing nailed down on the horizon.
In general we as a player have an overview of all of the map that we have previously revealed in fortressed mode. So, we see when creatures arrive in the distant caverns or at the corner of the map, even if there is not a dwarf there to see it. I was wondering whether this was a design decision on your part (that the player has more of a god-like overview of the map), or whether in the future you were considering making a traditional fog-of-war type situation where revealed parts of the map would be known, but the state of the map in those places, and any creatures in those places would only be updated if a dwarf was there to see that area directly.
It was and continues to be a speed issue as much as anything, though we made some progress there recently when we did all the adv mode stealth stuff a while ago and gave each dwarf slightly more comprehensive creature spotting abilities. I'm ambivalent about doing it overall -- the vision range of dwarves is really small compared to how far they should be able to see. Overland sieges would be strange if we stuck with 25 tiles, but it's more cpu heavy to let them see farther -- and more generally, the number of lookouts you'd need is just too high right now due to the vision range.
Given the upcoming eventual magic arc, do goblins themselves (as either underlings, selfmade masters through overtaking demonic masters or individuals) have access to any particular 'school', alternatively 'branch' of exclusive magic? or do they remain a largely mundane or magically generic race when the big supernatural being leading them suddenly ceases to exist in the mortal world?
The way it is now, they might end up quite magical if the settings are cranked up, and they'd likely end up with darker magics than the other races, since there'd be sphere (or whatever) biases (in vanilla, anyway) and biases in what they are created from and how (which then influences the type of magic they get -- for instance, goblins are already more likely to arise as the result of a curse on another race, which would influence magic types). So it'll be up to you, more or less, or you can leave it up to the computer.
Toady, now that we have proper taverns in human towns and dwarven fortresses, do you have plans to go back and have dwarven hillocks create proper taverns? Right now they still use fake taverns that just have drunks milling around. And will we ever see drunks in proper taverns ?
Yeah, that was just a time-crunch/oversight/whatever. We want them to have proper taverns, but like all small changes we passed up at their proper time it is now in limbo. I have no idea on the future of the drunk as a unit type.
As of 43.xx for sure, and possibly back in 42.xx it seems you can no longer interact with a minecart near lava and fill it up, even if it is magma safe, even if you are playing a creature which can just swim around in a volcano, we can't fill a container from lava.
If you acquire some magma, though, you can dump it out into a pool and happily fill anything from it. I figure that the magma being under the spilled liquids system is why that works, but there are times when even in a totally unmodded game your adventurer might come across a magma safe minecart and want to use it to say, cast a dam below the surface of a river running through your camp site.
Was leaving just the "heat near lava" option deliberate?
I don't recall making a deliberate change, but I can check and mark it off one way or another if there's a bug report.
Do dwarves that damage furniture in temples dedicated to megabeasts get cursed by the megabeast?
It appears that they need to have the deity flag, which is only given to the ones that are actual gods rather than objects of worship.
Author
Topic: Future of the Fortress (Read 1884154 times)