Print

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

[Othob Rithol]

.

[Othob Rithol]

<List of relevant threads>

[Steely Glint]

Perhaps the miners guildmaster could also grant the ability to mark ore veins to be followed. Every time a new square of a marked vein is exposed, it's marked for digging.

[Dwarmin]

House Olon, meaning Gear=Mechanics Guild. Would upkeep mechanisms efficently if item damage ever goes in

House Datan, meaning Iron=metal crafts Guild. Would be able to design special player desgnated Items for certain Dwarves-like your hero could get a gold amulet engraved with his killing of a Hydra.

[Snoman]

I like some of these ideas. I especially like how it would allow new game features to appear over time, thus smoothing out the learning curve a bit.

However it seems to me that the idea you have for mandates needs a little work.
 For a start, if you aren't using a particular guild much, having mandates appear to keep them busy is a dumb idea in my opinion. It would be annoying for a start. There is usually a reason when I stop producing as much of a certain good. Although, if the point is to increase difficulty, then OK. But I still think it would be more on the side of being just annoying rather than adding to gameplay.
 Secondly, having a guild that you aren't using complain by going on strike, probably wouldn't bother me a whole lot. Possibly losing the GM benefit might though.

When it comes to dealing with dwarves with no work to do and therefore no income, I think a more detailed economic model that allowed dwarves to work for their own ends and buy/sell from other dwarves, as well as work for the government (you) would cover this better. (my 2c).

Perhaps instead they blockade another guild that is getting all the work?
If they striked for a really long time it could become an issue.

[Teldin]

I am not in favor of strikes. I don't even understand why dwarves who don't pay rent get upset when they are able to just party all day and then go on tantrums if there's not enough for them to do. In a self-sufficient 200-dwarf fortress I just don't have enough for them all to do and I have to enlist 80% of them into the military or guard just to keep them from beating the crap out of people in the party room. With Guild Masters they would all just go on strike 90% of the time.

I don't like making busywork for dwarves and I don't like having arbitrary mandates on producing X amount of goods if I don't actually need them. I prefer to have say 10 legendary dwarves doing the work for the other 190 so the rest can relax.

[Dae]

When it comes to dealing with dwarves with no work to do and therefore no income, I think a more detailed economic model that allowed dwarves to work for their own ends and buy/sell from other dwarves, as well as work for the government (you) would cover this better. (my 2c).

It also has all my support, but it's not the point here. It's related to Life Arc and could require a bit of Caravan Arc, but it'd be nice to start another thread about it.

Strikes seem at first a bit... violent in the DF world, meaning quite democratic in a fortress when a random guy is beaten to death for something doesn't even know about. They would fit more if the Fortress Guard was around them and the strike could get more like a riot.
Of course, not every time but if strikes came in too often, or the Captain is easily upset or he doesn't like the Guild Master.

Also, being in a guild should have advantages for the dwarves. If they're going to go on strike and share danger, hunger and quite often magma, they should be sharing the positive part of the life in the fortress (given there's one). That's why I think they should put in common all the money earned from doing their job and, once a month/season, share it either equally or depending on their skills. Either ways, the GM would get a better rent than other members.

During every pay, a dwarf would compare how much work he did, how much he earned from it and react depending on his personality : leave the guild (if he's skilled enough to earn a living by himself), get angrier (raising the probability of a strike), do nothing (for the passive-tempered ones).

Perhaps there could be some sort of Guild secrets, revealed only to a few chosen ones. The Guild master would know it, the dwarves who are in the guild for a very long time too. It would be something that would make them more efficient or give them a sort of enhanced ability, maybe just stats going up quicker, which would be useful to your fortress by itself.
But moreover, some new options for the player would be unlocked as the fortress counts a certain amount of Initiates, or it'd be unlocked as soon as you have a Guild Master and  the more Initiates you have, the stronger and more useful this option gets.

This way you have some new factions (useful for more politics, treasons and fun), dwarves' lives get a new social aspect and you would want the guild to be successful.

[Quift]

I like the ideas, but since production is seriously broken. (ie, overproduction)¨, I say that the game is not really mature for this.

I dp generally endorse all suggestions related to improving the Fortress part of the game (instead of silly world gen things that I cannot see etc)

[Neonivek]

Alright well here are some of my suggestions for Guilds... That may or may not have been said

-Guilds depending on size should get their own a guild house.
-The Guild should get a cut of all the members pay
-Long established and successful guilds should require an entrance fee or a referal
-BEING A GUILD, they should harass people who arn't members of the guild. So a Miner's guild should harass or even kill non-guild miners.
--Note: This is what guilds do... You thought differently?
-As an alternative to the above. Guilds could heavily tax non-members of the guild to work. (Hey Guilds arn't a good thing... remember that)
-Guilds since they earn money, should have a Treasury where they keep all their combined wealth!

Now for Military Orders... I don't know...

On another note... Some changes to Nobles
1) You SHOULD be able to set a "Noble" room... As in a room specifically for a Noble class and not a specific dwarf so you don't have to reassign manually everytime a Noble dies or doesn't get elected.

[Lazer Bomb]

GUILDS ARE EVIL

Meh, I dissagree. These are DF guilds, not RL the mafia.

[Dae]

Disagreement agreed. Guilds would get enough !!fun!! into the game once politics are a little better handled, there's no need for them to be fundamentally evil. Just think if the council of nobles is in, some guilds could fight for having a mandate done following their interests.
A guild system implies a faction system, which allows for simili-civil wars. With a little more of Crime and Punishment, it becomes quite interesting.

[Granite26]

GUILDS ARE EVIL

Meh, I dissagree. These are DF guilds, not RL the mafia.

The truth lies in between, but in my opinion closer to Neonivek.  Guilds and trade unions operate by controling the labor force and collective bargaining.  Their power (and thus benefits to their members) is based entirely on presenting a collective front.

Anyway, my thoughts:  The guild as an organisation provides an amazing framework for emergent social interactions and crime.  Examples
           Imagine a dwarf that has a grudge against with the elected guild leader.  He'd have to change professions, likely wouldn't even be allowed in the guild.
           Encouragement to join: Independant dwarves might not want to join.  They would be tormented by the guild.
           Factionalism:  Guilds hanging out will naturally create social cliques, which is a short jump from factions.

Also, how cool would it be to have the option to send troops to break up the guilds forming?  Want to run a totalarian fortress and not put up with the nobles?  You lose both the abilities, and kinda piss off the would be members.  How's that for balance? (Finally a use for the fortress guards!!!)

[Dae]

           Encouragement to join: Independant dwarves might not want to join.  They would be tormented by the guild.

Instead of being tormented (which could be in, doesn't bother me at all, I'd just like if there was another way) directly, guilds could encourage mandates such as "From now on and until the next season, every mining job will be done by the Miners Guild". This way, independent miners won't be able to work.
Or they could mine a few tiles, get paid (less than if it was official) but encounter the risk of going to jail.

[Granite26]

LMAO, along with job priorities, we can mark jobs to be guild or non-guild.  If it's non-guild, then any unhappy guild members that wander by might throw a tantrum! (Iffy if they'd search it out, or if they'd take 'non-guild' jobs, or if they'd care unless they saw a non-guild dwarf working it.)

Also, Guild 'power' could depend on how many guild jobs you do.  You can break the back of the guild by not making guild jobs (and hence guild has no dwarfbucks or power), but the members get unhappy, and you don't get the nifty powers (or as many).  Awesome.

[Mohreb el Yasim]

kill non-guild miners

no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no
dwarfs are not so. you melange them with humans and goblins ...