Print

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

[Toady One]

According to Legends info (via, Legends Viewer - the diagrams are useful), when a Dwarf civ is in a war, they'll only ever be the defender (except in special cases caused by player raids). Looking at some wars right now with some 20-30 battles, Dwarf is never the attacker.

Now, some of those battles seem to involve clashing armies meeting half-way between sites, so they're not just sitting at home taking sieges. Maybe it just defaults them to "defender" because they didn't start the war overall? There are certainly no 'dwarf attacks site' events though.

The relevant personality facets are the same as humans.  So far it seems to be that they are just out-populated, and think they are going to lose.  A few overcame the risk rolls all the way up until it did the fortification calculation, and decided they couldn't field a large enough army.

There's one part of that calculation that's inconsistent in world gen (it predates the use of non-historical populations, so they weren't being figure in), but I'm not sure that'll change anything.  The post world gen function is even mushier, but there's a speed issue there.

But I'm not sure it's even incorrect, the decision they are making, if the populations really are that way.  Dwarves can outpopulate other people, but they only seem to get in wars with people that outmatch them (probably because they don't start wars, and others start wars they feel they can win?)  But their war logic might be correct?  It seems like I'm still missing something.

[Random_Dragon]

What was the first thing that came to mind that led to the player being unable to exchange items with children NPCs in adventure mode?

I don't recall what came up first.  All the reasons you listed were reason enough, though!

Aw. No dwarven Santa? XP

[Warlord255]

Two questions in relation to Magic and monsters.

1) Are you planning to add more interesting behavior tokens for use by generated and/or mundane creatures?

As it stands, most monsters don't seem very proactive. Randomly generated interactions are cool, and are slated to get a lot cooler, but active trouble-seeking behavior is limited to a handful of tags. CRAZED, MISCHIEVOUS, BUILDINGDESTROYER and CURIOUSBEAST_GUZZLER come to mind, but not much else. Is there hope for a CURIOUSBEAST_GOBBLER, perhaps, that could result in forgotten beasts that "hunger for metal" and go around eating swords, or Giant Termites/Beavers that devour your wooden items?

2) Are you planning to use existing tools more extensively for more generated magic weirdness?

The Modding forum has achieved some seriously strange effects with the existing system, and it might be worth your time to take a look for ideas. There's so much that's possible already - grasses with SYN_INGESTED that turn horses into unicorns, EXTRA_BUTCHER_OBJECT to spawn syndrome vapors when you butcher a magic animal, acid-puking bite attacks by removing ENTERS_BLOOD from venom... even coal dust and exploding cursed gemstones! Seeing these types of effects in the Magic update would be a real treat.

Hope that's not too many questions. Whatever else happens, keep up the good work, Toady! 

[Knight Otu]

Thanks for the answers, Toady!

[Max™]

I just realized having your mount attempt to go about regular animal wandering/eating/fleeing/stalking behavior when you don't give any input, and trying fairly intently to ignore your inputs would play exactly like trying to get an ornery stallion to go where you want to go.

Riding skill, training level, mount personality traits, all could contribute to pushing the activity from "100% my(the mount) path and goals" down towards 0% for them and 100% for you...

[FantasticDorf]

"Will semi-intelligent combatant's role in conflicts be more streamlined by the time of better integration into raiding and armies of war animals and mounts?"

I imagine this to be slightly different to the previous question on 'support roles' because already, goblins already employ trolls for off map conflicts implicitly of virtually any size without having to need to add any tags onto the creature themselves. It doesn't always turn out smoothly and you hear rumors about oddities like some trolls appearing wearing iron armor & others of goblins riding on their backs without much consistency as what to expect through a mixture of possibly buggy application.

[PatrikLundell]

"Will semi-intelligent combatant's role in conflicts be more streamlined by the time of better integration into raiding and armies of war animals and mounts?"

I imagine this to be slightly different to the previous question on 'support roles' because already, goblins already employ trolls for off map conflicts implicitly of virtually any size without having to need to add any tags onto the creature themselves. It doesn't always turn out smoothly and you hear rumors about oddities like some trolls appearing wearing iron armor & others of goblins riding on their backs without much consistency as what to expect through a mixture of possibly buggy application.

Trolls and ogres wearing armor and wielding weapons is not odd. In all cases I've seen it they have full two part names and a military title (the ogre was a bowman, which is a role where its physical strength is really useful...). One theory I've seen is that they are ones who have gained enough training (becoming hist figs?) is a previous conflict to be upgraded from the "recruit" level (note that unarmed and unarmored "civilized" race recruits aren't uncommon in goblin armies). Beak dog warriors is off, though (I've never seen those myself).

[thvaz]

Thanks Toady!

[FantasticDorf]

Trolls and ogres wearing armor and wielding weapons is not odd. In all cases I've seen it they have full two part names and a military title (the ogre was a bowman, which is a role where its physical strength is really useful...). One theory I've seen is that they are ones who have gained enough training (becoming hist figs?) is a previous conflict to be upgraded from the "recruit" level (note that unarmed and unarmored "civilized" race recruits aren't uncommon in goblin armies). Beak dog warriors is off, though (I've never seen those myself).

Whether they should or shouldn't is another thing entirely especially if its wrongly applied with its application on giving recruit status to creatures who have learnt fighting skills for alligator/horse recruits comparably etc. I've got a picture i pulled off a DF discord of beakies and trolls with single forenames. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/173888543419006976/426522387903938580/dfsasdasd.JPG

I mean there's no complaint to giving a troll a hammer if it's going to use it, but its no the same kind of equipping you'd find on intelligent fighters since they're not equals hence i asked the question whether something more concrete in definition would be put in.

[Inarius]

About villains and the necessity to be intelligent to be a real villains (in opposition to "beasts"), I remember that Toady told someday that dragons and to a certain extent MB and titans could be intelligent and speak. So I suppose that could include them, too.

[ZM5]

Regarding the alligator or other predatory animals getting recruit titles, I'd think its related to them just getting kills in worldgen, which comes with them also getting a name.

Don't really have an explanation for why some of the trolls/ogres end up having only a single name and others have both a name and a last name, along with armor. I suppose it'd be related to SLOW_LEARNER, leading to them being treated as some form of livestock, aside from the few individuals that get higher weapon skills.
I'm mostly thinking that because of some old sieges I had from some of my modded races - for example in this one, the regular ogres were a caste with slow learner, but as you can see some only have a first name while others have both a first name and a last name along with the recruit title. Same thing with the fel brutes in this screencap - they were also a slow learner caste. I can't really explain why the named "puffalo recruit" is a thing though, considering they're just wild animals.

[FantasticDorf]

About villains and the necessity to be intelligent to be a real villains (in opposition to "beasts"), I remember that Toady told someday that dragons and to a certain extent MB and titans could be intelligent and speak. So I suppose that could include them, too.

Toady's reply (spoilered) largely explains that the motivation and power structure needs to be built up, so that even [POWER] beasts can have tangible reasons and targets.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

So about villains.

Does this include self-motivated "supervillains" that operate at world-level? As it stands, the goblin civ leader-type demons and very old vampires/necromancers are the closest we have to what I'd call true 'villains', though the planar stuff and magic release will probably introduce more. Megabeasts and titans are closer to rampaging wildlife, lacking greater motives. Thieves and even deadly ambushes or sieges are typically relevant to a single site, they're enemies but not villains with distinct motives. That's my own sense of semantics, however: A villain is a sapient character with a motive, rather than a beast or a minion.

For example, an elf that sets out to turn two human civs against each other using cover identities and assassinations.

Yeah, that's the idea, though often I imagine they'll be position holders or the existing sorts you listed operating with a new set of tools that providing a nested or branching structure to be discovered, with, as you suggest, some sort of larger exposable purpose.  We don't have the framework for many of the common motivations, but we have enough to get started.

Regarding the alligator or other predatory animals getting recruit titles, I'd think its related to them just getting kills in worldgen, which comes with them also getting a name.

Could be, but its unlikely its down to any one singular cause like that.

A few notes @button mentioned on bug-tracker relevant talk about that full intelligent creatures jump into citizenship when they learn a skill especially i would say leaning towards a skill associated with a position like a broker, so something recursive might be occuring here for recruit selection. Kept in mind that semi-intelligent (and pet full intelligents) in play are difficult to handle and ignore pasture & training orders requiring micromanagement, burrows to force them into areas else they will continue following civilian routines.

Troll shearing operations for instance when they are modded into regular play as cleanly as possible bothersomely require a great amount of planning to establish a pernament living quarters for trolls in a burrow who elsewise will resist being pulled in to be sheared and remain queued to do hauling jobs without dwarf-therapist. Gremlins in vanilla regularly ignore prompts to train their pet status after they ascend into becoming a citizen as a long term citizenship petition. etc. etc.

[Magistrum]

About villains and the necessity to be intelligent to be a real villains (in opposition to "beasts"), I remember that Toady told someday that dragons and to a certain extent MB and titans could be intelligent and speak. So I suppose that could include them, too.

*Fixed bug where dragons would sometimes put on a beard and infiltrate dwarven society to spread disorder.

Once we get tributes going, will we get demands from the mountain homes, like food for metropolises and equipment when in war time? Will they bear any resemblance to the current noble demand system?

[GoblinCookie]

Regarding the alligator or other predatory animals getting recruit titles, I'd think its related to them just getting kills in worldgen, which comes with them also getting a name.

Don't really have an explanation for why some of the trolls/ogres end up having only a single name and others have both a name and a last name, along with armor. I suppose it'd be related to SLOW_LEARNER, leading to them being treated as some form of livestock, aside from the few individuals that get higher weapon skills.
I'm mostly thinking that because of some old sieges I had from some of my modded races - for example in this one, the regular ogres were a caste with slow learner, but as you can see some only have a first name while others have both a first name and a last name along with the recruit title. Same thing with the fel brutes in this screencap - they were also a slow learner caste. I can't really explain why the named "puffalo recruit" is a thing though, considering they're just wild animals.

The reason for most the differences that they are defined as pets in the entity, it does not have anything to do with their tokens.  Armour will be related to skills, most probably.  The extra names *may* come from having lots of kills, you get extra names if you kill enough historical people.  Bugs may be involved in the situation as regards the names for intelligent pet creatures, it could be that it just gives them a regular two-part name rather than a full mass-murderer name, since they don't have a surname to begin with due to being pets(?). 

[ZM5]

The reason for most the differences that they are defined as pets in the entity, it does not have anything to do with their tokens.

You missed my point - they DIDN'T have pet tokens, and weren't defined as pets in the entity - they were a caste of the civs main race which just had SLOW_LEARNER. The "unarmed, unarmored, no last name" thing didn't happen with the non-slow learner castes. Civilized creatures tend to have both a first and last name regardless of their kills - obviously this didn't happen with those slow learner castes - some seemingly were treated the same way as trolls, others were normal recruits. So that's why I'm thinking there's something up with the slow learner token.