Print

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

[DG]

This suggestion is semantic.

Dwarves have rather specific likes, usually a stone, a metal, a gem and then toucan teeth or octopus bone etc. Most people in reality (which I'll use as an analogue for dwarves, ha) have more than one thing they like in any given field^{citation required}. Let's take animals for example. Think of all the different animals that you like, I'll guess that most people can come up with at least ten (simply because I can come up with way more). So for dwarves, I find it hard to believe that a dwarf will only ever like one specific gem type and be indifferent to all others. But this is what the current wording implies. On the other hand it's reasonable that a dwarf would have only one favorite gem, even while liking many other types.

I am not suggesting that we expand the total number of "likes" a dwarf has (too cumbersome, little to no gain), but rather that "likes" be changed to "favors". The term suits the preferences system more than likes does. It's also more in line with "absolutely detests" on the impoverished dislikes scale.

[Roofless]

I dunno, "likes" is quite appropriate IMHO. If a dwarf likes copper for some reason, he will still get a happy thought from owning a chest made of gold. The only difference is that a copper chest will drive him bat shit crazy about it. So "like" is the word to use.

[Duck Slayer]

I favor these semantics of favors.

[Bumber]

"Likes" is fine. It doesn't say "likes only", and can therefore be a partial list.

I have never used "I favor" before in a sentence, and it sounds odd.

I'd say "prefers" works, but it's already used.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

where?

Edit: oh, you mean "prefers to eat strawberries and pickle teeth and elf snot and schnozzcumber refuse piles."

Because I think a preference for owl teeth is hilarious.