Print

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

[Sean Mirrsen]

Heh. Well, the reason I'm reading it is because people have complained about it so much. Also, it came up on TVTropes, with a direct link to the PDF no less, so I couldn't help but check it out. And you know, it's not as bad as people think. Sure, there's this pervasive sexual theme throughout, but if you don't focus on it, the system makes sense. I still wouldn't try to play it with PnP, because holy carp there's a lot of statistics, but it's not a problem for a computer-controlled environment. I'm sure if you rename it to, say, LETHAL (Logistical Evisceration Through Hellish Algebraic Loquaciousness) and get it some public opinion facelift by dropping most of the sexual theme and introducing more normal violence, you'll get a passable Expert-level RPG system. You know, something like what DF aims to be.

Note, however, that I don't find such things as rules for forceful intercourse "unfitting" for an RPG. Normal RPGs have rules for killing, and that doesn't mean you should kill anything that moves. This one has rules for "that", and that doesn't mean you should do "that" to anything that moves.

[Footkerchief]

Are you saying that FATAL can be of use in DF's development in some way?

[CobaltKobold]

I'm going to be googol% sure that you're better off doing things from scratch.

[Saber Cherry]

But the two factors are combined here. You won't progressively work slower and slower if you chew less coca leaves unless you're already addicted. In which case coca leaves or cocaine stop being a bonus, and lack of them becomes a penalty. This is the case with dwarves.

There's no difference here except for the frame of reference. If you're used to something improving your performance, then lack of it is seen as a penalty, and if you're not used to it, then presence of it is seen as a bonus.

I disagree.  The body and brain can adjust to many substances, and create a new baseline.  Thus coffee (or various other stimulants) may be beneficial when someone is first exposed to it, but after years can become a necessary crutch that does not enhance performance, but is necessary to maintain baseline.  Sometimes the new baseline is even lower than the old baseline.  Deprived of the substance, the person can become basically useless, far below their pre-dependence level - at least, until the affected systems recover.

Dwarves never recover, so I suppose alcohol dependence is inherent to their genetics...  or maybe due to fetal alcohol exposure.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Are you saying that FATAL can be of use in DF's development in some way?

Not at this point, probably, since Toady is making up everything from scratch anyway. But FATAL (or rather, LETHAL, as I've dubbed it) would make a good DF-like game, yes.
Basically, it provides statistically sound systems to generating believable characters, and handling their interactions with the world. It's unwieldy for PnP, but I don't think it'll be much of a problem for a CRPG.

[Footkerchief]

In that case, I'm not sure why you brought it up here, especially given a) FATAL's tendency to provoke shitstorms and b) the fact that this thread gets derailed way too much (Toady already has 2000+ posts to read through).

[Dante]

They don't even ask for adamantine!

I think it is just assumed that every dwarf loves the stuff. The way I see it, no dwarf can even like it more than the next, so no one demands it/likes it. Its kind of like the "needs alcohol to get through the work day," but not written.

No, because the weird thing is, some dwarves do have it as their metal preference (and possibly it can be their stone preference as well, I'm not sure). So that means that some dwarves like adamantine even more than others, which is a scary thought.

The other weird thing is that the dwarven king/queen doesn't have an adamantine preference - or any at all - even though they travel to your fortress specifically because of it.

[Gidoran]

They don't even ask for adamantine!

I think it is just assumed that every dwarf loves the stuff. The way I see it, no dwarf can even like it more than the next, so no one demands it/likes it. Its kind of like the "needs alcohol to get through the work day," but not written.

No, because the weird thing is, some dwarves do have it as their metal preference (and possibly it can be their stone preference as well, I'm not sure). So that means that some dwarves like adamantine even more than others, which is a scary thought.

The other weird thing is that the dwarven king/queen doesn't have an adamantine preference - or any at all - even though they travel to your fortress specifically because of it.

Obviously, they have a hidden pref for money. I mean, generally, when you strike adamantine your fortress will suddenly boom in terms of value, and since most people make crackerjack weapons and armor out of it, or if not most then a good percent, Your king/queen would likely be safest there.

So they've a hidden pref for money. And survival.

[Sean Mirrsen]

In that case, I'm not sure why you brought it up here, especially given a) FATAL's tendency to provoke shitstorms and b) the fact that this thread gets derailed way too much (Toady already has 2000+ posts to read through).

On the off-chance it does become useful, of course! Let's not mention the existing FATAL then, and focus on the hypothetical LETHAL, that lacks the game's most controversial point. You could still salvage stuff from it that can suit DF. Its skill lists boggle the mind. Its stat and skill definition tables could be used to overhaul hist-fig generation at worldgen, and the whole character generation system can be used to inject a custom character into the world for Adventure mode purposes. I didn't read up on combat yet, so I've yet to see how well it matches DF's, but what I heard of it indicates it's just as ridiculously detailed as the next DF version's is going to be.

edit: now I have. DF definetly could use some of those descriptive bits.

[CobaltKobold]

Spoiler: F stuff (click to show/hide)

I don't want to talk about it, but the reviews were fairly in the direction of REALITY DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY on the detailed mechanics, aside from being egregiously offended.

Unlike DF.

the explicit CAN_CIV doesn't make much sense to me presently. If a creature is able to do the thinking, and the speaking, why couldn't one civ?

[Footkerchief]

On the off-chance it does become useful, of course!

I ask again: why did you post about it here, instead of, say, Suggestions?  It's not even tangentially related to current development.

[Sean Mirrsen]

I'll make sure to make one later. (though likely in GD first, to make the hypothetical system non-hypothetical) I didn't really intend to discuss it here, was just "thinking out loud" in the most currently appropriate place.

edit: the previous (as in, first) version of your post was more applicable, I think.

[Neruz]

Yeah, FATAL's system might be detailed, but it's also horribly wrong.

[Reese]

Yeah, FATAL's system might be detailed, but it's also horribly wrong.

So?

I'll admit I have no knowledge of FATAL outside what's been mentioned in the last few posts, but it seems to me any system that gets things 'horribly wrong' still has merit as a base on which a not 'horribly wrong' derivative system could be built...

Speaking of derivative systems, Toady probably shouldn't even bother looking at FATAL because derivative works fall under copyright infringement, and I think we can all agree that Copyright issues are the last thing Toady needs to deal with, and plausible deniability is the best kind.

[Neruz]

Reese, i assure you right now. You do not want to know about FATAL.


Every pen and paper gamer on the planet can universally agree that FATAL is the worst pen and paper RPG ever. There's lots of fights for second place, but none beat first FATAL for worst.