Print

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

[WordsandChaos]

Actually, facetious as my earlier comment about boats was, given that wagons are considered to be creatures, is it actually possible for the procedural body-horror abominations to incorporate wagons?

[FantasticDorf]

With the villain update, if a goblin from a goblin civ obtains the title of king over a human or dwarven civ through a coup and intrigue, will that civ then start to act more similarly to a goblin one because of the goblin king's values, which originate from a goblin civ? For example, will a human/dwarven civ that is ruled by a goblin from a goblin civ be more likely to declare wars?
Do war declarations, etc depend on the values of the actual ruler or does diplomacy right now depend on the civ's average values instead?

Yes, the goblin's core personality from its own civ won't change without some emotional introspection, only second generation citizens in a foriegn nation commit to a full value flip to go 'native'. So if the evil goblin monarch kicks the bucket and their son born inside the Dwarf civ (with marriage to a refugee goblin for example) is named heir the neo-dwarf goblin is still going to have a terrible temper and murderous disposition, but they'll have dwarven ethics. A beard too most probably.

The kind of not cavalier but often aggressive attitude of goblins will brush up against other civ leaders and prompt them to go to war more often, especially since they're often not as charismatic as demon leaders either especially if they favor dreams of power, enjoy violence and prize martial prowess. Though some civs just declare wars because goblins are liars and decietful. (pretty scandalous for dwarves)

Actual societal change won't occur until the law arc where its scheduled, but a untoppled immortal ursurper can still destabilise the kingdom in a single lifetime.

Actually, facetious as my earlier comment about boats was, given that wagons are considered to be creatures, is it actually possible for the procedural body-horror abominations to incorporate wagons?

Undoubtedly same as the lawnmower modification, if there's wagons in your livestock by some odd means (probably a bit of deliberate poking around) it can probably happen, otherwise id think its just wierd.

[golemgunk]

Can the ghosts necromancers raise attack people like the murderous ghosts that sometimes appear in forts? Can you physically fight a ghost?

When a fort in worldgen breaches the underworld and falls to demons, do all the demons stay in their new home or is there a chance that some may choose to set out and work on their own schemes?

[Inarius]

I don't really know how to say so let's do it this way :
Have you seen the "Dwaven Language Codifier" here ? And if yes, what are your thoughts about it ?

[FantasticDorf]

Can the ghosts necromancers raise attack people like the murderous ghosts that sometimes appear in forts? Can you physically fight a ghost?

When a fort in worldgen breaches the underworld and falls to demons, do all the demons stay in their new home or is there a chance that some may choose to set out and work on their own schemes?

The ghosts seem to be the same vein as intelligent undead than general units, i think its unlikely that a necromancer could summon semi-corporeal ghosts of your fortress en-masse, which might be very scary on some saves with inadequate or cramped burial chambers. Lets hope they have some sort of common weakness like silver or metals like werebeasts do, Toady might explain more when we actually roll over to fortress mode additions, for purposes i think that summoning a ghost at the moment makes them corporeal enough to hit typically, even if the damage is negated a little bit compared to a mortal person.

To your second question - link to june fotf reply part 2

So are these new civs basically goblin civs lead by a released demon? Or actual full-on hell civs packed with demons and a couple of goblins thrown in? Do they create the initial goblins?

They have goblins so that they can behave normally, but they have a pack of 5-20 non-civ-leader underworld demons to make them scarier, and they also have a standard demon leader.  All of these creatures are created on the spot, as the underworld is assumed to have unnumbered amounts of such beings currently, though the goblin is faked and indeed it just checks for the EVIL tag on them, the good old EVIL tag.  I didn't bother simulating their underworld pops on account of time and the upcoming magic release clarification of these matters.

I dont think they disperse without a good reason unless actual new settlements appear of that 'civilisation' (conquered or the goblins set it up) in which the other demons might try to covet some lower hanging fruit of positions, become spies, or something else. Nothing to stop them plotting against anybody straight away either or against the leader demon if they're more preoccupied on that rather than the civ's enemies.

[MinerMan60101]

Will you add Sand to the embark indicators? Dfhack has it, and you already indicate dirt and clay presence.

[PatrikLundell]

Will you add Sand to the embark indicators? Dfhack has it, and you already indicate dirt and clay presence.

That's a suggestion, not a question, and thus belongs to the suggestion sub forum (and I assume it's already there, somewhere).

[PlumpHelmetMan]

Now that monasteries have been added as separate structures from temples, is it safe to assume that "monastery" has been taken out of the procgen pool for temple names?

[CaptainArchmage]

Now that monasteries have been added as separate structures from temples, is it safe to assume that "monastery" has been taken out of the procgen pool for temple names?

In line with this:

Will we be able to designate monasteries in fortress mode?

Do you plan to change the way dead units are handled, so they don't clog up the list (there's an immigration issue there too)?

[Eschar]

Now that monasteries have been added as separate structures from temples, is it safe to assume that "monastery" has been taken out of the procgen pool for temple names?

In line with this:

Will we be able to designate monasteries in fortress mode?

Do you plan to change the way dead units are handled, so they don't clog up the list (there's an immigration issue there too)?

I thought there was a separate list for dead units.

[CaptainArchmage]

I thought there was a separate list for dead units.

Do you plan to change the way dead units are handled, so they don't clog up the list (there's an immigration issue there too)?

Clarification: I am referring to Nonsignificant creatures clogging up the dead units list, i.e. having to scroll past all those puppies :-(.

There's also that bug where the units list, when above 1,000, starts to reduce migration I think.

Will you add Sand to the embark indicators? Dfhack has it, and you already indicate dirt and clay presence.

Seconded on this.

Do existing changes also include the animated furniture? Can you as a necromancer, say, stitch new frankentrocities around a schist cabinet?

When you say you can create new monsters from amalgamating other creatures as a necromancer, can we do that in adventure mode and can we "invent" new creatures or are those just generated from the start?

I look forward to having a ball of various arms rampaging around a castle. Not so much one rampaging around my lever room.

Will the divination games be generated at the beginning of the world, or could new ones appear over time?

[PatrikLundell]

Have you considered splitting the Myth & Magic Big Wait into two Large Waits with a Systems Rewrite release in the middle? It seems to me that the systems rewrites that are going to break save compatibility really is a prerequisite for the actual Myth & Magic stuff, but from the exterior it looks like you'd have to restore the current functionality using the redesigned map (etc.) as a starting point regardless, and it doesn't seem that much of that would have to be torn up again for the magic stuff. Doing it in two steps has the advantages of play testing (i.e. bug finding), and reducing a very uncomfortably long period of no releases into two merely quite uncomfortable ones.
I know this is very much a suggestion, but I'm quite interested in hearing the reasoning behind the decision, as I'm sure you've considered the various options.

[Shonai_Dweller]

Have you considered splitting the Myth & Magic Big Wait into two Large Waits with a Systems Rewrite release in the middle? It seems to me that the systems rewrites that are going to break save compatibility really is a prerequisite for the actual Myth & Magic stuff, but from the exterior it looks like you'd have to restore the current functionality using the redesigned map (etc.) as a starting point regardless, and it doesn't seem that much of that would have to be torn up again for the magic stuff. Doing it in two steps has the advantages of play testing (i.e. bug finding), and reducing a very uncomfortably long period of no releases into two merely quite uncomfortable ones.
I know this is very much a suggestion, but I'm quite interested in hearing the reasoning behind the decision, as I'm sure you've considered the various options.

A year long wait followed by  a release in which absolutely nothing has (visibly) changed? Fun for the bug testers maybe. But since they seem to officially exist now with Kitfox mentioning "beta testing", not an awful lot of reason to release to the public.

What about Waiting is uncomfortable? Devblogs will be coming weekly, serious crash bugs will be fixed with emergency patches this time. Doesn't seem like a big deal after building up the Wait hype for years.

[therahedwig]

I am pretty sure the version with only mythgen and maprewrite and little-to-no-restoration of maps is already what counts as 'big wait'. The problem is that the map rewrite has a large chunk of changing the way how coordinates work, and that's really fiddly and all over the place.

[PatrikLundell]

Apart from finding bugs faster, a "systems rework" release would also allow the DFHack community to map out the new structures and adjust relevant scripts to work with them.

I'm aware that the map rewrite is a huge task, and that it isn't the only save compatibility breaking change that's likely to be made. However, it doesn't seem to me that mythgen has much of an influence on map mechanics (sure, evil/savagery replacement with spheres affects maps, but there's no real need for a working mythgen process to be able to use those maps: they could be the hard coded results of a not yet implemented mythgen process: as long as the usage of those hard coded values act as if the input was generated, there shouldn't be any dependency [apart from the bugs that would lurk in the parts of the code that isn't executed: those bugs will have to wait]).