Print

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

[Sean Mirrsen]

A clarification on the grasp-size thing. Currently, what creature can hold what weapon is determined by the overall creature size, which is somewhat limiting. Since we can now determine the absolute size of a bodypart (by correlation between all subsizes in a defined body size), we could swap out the minimum/maximum size tags and the two-handed tag for just one tag, [GRASP_SIZE:X:Y]. The X being the "thickness", or minimum grasp size that can effectively hold the weapon, and the Y being the "length" or maximum size of simultaneous grasps. If the calculated grasp size of a creature is less than X, the weapon can only be hauled. If it's more than X and less than a third of Y, the creature can wield the weapon only two-handed. If it's anywhere between a third and two thirds of Y, the creature can wield the weapon one or two-handed. If it's more than two thirds of Y, the weapon can only be wielded one-handed.

Okay, the above might sound a little too complicated for little gain, but I thought of two cases that wouldn't make sense. A Tyrannosaurus Rex (and similar critters) is huginormous, but has small hands - he wouldn't be able to equip a monstrous sword made for Titans' use, even if he is of comparable size. On the contrary, a magical "floating hand" would be very small - but since it's both magical and essentially a hand in and of itself, it would be able to wield any weapon that a human could wield one-handed. I thought that this bit of "realism" was a logical step forward.

[darkflagrance]

A clarification on the grasp-size thing. Currently, what creature can hold what weapon is determined by the overall creature size, which is somewhat limiting. Since we can now determine the absolute size of a bodypart (by correlation between all subsizes in a defined body size), we could swap out the minimum/maximum size tags and the two-handed tag for just one tag, [GRASP_SIZE:X:Y]. The X being the "thickness", or minimum grasp size that can effectively hold the weapon, and the Y being the "length" or maximum size of simultaneous grasps. If the calculated grasp size of a creature is less than X, the weapon can only be hauled. If it's more than X and less than a third of Y, the creature can wield the weapon only two-handed. If it's anywhere between a third and two thirds of Y, the creature can wield the weapon one or two-handed. If it's more than two thirds of Y, the weapon can only be wielded one-handed.

We can implement grasp sizes to stop faires from doing more than hauling greatswords, but will that be enough to prevent a sufficiently bad dwarf from defending himself with a gabbro cabinet?

[snelg]

Will ore smelting be changed to always require coal fuel? As it is, in Real Life, Cinnabar is the only ore that can be smelted (into Mercury) using nothing but heat, while all other ores require a reducing agent, usually coke.

If it's not super-annoying to play, I don't mind making things more realistic.  Without coal deposits, you'd need more trees to die, and that's wholesomely dwarven, but if you can't send lumber parties off-map, it might start to get too extreme to demand one unit of coal for every single ore item that is dropped.

Once trees get some more love (and give something more than "one wood" each) this problem might not be too big.

[Cruxador]

DF is moving ahead, but unfortunately it has had its arms and legs lopped off.

Actually, I think DF is more like the end boss in mass effect 2. Think about it.

A giant, illogical and completely inexplicable skull that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in every context known to man and has single-handedly been personally responsible for millions of brain aneurysms in sci-fi fans worldwide?

It made perfect sense if you talked to Legion enough first. I would imagine that most people didn't, due to how late you generally get him.

[Sean Mirrsen]

A clarification on the grasp-size thing. Currently, what creature can hold what weapon is determined by the overall creature size, which is somewhat limiting. Since we can now determine the absolute size of a bodypart (by correlation between all subsizes in a defined body size), we could swap out the minimum/maximum size tags and the two-handed tag for just one tag, [GRASP_SIZE:X:Y]. The X being the "thickness", or minimum grasp size that can effectively hold the weapon, and the Y being the "length" or maximum size of simultaneous grasps. If the calculated grasp size of a creature is less than X, the weapon can only be hauled. If it's more than X and less than a third of Y, the creature can wield the weapon only two-handed. If it's anywhere between a third and two thirds of Y, the creature can wield the weapon one or two-handed. If it's more than two thirds of Y, the weapon can only be wielded one-handed.

We can implement grasp sizes to stop faires from doing more than hauling greatswords, but will that be enough to prevent a sufficiently bad dwarf from defending himself with a gabbro cabinet?

Yes if all items are merged into one class, and if cabinets will have a raw definition.

[Neruz]

DF is moving ahead, but unfortunately it has had its arms and legs lopped off.

Actually, I think DF is more like the end boss in mass effect 2. Think about it.

A giant, illogical and completely inexplicable skull that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in every context known to man and has single-handedly been personally responsible for millions of brain aneurysms in sci-fi fans worldwide?

It made perfect sense if you talked to Legion enough first. I would imagine that most people didn't, due to how late you generally get him.

Making a robot out of people does not make sense.
At all.
Ever.

[Cruxador]

DF is moving ahead, but unfortunately it has had its arms and legs lopped off.

Actually, I think DF is more like the end boss in mass effect 2. Think about it.

A giant, illogical and completely inexplicable skull that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in every context known to man and has single-handedly been personally responsible for millions of brain aneurysms in sci-fi fans worldwide?

It made perfect sense if you talked to Legion enough first. I would imagine that most people didn't, due to how late you generally get him.

Making a robot out of people does not make sense.
At all.
Ever.

Probably best to use spoilers for the sake of the folks that haven't played it yet.

Spoiler: Mass Effect spoilers (click to show/hide)

I don't see why not. Where else are the Reapers going to find billions of minds with which to form a new one of their own?

[AbacusWizard]

Its not about the existence of such things - its more about how hard it is to achieve such things.

Or how hard to get. The roots of a mountain is kind of the odd one out because granite technically forms the base of the continents and if you dig deep enough....

I think the general idea is that the chain is made out of things that don't exist, because if it doesn't exist, you can't break it!

Also, could it be that "the roots of a mountain" was a kenning for adamantine?

[PsyberianHusky]

"Footkerchief is a deity of The Bay-Forum of Twelve. Footkerchief most often takes the form of a User and is associated with the search function, quotations and knowledge."

He is  god, I search the same thing and I get nowhere the same yields

[Antagonist]

By that logic a female virgin(maiden?) dwarf beard should provide adamantine levels of protection.

Hmmm....

[Neruz]

DF is moving ahead, but unfortunately it has had its arms and legs lopped off.

Actually, I think DF is more like the end boss in mass effect 2. Think about it.

A giant, illogical and completely inexplicable skull that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in every context known to man and has single-handedly been personally responsible for millions of brain aneurysms in sci-fi fans worldwide?

It made perfect sense if you talked to Legion enough first. I would imagine that most people didn't, due to how late you generally get him.

Making a robot out of people does not make sense.
At all.
Ever.

Probably best to use spoilers for the sake of the folks that haven't played it yet.

Spoiler: Mass Effect spoilers (click to show/hide)

I don't see why not. Where else are the Reapers going to find billions of minds with which to form a new one of their own?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The first game stated quite clearly that the Reapers were of the (probably correct) opinion that organics were weak and useless and that their machineness was awesome and super. Then in the second game they turn right around, asspull a slave-species for no apparant reason when a bunch of robots would have made far more sense and then proceed to start covertly abducting millions of people to turn them into squishees to make a new Reaper, which are revealed to be gigantic humanoid skeleton robots.

None of that makes sense. Not one part of it. Their entire plan is batshit insane, whatshisfaces revival and the massive face heel turn by Cerberus is highly contrived and more than a little stupid, but it does make a sort of insane sense. The whole "Turn peoples into Reapers" storyline makes no sense at all and actively degenerates the Reapers from their original conception.

It's just plain dumb. There is no excuse for it.


--EDIT--

Also:

Edi: My readings indicate it’s a Reaper.

Shepard: A Human Reaper.

Edi: Precisely.


ಠ_ಠ

[Thundrim]

By that logic a female virgin(maiden?) dwarf beard should provide adamantine levels of protection.

Hmmm....

Absolutely. There is a catch though, they will have your arms removed when you try to approach the owner of said beard in a groping or cutting fashion. Like it was easy to locate it in the first place. Guess it adds to the challenge.

---

[Flaede]

Its not about the existence of such things - its more about how hard it is to achieve such things.

Or how hard to get. The roots of a mountain is kind of the odd one out because granite technically forms the base of the continents and if you dig deep enough....

I think the general idea is that the chain is made out of things that don't exist, because if it doesn't exist, you can't break it!

Yes. The point is they don't exist. The giant slavering beastie is held back by nothing. Which as noted, is unbreakable. And fortunately for everyone involved, he doesn't know it's nothing, and thus isn't there to be broken or (more to the point) hold him back.

(and someone still had to lose an arm to get the blasted thing on 'im)


I agree with the people wanting strange moods like this one, though. That and Wagnerian Opera rings (that make everyone around them burst into song), or crazy bottomless beer mugs, or suchlike.

[Thundrim]

Its not about the existence of such things - its more about how hard it is to achieve such things.

Or how hard to get. The roots of a mountain is kind of the odd one out because granite technically forms the base of the continents and if you dig deep enough....

I think the general idea is that the chain is made out of things that don't exist, because if it doesn't exist, you can't break it!

Yes. The point is they don't exist. The giant slavering beastie is held back by nothing. Which as noted, is unbreakable. And fortunately for everyone involved, he doesn't know it's nothing, and thus isn't there to be broken or (more to the point) hold him back.

(and someone still had to lose an arm to get the blasted thing on 'im)

That's why they are Gods, they understand these things so much better than us mere mortals.

---

[James.Denholm]

Yes. The point is they don't exist. The giant slavering beastie is held back by nothing. Which as noted, is unbreakable. And fortunately for everyone involved, he doesn't know it's nothing, and thus isn't there to be broken or (more to the point) hold him back.

Bay12 Community, Philosopher, cancels Pacing: Enlightenment achived.