Print

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

[Shonai_Dweller]

Social arc is coming up after Mythgen. That's when things get more nuanced and what is right or wrong for specific cultures can be defined (procedurally generated). Right now dwarves take lovers in order for villains to work. Full stop. That's it. Villains release, villains required simulation.

Right now it seems to be dependent only on personality, which you can mod. Other than that, suggestions forum is what you want.

Yeah, but what facets actually control it? How do you minimize it?
I'd much rather have a way to just disable it.

Mod forum. Suggestions forum if it's impossible.

[kaijyuu]

Some eyebrow raising yikes comments here, hehe. I'm happy my dwarves can have open relationships; I couldn't live in a closed one myself (though it's perfectly fine for others if they prefer that of course, provided they don't impose it on any partners instead of finding like minded ones). And of course betrayal/jealousy/promiscuity is a common facet of real life; humans are very rarely pair bonders except when enforced by social norms, and I see no reason for dwarves to be different. It can add some drama to the whole thing. If there's any worry gameplay wise, it's another thing that can cause negative thoughts that's mostly outside the player's control, and as we've seen in recent releases that can be very frustrating.

It'd be nice if we could get polycules and the like in the future. I'm not sure how hardcoded the marriage thing is to only have 2 people.

[Untrustedlife]

...
Dwarves have some more general relationship types now ... and they can also have multiple lovers or get divorced or have children before they are married.

New stuff
   (*) Romantic relationship changes (multiple lovers, affairs, children outside marriage, divorces, etc.) as well as other relationship changes and details (friendship/rival types, variables like trust, respect and loyalty)
...

I value immersion & "realism"... perhaps above most other features in a "game"... BUT
I'm hoping this new "feature" might be tempered with species, social, personality, and other influences so that it doesn't go too far into the extreme. To take this sort of presumed/encouraged, consequence-free, promiscuity-without-stigma, to the extreme, quite frankly, reminds me a bit too much of what is [arguably] weakening the fabric of our real life world today. Also to be non-judgemental is fine and good, but we're talking about dwarves here; who are USUALLY seen as a fairly conservative bunch/species.

I'm not trying to make a big stink here, or begin a debate/argument, or even get particularly philosophical, but
I AM asking for the option to choose and/or control this type of thing a bit in our own personal games:
Just how often this sort of thing might happen, or the type of personality to act on it would occur, or some other form of restriction (consequences perhaps for the civilization / religion / fort having an accepted practice that might provoke varying degrees of reaction when the accepted boundaries are crossed, depending of course on how far they are crossed... etc. E.g. the OPTION of realism, instead of only having the option where throwing in a feature that might be interesting to play around with in a fun/fantasy way completely takes over and changes the feel of the previous versions/workings of the game.

TLDR; I hope we either have more detailed information, or a few options/settings for tweaking how this new "dwarven sexuality system" works. I realize many people, especially those who do not have their own children in real life, might not think what I'm saying is worth worrying too much about, but I assure you; it can be kind of a big deal to many people.

So if no in-game options occur [by the dev(s)] to allow players to customize their dorf relationship system a bit, then hopefully by makers of mods (LNP, df hack? others?) will do so, and soon.

I think this new feature set is AWESOME personally, let me argue my case:

Without this new feature (affairs, multiple lovers, children outside marriage) you would not get bastard children, (as happened in the medieval world quite often, which lead to very interesting struggles for inheritance)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_bastard
This kind of thing is also in CK2, so i dont see why not have it if you want a decent simulation of medieval society.
To pretend that this stuff (affairs, children outside marriage, multiple lovers (mistresses)) wasn't commonplace in medieval Europe and the ancient world and is somehow new and "eroding modern society"  is super rose-tinted-glassesish. Dwarves can also still only be married to one person at a time, so it isnt like some new fanged poly-whatever-marriage with multiple lovers thing. Its affairs and mistresses which have been around for basically forever and form the basis of many of the most interesting ancient stories (caeser having mistresses for example) previously these kinds of stories were impossible in DF now we can get all the more interesting politics/drama of the period. (What happens when a king has an affair for example)

Not that there isn’t any kind of merit to your complaint, eg perhaps some religions should allow and disallow divorce or punish members who break their specific traditions. But that is simply simulation toady hasn’t gotten to yet that will probably make it in at some point.  (Then we could get situations where monarchs create their own version of a religion so they can get divorced without penalties as happened with https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VIII_of_England )

[Demonic Gophers]

I just found that OldGenesis mod "crash on pressing embark" is caused by our twelve-castes dwarf creature definition.
Using vanilla dwarf creature I was able the remove the crash.

I've gotten a similar crash-on-embark issue and decided to do a little testing.  I put together a lightly modded entity with a fairly simple two-caste creature and was able to embark.  So I switched it for an almost identical creature with 15 castes and three body plans and tried again.  Embarked with no obvious problems, so the number of castes doesn't seem to be the cause.  I'll keep adjusting things and see if I can isolate the trigger.


And seriously, can we try to avoid a fiery social debate on this thread?  Having some entity-level controls on what relationships are considered appropriate would be nice in the long run, but this doesn't seem like the place to hash it out.

[Untrustedlife]

I just found that OldGenesis mod "crash on pressing embark" is caused by our twelve-castes dwarf creature definition.
Using vanilla dwarf creature I was able the remove the crash.

I've gotten a similar crash-on-embark issue and decided to do a little testing.  I put together a lightly modded entity with a fairly simple two-caste creature and was able to embark.  So I switched it for an almost identical creature with 15 castes and three body plans and tried again.  Embarked with no obvious problems, so the number of castes doesn't seem to be the cause.  I'll keep adjusting things and see if I can isolate the trigger.


And seriously, can we try to avoid a fiery social debate on this thread?  Having some entity-level controls on what relationships are considered appropriate would be nice in the long run, but this doesn't seem like the place to hash it out.

Only one person got mad. The rest of us just kinda reacted to it.
But yeah if any more conversing/arguing happens about the subject it should go
On the suggestion forum. ( I personally think the new relationship stuff is cool as heck which is why I tried to explain why it’s awesome)

[ZM5]

Weird thing - I used a modded summon interaction to summon some sentient creatures in arena mode. When I used k to look at their descriptions in the default arena view (the one thats more like the fort mode view) it crashed the game.
However, when I took control of the summoner, used the interaction, and looked at the description again while still in control, it didnt crash.
Back in the fort mode view it crashed again. I'm not sure if this would translate to fort mode as well but it might be worth looking into if it does - it reminds me of a similar "looking at description" crash when a creature would be permanently transformed in worldgen into something that has descriptors i.e hair and eye colours and/or body part descriptions ("his ears have great, swinging lobes", etc.)

EDIT: Did some more fiddling, seems to happen only with creatures that are capable of speech. Not sure why.

Are you playing in windowed mode? Viewing the description of some creatures in arena crashes in windowed mode for some reason.
http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=10831

I was, but it didn't seem to be consistently occuring with other creatures. Also just now tried it in fullscreen mode, still crashes with the same couple of intelligent summons, so I don't think this is the same issue.

I just found that OldGenesis mod "crash on pressing embark" is caused by our twelve-castes dwarf creature definition.
Using vanilla dwarf creature I was able the remove the crash.

I've gotten a similar crash-on-embark issue and decided to do a little testing.  I put together a lightly modded entity with a fairly simple two-caste creature and was able to embark.  So I switched it for an almost identical creature with 15 castes and three body plans and tried again.  Embarked with no obvious problems, so the number of castes doesn't seem to be the cause.  I'll keep adjusting things and see if I can isolate the trigger.


And seriously, can we try to avoid a fiery social debate on this thread?  Having some entity-level controls on what relationships are considered appropriate would be nice in the long run, but this doesn't seem like the place to hash it out.

Only one person got mad. The rest of us just kinda reacted to it.
But yeah if any more conversing/arguing happens about the subject it should go
On the suggestion forum. ( I personally think the new relationship stuff is cool as heck which is why I tried to explain why it’s awesome)

Eh, I wouldn't even call it getting mad, I do personally agree with both Strik3r's and Chaosegg's sentiments - it definitely would come across as jarring for members of a race defined by its loyalty or one thats very conservative still sleeping around, cheating and divorcing at the same rate as a race like goblins who probably are more loose in that regard.

From a modding perspective, I'd guess some personality+value combinations might affect it, i.e low lustfulness and/or high respect for tradition (though the latter is a bit "eh" since ofc tradition would mean different things for dwarves and goblins) - high loyalty value in a civ may also affect it - I'm slightly confused as to why its a civ value rather than a personality trait, but regardless - individuals in a high loyalty civ probably wouldnt be cheating on each other much and ones that arent loyal most likely wouldnt be able to step outside of the boundaries much lest they be socially shunned - thats what I'd expect, anyway.

[Strik3r]

I think this new feature set is AWESOME personally, let me argue my case:

Without this new feature (affairs, multiple lovers, children outside marriage) you would not get bastard children, (as happened in the medieval world quite often, which lead to very interesting struggles for inheritance)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_bastard
This kind of thing is also in CK2, so i dont see why not have it if you want a decent simulation of medieval society.
To pretend that this stuff (affairs, children outside marriage, multiple lovers (mistresses)) wasn't commonplace in medieval Europe and the ancient world and is somehow new and "eroding modern society"  is super rose-tinted-glassesish. Dwarves can also still only be married to one person at a time, so it isnt like some new fanged poly-whatever-marriage with multiple lovers thing. Its affairs and mistresses which have been around for basically forever and form the basis of many of the most interesting ancient stories (caeser having mistresses for example) previously these kinds of stories were impossible in DF now we can get all the more interesting politics/drama of the period. (What happens when a king has an affair for example)

Not that there isn’t any kind of merit to your complaint, eg perhaps some religions should allow and disallow divorce or punish members who break their specific traditions. But that is simply simulation toady hasn’t gotten to yet that will probably make it in at some point.  (Then we could get situations where monarchs create their own version of a religion so they can get divorced without penalties as happened with https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VIII_of_England )

eh, nobody's gonna deny it happened and i'm fine with it(As a feature in a medieval fantasy game (as long as its tuned to reasonable frequency, not to the levels of modern degeneracy)), but as a modder, i'm in the dark here as to what (if anything) controls said frequency. Personality? Values? the ORIENTATION tag? In reality that's all i actually care about.

Only one person got mad. The rest of us just kinda reacted to it.
But yeah if any more conversing/arguing happens about the subject it should go
On the suggestion forum. ( I personally think the new relationship stuff is cool as heck which is why I tried to explain why it’s awesome)

i just saw an opportunity and wanted to make some noise, the result was pretty good.
either way i'm done with this subject for now.

also, since i missed getting this in as a FotF question, Toady, here's (roughly) what i was going to ask, for a condensed and clean summary this whole thing:

   (*) Romantic relationship changes (multiple lovers, affairs, children outside marriage, divorces, etc.) as well as other relationship changes and details (friendship/rival types, variables like trust, respect and loyalty)

How frequently does stuff like this happen? What controls it happening? Can it be modded?

[Shonai_Dweller]

I think this new feature set is AWESOME personally, let me argue my case:

Without this new feature (affairs, multiple lovers, children outside marriage) you would not get bastard children, (as happened in the medieval world quite often, which lead to very interesting struggles for inheritance)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_bastard
This kind of thing is also in CK2, so i dont see why not have it if you want a decent simulation of medieval society.
To pretend that this stuff (affairs, children outside marriage, multiple lovers (mistresses)) wasn't commonplace in medieval Europe and the ancient world and is somehow new and "eroding modern society"  is super rose-tinted-glassesish. Dwarves can also still only be married to one person at a time, so it isnt like some new fanged poly-whatever-marriage with multiple lovers thing. Its affairs and mistresses which have been around for basically forever and form the basis of many of the most interesting ancient stories (caeser having mistresses for example) previously these kinds of stories were impossible in DF now we can get all the more interesting politics/drama of the period. (What happens when a king has an affair for example)

Not that there isn’t any kind of merit to your complaint, eg perhaps some religions should allow and disallow divorce or punish members who break their specific traditions. But that is simply simulation toady hasn’t gotten to yet that will probably make it in at some point.  (Then we could get situations where monarchs create their own version of a religion so they can get divorced without penalties as happened with https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VIII_of_England )

eh, nobody's gonna deny it happened and i'm fine with it(As a feature in a medieval fantasy game (as long as its tuned to reasonable frequency, not to the levels of modern degeneracy)), but as a modder, i'm in the dark here as to what (if anything) controls said frequency. Personality? Values? the ORIENTATION tag? In reality that's all i actually care about.

Only one person got mad. The rest of us just kinda reacted to it.
But yeah if any more conversing/arguing happens about the subject it should go
On the suggestion forum. ( I personally think the new relationship stuff is cool as heck which is why I tried to explain why it’s awesome)

i just saw an opportunity and wanted to make some noise, the result was pretty good.
either way i'm done with this subject for now.

also, since i missed getting this in as a FotF question, Toady, here's (roughly) what i was going to ask, for a condensed and clean summary this whole thing:

   (*) Romantic relationship changes (multiple lovers, affairs, children outside marriage, divorces, etc.) as well as other relationship changes and details (friendship/rival types, variables like trust, respect and loyalty)

How frequently does stuff like this happen? What controls it happening? Can it be modded?

For how frequently, just generate a world and read Legends. It happens as much as necromancers merge random peasant dwarves with pigs, as often as goblins impale elf maidens on stakes and as often as night trolls kidnap, transform and breed with random people they take a liking too.

For modding, people in the modding forums will be able to tell you right away exactly how to mod out anything in the game you don't like. Probably involve some hacking, or just playing an older version of the game.

[FantasticDorf]

A open-shut case for the discussion would be to fast-track development of the law arc's on domestic ethical policies and some creature level configurations i do believe without very much further elaboration on the detail that can be saved for a suggestion thread. Then just like attitudes to orientation, players can just correct them to levels they feel comfortable to.

• Setting divorce as unthinkable for dwarves etc, however it may lead to unhappy marriages with personality changes dwarves undertake, and saying some race like kobolds sees divorce with no stigma like theft and therefore freely divorces.

Stickying a thread to this effect with the orientation tokens (and anything else) and relevant advice onto the modding forum would also help. Wow this was a big pileup of a derail, this discussion should have probably been moved to DF General.

Spoiler: "Shonai's quote" (click to show/hide)

Social arc is coming up after Mythgen. That's when things get more nuanced and what is right or wrong for specific cultures can be defined (procedurally generated). Right now dwarves take lovers in order for villains to work. Full stop. That's it. Villains release, villains required simulation.

Right now it seems to be dependent only on personality, which you can mod. Other than that, suggestions forum is what you want.

I dont see it as that pragmatic, it was just there was very little movement happening already towards friends getting married versus world-generated marriages upkeeping the consistent population of forts (underpinned by babies now riding their mothers like horses into neglect) so Toady made the inbetween more flexible. It evidently works from the reports that dwarves in relationships are popping out babies like nobody's business (editing babies out fixes baby riding entirely) but its sad that its caused such uproar by accident.

Spoiler: "Shonai's & Strik3r's Quote" (click to show/hide)

How frequently does stuff like this happen? What controls it happening? Can it be modded?

For how frequently, just generate a world and read Legends. It happens as much as necromancers merge random peasant dwarves with pigs, as often as goblin impale elf maidens on stakes and as often as night trolls kidnap, transform and breed with random people they take a liking too.

For modding, people in the modding forums will be able to tell you right away exactly how to mod out anything in the game you don't like. Probably involve some hacking, or just playing an older version of the game.

Most of these things are toned down to not be graphic initially anyway, the game does carry a official consent warning on Steam so i would think that players would play DF with a air of maturity. Else we end up going down the path where we would need to validate identities before allowing players to access DF.

Things modders have done are often more disturbing and filled with innuendo than vanilla could ever do.

edit- this is getting wall of text'y so i put all the quotes in spoilers

[Evillee]

I think elves are the type to have open relationships

[Ouan]

Did we ever figure out what causes Mountains to sing?

My first stab at a large world resulted in the Plains and the Mountains having a sing off. Apparently, they can now sing well because their words are Impoverished.

Oh well, time to spend another hour or ten generating a world. Fingers crossed that this one does not crash eight hours into generation.

<crosses fingers>

[scriver]

Some eyebrow raising yikes comments here, hehe. I'm happy my dwarves can have open relationships; I couldn't live in a closed one myself (though it's perfectly fine for others if they prefer that of course, provided they don't impose it on any partners instead of finding like minded ones). And of course betrayal/jealousy/promiscuity is a common facet of real life; humans are very rarely pair bonders except when enforced by social norms, and I see no reason for dwarves to be different. It can add some drama to the whole thing. If there's any worry gameplay wise, it's another thing that can cause negative thoughts that's mostly outside the player's control, and as we've seen in recent releases that can be very frustrating.

It'd be nice if we could get polycules and the like in the future. I'm not sure how hardcoded the marriage thing is to only have 2 people.

Arguably it should be based on cultural values like so many other things in DF. I don't know to what extent those are derived from worldgen randomization contra raw tags these days, but I think it's fair you should be able to end up with civilizations of different values. At least that's how I would like it. Oh, and even better if tied religion and/or deity figures.

humans are very rarely pair bonders except when enforced by social norms

This is just saying "humans are very rarely pair bomsers except when they are pair bonders" though

[Shokujin]

Hi, Strange bug, depending of my cursor position the current level (top right) change. 

[Imic]

Did we ever figure out what causes Mountains to sing?

My first stab at a large world resulted in the Plains and the Mountains having a sing off. Apparently, they can now sing well because their words are Impoverished.

Oh well, time to spend another hour or ten generating a world. Fingers crossed that this one does not crash eight hours into generation.

<crosses fingers>

When it says MOUNTAIN, it actually refers to Dwarves. The same goes for PLAINS and Humans. It’s an internal system for categorising the Civs. So in truth, the Dwarves and Humans were having a sing-off so catastrophically loud that Armok decided to kill them all before they broke his favourite wineglass.

[FantasticDorf]

[snip]
My first stab at a large world resulted in the Plains and the Mountains having a sing off. Apparently, they can now sing well because their words are Impoverished.

Oh well, time to spend another hour or ten generating a world. Fingers crossed that this one does not crash eight hours into generation.

When it says MOUNTAIN, it actually refers to Dwarves. The same goes for PLAINS and Humans. [snip]

True, but not to the technicality.

The 'Risen' clown infested fortresses still occupy the dwarven site when they take over with no identifiable RAW entity of their own, and there's a lot of reported muck ups regarding whether one is entangled in the other due to things like histfigs visiting the mountainhome like nothing is wrong. Opening up both necromancer & 'Risen' fortresses as a token orientated generated site type entity would likely fix it if that doesnt sound too suggestiony.

• Already in modding via @UntrustedLife, the development of non-necromancer or rather slab with custom interaction secret driven "wizard towers" without needing a reanimation effect is slowly being developed.