Print

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

[Rumrusher]

Adventurers can have a unique identity now due to the customization of personalities and the needs you get based off of those now, I love that, it really encourages role playing and that to me is dwarf fortress adventure mode's draw is the role playing opportunities.

But it is still very early regardless.
I agree.
 The player merchant update sounds like exactly what you want nw, too bad that is probably years out, like you said, with the mansions and such.

like it's possible to trade with everyone talkitive, so you could walk up and trade wares for coins or clothes or weapons and you build a "good for business" relationship with people.

[Starver]

Late(ish) to the conversation, but from my experience...

Firstly, the game is called "Dwarf Fortress", it does rather tend to emphasise the bits with the dwarves and their 'fortress'.  It might encourage some people to think that the Adventure Mode bit is an add-on.  It's not even the most obvious selection, when you start (I think, it's been a while since I've paid attention).  And even if you do start an Adventurer, getting killed off by the first wildlife/nightlife/annoyed citizen that you happen to enrage is pretty final.  (Whereas you at least have a chance, in a new fort, of trying to recover a part-killed embarkation party with whatever remains after whatever natural/self-caused disaster you encountered.)


Also, the procedural generation of settlements was always some way behind the possibilities of player-generated settlements.  Those "Dwarf Mountainhomes" that were stair-lined holes in the ground, leading down to a normally totally empty (or, occasionally, ampersand-occupied) warren of unfurnished rooms?  Elven settlements were just "a place where elves seem to meet".  Human settlements were developed (procedural buildings with occasional procedural shops, eventually they got procedural streets, beyond the procedural highways between settlements with procedural bridges, procedural fields surrounding them, then better procedural buildings to make procedural streets, procedural sewers and then actual fortifications with procedural curtain-walls) and there were also the towers with the goblins (good for getting shot at through the arrow-slots)...  It is improving!

As is the scope of interactions.  Adventuring has always been somewhat of a grind.  As has Fortressing, to some degree, but the variations and therefore the apparent monotony are so much more identifiable, compared with travelling (over a gloriously diverse landscape, it must be said) fighting (a wide array of) enemies/prey/unfortunates-just-crossing-your-path and having limited-script conversations (definitely improved, these days) with NPCs who you haven't decided it worthwhile killing yet.

But the adventurer still doesn't easily exhibit development.  Stats/skills, inventory contents and a quest-list best denote the adventurer's advancement, but none of that is actually as 'tangible' as a Fortress, whether or not there's even an exhibitable megaproject attached to it.  Which is not to say that an Adventuring Megaproject isn't impressive (the most obvious ones being either the Ultimate Pacifist or Ultimate Genocide/Omnicide aims), but... it doesn't produce the same kind of visuals.


Now... if as Adventurer you could actually build your own Empire... including literally building it (at first constructing your own outpost, from which to rule, eventually giving architects plans for them to create your castle and forts along the borders of your influence for your own (non-local) followers to occupy...  or just direct a castle or fort to be built, to certain less-than-utterly-comprehensive instructions, and be able to trust to the engine/builder-AIs to give you something worthwhile... (Some of the early bits of this have been planned-for for quite a while, but I don't keep an eye on the game-goals enough to know how conceptually far Toady's actually thought of taking this.)

At the very least, we could benefit from a Battlezone-esque first-person-perspective "point and command" resource, building and unit management system...  But that's a twenty-year-old game concept that I've never actually seen replicated in anything more recent, so I'm not sure if it was appreciated as much I think it ought to have been...

[Rumrusher]

Late(ish) to the conversation, but from my experience...

-snip-
But the adventurer still doesn't easily exhibit development.  Stats/skills, inventory contents and a quest-list best denote the adventurer's advancement, but none of that is actually as 'tangible' as a Fortress, whether or not there's even an exhibitable megaproject attached to it.  Which is not to say that an Adventuring Megaproject isn't impressive (the most obvious ones being either the Ultimate Pacifist or Ultimate Genocide/Omnicide aims), but... it doesn't produce the same kind of visuals.

I hit that moment where I was looking for adv megaprojects to do because going around killing people or Not killing people seems bare bones(well that and you really can't retire the character once you do start murdering everyone you see) than the vast stuff you can do in fort mode.

Spoiler:  list of stuff one can do in adventure mode (click to show/hide)

I think it's possible to round up loads of historical people to 1 spot with use of the wait command and setting up a large battle between 2 adventuring parties.
another player went with a large werewolf colony.
now 42. open up to a new megaprojects like craft the worlds exotic and weird drink and get someone else to drink it.
adv museum of art
amass a horde of zombie bogeymen.
craft loads of toy figurines and give them all to the local residents at winter.

one of the better things I did that seem to lead to an exciting session was fortress guarding since some how it spawn hellish daemons every week.

[Robsoie]

Now... if as Adventurer you could actually build your own Empire... including literally building it (at first constructing your own outpost,

Looks like the next version should feature some basic building ability for the adventurer along with being able to cut some trees (apparently not the trees on site, i guess to avoid fun ) , check the logs 02/22/2016 and 02/21/2016 from :
http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/

Hopefully first step toward the big game.

[tonnot98]

Only in DF I can create and play as a muscular (custom modded-in race) female and NPCs would actually react to my character's name, race, title and profession and what she has done. Can I do an in-depth DF combat in any of the RPG games ever? Can I do all of that in Skyrim, (insert many other RPGs here)? Can I play as a Minotaur or a Gnoll character in Neverwinter Nights' story? Can I play as an Orc in Gothic 2's story? Can I play as that tall warrior Goblin or a Rat Man in Arx Fatalis' story? Can I play as a Lizard Man in Divine Divinity's story? No of course not, it's ALWAYS human this or human that and I am beyond sick of it.

Just chiming in to say: You should try playing D&D

[Rumrusher]

Only in DF I can create and play as a muscular (custom modded-in race) female and NPCs would actually react to my character's name, race, title and profession and what she has done. Can I do an in-depth DF combat in any of the RPG games ever? Can I do all of that in Skyrim, (insert many other RPGs here)? Can I play as a Minotaur or a Gnoll character in Neverwinter Nights' story? Can I play as an Orc in Gothic 2's story? Can I play as that tall warrior Goblin or a Rat Man in Arx Fatalis' story? Can I play as a Lizard Man in Divine Divinity's story? No of course not, it's ALWAYS human this or human that and I am beyond sick of it.

Just chiming in to say: You should try playing D&D

I think the only other game with DF combat is another roguelike name IVAN but IVAN literally hates the player and you basically have to learn more about the game to master it.

[Droggarth]

Just chiming in to say: You should try playing D&D

I have never in my life been into tabletop games, and never probably will. It's just not my cup of tea.

[pikachu17]

I actually prefer Adventure mode to fort mode. Mostly because "Then my forty dwarves that all have masterwork steel armor destroyed the 10 goblins"  is less satisfying than "than I, with my base quality copper mail shirt,destroyed all 10 goblins by ripping all their limbs off then biting their heads off". besides Fort mode is way too easy. I have yet to lose a Fort, but I lost my very first adventurer very quickly

[Urist McVoyager]

When construction gets more fleshed out and we get more workshops to play with, I'll switch over to Adventure Mode for the most part. I've done one Adventure fort and it was amusing as heck. First guy didn't take any booze from the Mountainhome, and I didn't know about melting snow. So he died of thirst while building his home. Second guy steals a barrel of rum. Forty units. He manages to find the same site, and continue the other guy's work. There's all sorts of wildlife around, and the river is finally thawing out. So when the booze runs out, it gets replaced with 100 units of water. Animals get hunted, and the last guy gets dragged into the workshop area and slapped down in a coffin in the corner of the room.

And then bugfixes come out and I delete that file. Either way, 10/10 would die of thirst and bury my own corpse again.

[fucduck]

.

[Rumrusher]

so far from what I seen of Digging too deep ends up with future adventure mode playthroughs having to deal with A random chance of Oops now this game mode is alot harder now that you can be ambush by worst things.
add that to camp building and you have yourself FUN.

[dwarf_reform]

I keep hoping Toady will devote a dev cycle to adding more raw "dwarflyness" to the game, like the ability to make use of venoms/ichors/syndrome-liquids, an overhaul of siege weaponry (including the ability to fire new things out of the catapult, like living creatures and barrels of venom), the ability for blood to pool and flow, some integration of divine metals into adv mode, interaction between fire/smoke/grass/trees/people (like how campfires/grass fires won't burn anything and the smoke has no negative effect)..

Really, I think Toady values the emergence of it all over making it more "gamey" (and therefore more satisfying as an "RPG"..). Also, we've been given some unprecedented depth in adventure mode now and it'll only leave us wanting more.. For instance, each sentient being has feelings and such, but there is no over-arching consequence (like a town full of happy, healthy citizens can be ruled over by a disgusting creature posing as a god with no ill effects..)..

If I were Toady (and assuming he doesn't want Dwarf Fort being "gamey"), I'd "play it safe" and keep the potentially gamey stuff "dwarfly" :> Can't go wrong with firing elf corpses over the wall (and into an army of elves) to damage morale, to make a moat full of carefully harvested paralyzing venom, to raze a (wooden!) village to the ground in adv mode (or to bash it down with picks and warhammers, if its stone)..

Just my dingy two cents, anyway

[Droggarth]

-snip-

Just my dingy two cents, anyway

Aye! I strongly seem to dislike games nowadays that are too "gamey" (no manual saves, only checkpoints, linear-something and on top of that game itself makes no sense in terms of plot, atmosphere, npcs, gameplay and etc). DF seems to be my kind of game, I can save whenever I want, npcs react to my adventurer and don't just sit there until I press that "E" to talk as I already have a chance a random npc strikes up a conversation with my adventurer with simple yet somehow more than meaningful dialogs and choices of how to respond.. seriously is there any RPG where I can just blatantly ignore the greeting and say something to that npc (like calling the npc the creature of the night) without even introducing myself? Heh.

Just yesterday I looked into the legends viewer to see what the game has recorded me doing as my ischroboar adventurer and how my built site was recognized by the game. Found out that the quire I used to bind book was an artifact quality item.

[vjmdhzgr]

-snip-

Just my dingy two cents, anyway

-snip-

Just yesterday I looked into the legends viewer to see what the game has recorded me doing as my ischroboar adventurer and how my built site was recognized by the game. Found out that the quire I used to bind book was an artifact quality item.

The quire wasn't artifact quality. All books are considered artifacts in Legends. It's mainly a result of how necromancer slabs and books used to be considered artifacts, and also how there was nowhere else to put them.

[Droggarth]

The quire wasn't artifact quality. All books are considered artifacts in Legends. It's mainly a result of how necromancer slabs and books used to be considered artifacts, and also how there was nowhere else to put them.

Fuck! >_< Then what is this!??