Print

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

[UristMcVampire]

Title says it all.

[Shonai_Dweller]

A bug prevents this right now. It's supposed to be (and previously was in a bygone age) possible, dependent on ethics.
Once the bug is fixed, just alter ethics as you like. No need for Toady to change anything else.

[UristMcVampire]

I don't want it to be dependent on ethics. I don't want to have to make ALL races cannibals -_-

[Bumber]

I don't want it to be dependent on ethics. I don't want to have to make ALL races cannibals -_-

Why would ethics be dependent on race?

[Shonai_Dweller]

I don't want it to be dependent on ethics. I don't want to have to make ALL races cannibals -_-

Race has nothing to do with ethics.

The point of DF is that you're one of the hundreds of thousands of people living in the world. You're not special. Adventurers will never get special "cannibal because you're controlled by a player" mechanics.

Breaking ethics and eating people out of desperate starvation is, of course, feasible and could be a thing (for anyone). As is "eating people is OK if I'm a werewolf". Cannibalism as standard for outsiders too. But never "cannibal" because I'm an "adventurer"  or part of an "adventurer party".

"Flexible ethics" will probably first get looked at in Starting Scenarios (the development arc which looks at society and politics). So will be a fair way off yet.

[UristMcVampire]

I don't want it to be dependent on ethics. I don't want to have to make ALL races cannibals -_-

Race has nothing to do with ethics.

The point of DF is that you're one of the hundreds of thousands of people living in the world. You're not special. Adventurers will never get special "cannibal because you're controlled by a player" mechanics.

Breaking ethics and eating people out of desperate starvation is, of course, feasible and could be a thing (for anyone). As is "eating people is OK if I'm a werewolf". Cannibalism as standard for outsiders too. But never "cannibal" because I'm an "adventurer"  or part of an "adventurer party".

"Flexible ethics" will probably first get looked at in Starting Scenarios (the development arc which looks at society and politics). So will be a fair way off yet.

-_- players don't HAVE to eat people, I just want it to ALWAYS be an option

[Shonai_Dweller]

I don't want it to be dependent on ethics. I don't want to have to make ALL races cannibals -_-

Race has nothing to do with ethics.

The point of DF is that you're one of the hundreds of thousands of people living in the world. You're not special. Adventurers will never get special "cannibal because you're controlled by a player" mechanics.

Breaking ethics and eating people out of desperate starvation is, of course, feasible and could be a thing (for anyone). As is "eating people is OK if I'm a werewolf". Cannibalism as standard for outsiders too. But never "cannibal" because I'm an "adventurer"  or part of an "adventurer party".

"Flexible ethics" will probably first get looked at in Starting Scenarios (the development arc which looks at society and politics). So will be a fair way off yet.

-_- players don't HAVE to eat people, I just want it to ALWAYS be an option

Yes, you said.
Since you never said why this would benefit the game. Why you're demanding Toady add cannibalism for adventurers,  I was explaining why this won't happen.

If there's no design reason for it, nothing that would benefit the game, and it goes in the opposite direction to the development by making adventurers special, then someone might mistake your demand as being "because I want to indulge in sick fantasies". And that's not it, is it? Right?

As I said, when the ethics bug is fixed, you'll be able to mod this in as you like. It's not needed in vanilla (not in a Just Because way anyway).

[PlumpHelmetMan]

Toady has also always been rather squeamish about directly encouraging the depraved fantasies of fans, just look at the mermaid farming debacle for an example.

[GoblinCookie]

They should be able to eat sentient mean *if* they are starving, like how they can drink muddy water if they are thirsty enough.  The problem with this idea is elves, elves should not be fine with killing animals, nor with eating animals normally but they would be happy eating things they personally killed for other reasons.

[Shonai_Dweller]

They should be able to eat sentient mean *if* they are starving, like how they can drink muddy water if they are thirsty enough.

Yes. As I said, this surely needs to be a thing. Along with possible consequences when polite society finds out about it. The whole ethics thing needs to be replaced by a much more in-depth system.
But that's not just limited to adventurers as the OP is unfortunately insistent it be.

[GoblinCookie]

Yes. As I said, this surely needs to be a thing. Along with possible consequences when polite society finds out about it. The whole ethics thing needs to be replaced by a much more in-depth system.
But that's not just limited to adventurers as the OP is unfortunately insistent it be.

I disagree that the ethics system needs to be replaced as such.  Basically it is laying out the basis for laws, it is kind of "what should the laws on X be", but there are nuances between for instance [ACCEPTABLE] and [PERSONAL_MATTER], the latter represents a state of affairs where it is not acceptable but should not be illegal while the former is where it is both legal and acceptable.

Interesting though what happens when we make a set of ethics that are so dysfunctional that it would just wipe the civilization out.  You really cannot have killing other entity members be [ACCEPTABLE] in your society.

[Putnam]

Huh? PERSONAL_MATTER doesn't mean "not acceptable but should not be illegal ", that would be SHUN or MISGUIDED or APPALLING, PERSONAL_MATTER is essentially identical to ACCEPTABLE. PERSONAL_MATTER means that one dwarf would never lie while another dwarf might lie at the drop of a hat and neither will be particularly considered differently by society at large while ACCEPTABLE means that all dwarves will lie because that's just a normal thing for dwarves to do.

[Egan_BW]

If the player character is able to decide to stab random people or jump off of a cliff for no particular reason, I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to eat people meat either. That's not consistent, the game should either be saying "no, you can't stab your best friend in the face for lulz, that's not in-character" or it should let you do anything possible in the game mechanics, assuming that you, roleplaying the character, must have some good reason. It makes no sense for that to be true of some things and not others.

You could always get a message reminding you that you seem to be doing something that doesn't make sense. "Are you sure that you want to step north? There's no floor there." "You don't feel good about eating Urist, do it anyways? Y/N"

[Shonai_Dweller]

If the player character is able to decide to stab random people or jump off of a cliff for no particular reason, I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to eat people meat either. That's not consistent, the game should either be saying "no, you can't stab your best friend in the face for lulz, that's not in-character" or it should let you do anything possible in the game mechanics, assuming that you, roleplaying the character, must have some good reason. It makes no sense for that to be true of some things and not others.

You could always get a message reminding you that you seem to be doing something that doesn't make sense. "Are you sure that you want to step north? There's no floor there." "You don't feel good about eating Urist, do it anyways? Y/N"

There are consequences to randomly killing people (which gets an "Are you sure?") and throwing yourself off a cliff (which requires a special command). The consequences of eating people (and stones, and mud, and magma) haven't been implemented yet. Taking the time to add cannibalism just to satisfy sickos isn't likely. Adding it along with the required damage to body and social standing is more so.

[UristMcVampire]

What about if we just have a syndrome tag that makes you able to eat people?