Print

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

[Taras]

Step-mothers and step-fathers: if original parents dead, child may have new and they will be in legends. This wil be great for gay marriages. BABYSNATCHER civs may become parents of children from another races.

Slavery: sapient creature may be slave, this work like pet with some hacks to prevent strange behavior. Also slaves has more priority of labors than normal citizens. For enslaving creature may need special token SLAVEABLE or be SLOW_LEARNER. Temporary enslaving may use animal trainer skill and/or some social skills.

Eating corpses: goblin or elven butcher shop has second butchering reaction that used for butchering corpses with DEAD_DWARF.

Growing items: entity level token for elves. Player may designate wooden items by manager, when elves will gather fruits from trees, they will also occasionaly spawn requested wooden items.

Pseudo-civs: aboveground analogue of cave animalmen civ. Maybe, used by some wild sentient creatures (like ogres) for choosing crude equipment (like great sling made from raw hide) or artifact making (in myths, cyclops was legendary crafters like dwarves).

DEEP_CIV: like LAYER_LINKED this token give acces to plants and creatures from three cave layers, but not remove caravans and embarking. Or, maybe, this will be better as new SITE type.

Special missions: BABYSNATCHER may send missions of children stealing, ITEM_THIEF may send missions of stealing items.

Thanks for reading!

[MaxTheFox]

+1. IIRC you won't be locked to playing dwarves in vanilla in future versions.

[Shonai_Dweller]

We can already send people out to steal stuff. Don't need to be an Item_Thief.  Baby_Snatching missions are basically done, or at least will be once the final parts of Villains are put in after Steam, so that will be good.

Not being able to eat corpses when your ethics let you is a bug. It's supposed to work, it used to work, but it broke.

Slavable? Um...no.
Powerful races should take whomever they please to be slaves (as they do already, at least in worldgen).

Otherwise yes, lots of new options for playing other races would be welcome. It'll be along while before they're made vanilla playable in site mode.

[Taras]

Sorry, but I forgot about tortures from ethics.

AS_EXAMPLE give you ability to use 'justice' (executions) to captured sentients who not fort member.

FOR_INFORMATION - when you torture creature, (s)he may give you rumours.

ANIMALS - non-sentient creatures now not have justice immunity.

FOR_FUN - all fort members (or non-happy members?) may do executions, so you not need special noble.

[Taras]

We can already send people out to steal stuff. Don't need to be an Item_Thief.  Baby_Snatching missions are basically done, or at least will be once the final parts of Villains are put in after Steam, so that will be good.

Not being able to eat corpses when your ethics let you is a bug. It's supposed to work, it used to work, but it broke.

Slavable? Um...no.
Powerful races should take whomever they please to be slaves (as they do already, at least in worldgen).

Otherwise yes, lots of new options for playing other races would be welcome. It'll be along while before they're made vanilla playable in site mode.

Will Baby_Snatching missions work only with this token?

Slaveable - for fortress mode enslaving. When you catch creature into cage and turn into your fort's slave.

[endlessblaze]

I dont think you would need a special tag for being able to have a given creature capable of being enslaved
If the creature [CAN_LEARN] [CAN_SPEAK] or is [INTELEIGENT] Thats likely enough for an entity that decides that slavery is ok.

How easy it is to keep them in line might depend on factors like [SLOW_LEARNER] or the average temperament of the species.

Of course, I could see tag for being slaveable being useful If you wanted to make civs more selective.

Like having a civilization that wont enslave humans or dwarves, but will enslave like, Fire Fairies, or something.
You could use tiers of the tag in that case I guess?

[Shonai_Dweller]

We can already send people out to steal stuff. Don't need to be an Item_Thief.  Baby_Snatching missions are basically done, or at least will be once the final parts of Villains are put in after Steam, so that will be good.

Not being able to eat corpses when your ethics let you is a bug. It's supposed to work, it used to work, but it broke.

Slavable? Um...no.
Powerful races should take whomever they please to be slaves (as they do already, at least in worldgen).

Otherwise yes, lots of new options for playing other races would be welcome. It'll be along while before they're made vanilla playable in site mode.

Will Baby_Snatching missions work only with this token?

Slaveable - for fortress mode enslaving. When you catch creature into cage and turn into your fort's slave.

I don't really want restrictions on what I can and can't enslave. I caught it, I'll do what I want with it. Unless I'm playing a race who refuses due to ethics. Why does it make sense to be able to enslave a troll and not an owl person for example?

I mean if you don't want not enslave some stuff to for rp reasons or whatever then just go ahead. It's a sandbox, play how you like. But if realism means I have to work through the whole of the raws adding Slavable to every single race, it doesn't seem worth doing in the first place.

Preventions to slavery should be based on inter-civ (and "wild civ" when that's a thing) diplomacy. Not tags.

Kidnapping missions (including the snatching of children) should Just Work when Toady turns them on, which he hasn't yet (probably because work on Villains isn't finished yet). No idea if ethics will prevent in in fortress mode. Adventurer too, probably with less restrictions.

[FantasticDorf]

I don't really want restrictions on what I can and can't enslave. I caught it, I'll do what I want with it. Unless I'm playing a race who refuses due to ethics. Why does it make sense to be able to enslave a troll and not an owl person for example?

I mean if you don't want not enslave some stuff to for rp reasons or whatever then just go ahead. It's a sandbox, play how you like. But if realism means I have to work through the whole of the raws adding Slavable to every single race, it doesn't seem worth doing in the first place.

Preventions to slavery should be based on inter-civ (and "wild civ" when that's a thing) diplomacy. Not tags.

There are viable arguements why there are things you may not want to slave in the first place, like having a terrible/prideful temperament to never give in to your attempts, or it just doesn't make sense or cannot be reasoned with into doing tasks (like a inanimate gabbro/amethyst/magma man)

Not that trolls and etc might look at your fortress dwarves and go "Oh thank goodness im so relieved the Dwarves are here to enslave me rather than turn me into meat-roasts"

[Shonai_Dweller]

I don't really want restrictions on what I can and can't enslave. I caught it, I'll do what I want with it. Unless I'm playing a race who refuses due to ethics. Why does it make sense to be able to enslave a troll and not an owl person for example?

I mean if you don't want not enslave some stuff to for rp reasons or whatever then just go ahead. It's a sandbox, play how you like. But if realism means I have to work through the whole of the raws adding Slavable to every single race, it doesn't seem worth doing in the first place.

Preventions to slavery should be based on inter-civ (and "wild civ" when that's a thing) diplomacy. Not tags.

There are viable arguements why there are things you may not want to slave in the first place, like having a terrible/prideful temperament to never give in to your attempts, or it just doesn't make sense or cannot be reasoned with into doing tasks (like a inanimate gabbro/amethyst/magma man)

Not that trolls and etc might look at your fortress dwarves and go "Oh thank goodness im so relieved the Dwarves are here to enslave me rather than turn me into meat-roasts"

Yes, and the simulation should attempt to simulate them. Not pile on restrictive yes/no tags. More simulation, less binary tags please.
(Plus fixed world editor for when players need to add specifics themselves of course).


--
Because after all, in DF worlds which are full of increasingly mixed race civs where would "not_enslave" even go? On the creature? So when an invasion takes over a civ they enslave everyone except the races they're not allowed to enslave. And, I guess they just kill all the ones they're not allowed to slave, because....no can't think of a reason.

On the entity? So, I can enslave a village of elves, so long as they call an elf their king, but if they're a village of elves in a not-enslave civ, then we don't enslave them because.....no again, can't imagine why invaders would care.

[IndigoFenix]

The whole CAN_LEARN/SLOW_LEARNER thing needs an overhaul, or at least a rethink IMO.

I've always seen trolls as being basically like monkeys - they can be taught some skills, like how to fight, perform tricks, and if they have hands they can learn to perform basic labors, but can't complain, plan vengeance on their oppressors as a group, or petition for equal rights, and therefore they are never actually given the rights of sapient beings.  While animalpeople are just...people who happen to have the heads of animals, and haven't formed a civilization for whatever reason, but would be biologically capable of doing so.

Except that logically this distinction really falls more under the ability to speak - the ability to create a social contract - not the ability to learn skills.  Pretty much all animals with brains have the ability to learn skills, to a greater or lesser degree, but DF ignores this and uses the CAN_LEARN token to determine whether the species should be regarded as sapient as far as cannibalism and killing are concerned.

This is probably because there are humanoid creatures in DF who cannot speak, like plump helmet men, kobolds, and trolls, and the idea of dwarves eating humanoid, thinking beings because said beings aren't capable of organizing and fighting back rubs Toady the wrong way.

But if so, I think there should be a separate token to handle this, like CONSIDERED_SAPIENT, because the idea that a creature is either "fully sapient and capable of creating a civilization" or "mindless automaton incapable of learning" is kind of silly, from both a realism and a gameplay perspective.  (Wouldn't it be neat if your pets could learn combat skills, and an old, experienced war dog could fight better than a just-trained one?)

[voliol]

With step-parents you mean adoptive/foster parents; a step-parent is someone your parent marries, presumably after death of the other parent or divorce. As of the new update I think this might happen already (haven’t seen it though, is there a relationship title?).

+1 for adoptive parents, they’re ubitiquous IRL.

Kobold thieving and babysnatching could be moved into the missions system, if they haven’t already. That is, the NPC thieves and snatchers should be considered questers for their civs, moving across the world map, instead of teleporting events that show up if you have a hostile ITEM_THIEF/BABYSNATCHER civ near your fort.

[Shonai_Dweller]

Kobold thieving and babysnatching could be moved into the missions system, if they haven’t already. That is, the NPC thieves and snatchers should be considered questers for their civs, moving across the world map, instead of teleporting events that show up if you have a hostile ITEM_THIEF/BABYSNATCHER civ near your fort.

Baby snatchers travel like armies across the map, they don't teleport. Very few things are left which still teleport (FBs, titans and merchants). And, yeah, Toady says in an fotf someplace that he's already made them use the mission code, so if he wanted to and had time to check through it for errors, he could turn on baby-snatching missions in site mode.

I imagine it'd be more useful for players to use it for kidnapping villains. Who wants more kids in the fort? 

[madpathmoth]

I imagine it'd be more useful for players to use it for kidnapping villains. Who wants more kids in the fort? 

If it meant you could take goblins or other non-dwarven races and raise them in your society as fortress workers, that would be interesting (or terrible, depending on how you view kidnapping babies even if it's saving them from a society of demon worship) and since goblins don't eat or drink, that's a small upside.

In regards to slavery, it does seem kind of surprising that I see slaves from civilized races, but only see animal people slaves when they are from another race's society.  You'd think the dark forces would be all about enslaving the nearby tribal cultures as manual laborers, kind of like how in Morrowind, Khajit and Argonians were considered "well suited" to their roles as slaves because of their physical attributes.  Not to mention how many would make dangerous soldiers for their army.

I mean, I dunno how useful a bunch of beetle men would be, but any of the human-sized or larger ones would be intimidating to see ("oh god, the goblins enslaved the local polar bear man population and have sent them to our fortress!") and a squad of crowman crossbowmen certainly has applications.

[Shonai_Dweller]

Slaves are taken from populations of sites taken over by invaders. Animal people have no sites therefore are not taken as slaves. It's only surprising if you mistakenly buy into the hype that Dwarf Fortress is some kind of reality simulator.

As for kidnapping missions, I mean, players don't need kids, but an actual application of the mechanic would be where you interrogate someone, he says he's working for someone else. You go kidnap them to find out who the real bad guy is. Kidnapping mission.

You can kidnap for profit too like worldgen bad guys do, but not much point until money actually means something. Fortress mode actual child-snatching missions would be to fulfil some kind of mandate in a future release where mandated missions are a thing. Worth noting that goblins don't kidnap children to make them slaves (right now, anyway).

Right now, no-one knows what other sites are, what their relationship to other places in the world is, they're just driven by tag-motivated action. Is he an "enemy"? Yeah, let's go mug him!

All of that is to be addressed in the next big arc after Mythgen, far in the future (I suggest listening to Toady's interview where he talks a bit about that from a couple of days ago).

[madpathmoth]

Slaves are taken from populations of sites taken over by invaders. Animal people have no sites therefore are not taken as slaves. It's only surprising if you mistakenly buy into the hype that Dwarf Fortress is some kind of reality simulator.

I'm not sure how to take that comment, that feels a little rude.  Excuse me for not knowing exactly what parts of the fantasy generator have been detailed and what ones aren't.

It does make sense that animal people can't be conquered without controlling any sites, though, thank you.