Print

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

[smjjames]

one halfassed rerail later:

Eyelids clean the eyes so you don't have to soap them off, but if an eyelid is torn off, I think they might soap the eyes.

It may be my contemporary bias, but doesn't soap actually burn the eyes and severely irritate them?  As someone who bathes, that has been my experience.  Any current/former chem students?  confirm/deny

So does shampoo, I'm sure everybody has gotten shampoo in their eyes at least once.

Edit: re-rail, heh.

Since there is now a 'placeholder' infection, Toady, shouldn't you change the wound infections and sepsis in the venom section?

Edit2: From the devnotes, having rotting tissue eventually kill sounds alot like sepsis, so maybe you could take a second look at the venom entry.

Oh yea, wiki link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sepsis

Also, where are these notes by SirHoneyBadger as I want to look at them?

[Areyar]

infected puss opozing wounds will smell . . . Does that mean rotting dwarves will emit miasma?
Living rotting dwarves that is. Normal dead rotting dwarves emitting miasma is pretty vanilla. (yet not pretty or smelling of vanilla )

[smjjames]

Well, zombies=rotting animated corpses which emit miasma. So I would think yes.

I hope it's not too much as miasma has a tendency to be completely opaque.

Edit response to areyars edit: Rotting is still rotting, whether it's living, dead, or undead.

[Quatch]

I was just thinking, the progress seems to be far enough along to give a demo!

Then I thought, oh, this game is in alpha. You can't give an alpha demo, because it already is.

Then I was sad.

Hooray for christmas! (when I figure we'll get this).

Now I am thinking in 318 pages, someone else has said this. Originality is dead.

[Chthonic]

It may be my contemporary bias, but doesn't soap actually burn the eyes and severely irritate them?  As someone who bathes, that has been my experience.  Any current/former chem students?  confirm/deny

Don't quote me on this, but isn't the soap in DF made with Lye?  As in you-can-dispose-of-bodies-by-dissolving-them-in Lye?  I'd imagine it's pretty harsh.

[smjjames]

I think we need some chemistry majors here....

Still, the wiki ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soap#Soapmaking ) says that lye will form a stable soap with tallow fat or something.

I think the dwarves use the hot proccess.

[Granite26]

It may be my contemporary bias, but doesn't soap actually burn the eyes and severely irritate them?  As someone who bathes, that has been my experience.  Any current/former chem students?  confirm/deny

Don't quote me on this, but isn't the soap in DF made with Lye?  As in you-can-dispose-of-bodies-by-dissolving-them-in Lye?  I'd imagine it's pretty harsh.

Yeah... Friend of mine makes soap with beef fat and lye all the time.... if you wash with it before it cures (I.E. don't wait 4-6 weeks), it'll melt your skin off.  The curing process makes it pretty gentle though, so it's not so bad as you'd think.

Bright side:  As per Fight Club, you really can make explosives with the by-products.  (Unverified by us, though)

[Footkerchief]

Does ANYONE know whether you can currently request soap as a trade good?

Also, when will we be able to use metal vials or even wooden ones to make soap with or is there something special about glass vials?

I think the reasoning with glass vials is that a) glass isn't nearly as reactive as metal or wood and b) it's easier to measure things with glass, since you can see the liquid level from the side.  Wood/metal measuring cups would be a sensible addition though, for cooking and some alchemy.

Is there any difference between organs of different species?  Say an elf heart and a dwarf heart?
If not then say Urist Mcscrewed has his heart injured in battle, would it (at some point in the future) be possible to, you know, get an elf and...I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this.

Heart transplants are, like, infinitely beyond their tech level.

Since there is now a 'placeholder' infection, Toady, shouldn't you change the wound infections and sepsis in the venom section?

Edit2: From the devnotes, having rotting tissue eventually kill sounds alot like sepsis, so maybe you could take a second look at the venom entry.

The point is that it's just a placeholder, instead of being everything he wanted to do for that item, and there's still work to be done on it later.

Don't quote me on this, but isn't the soap in DF made with Lye?  As in you-can-dispose-of-bodies-by-dissolving-them-in Lye?  I'd imagine it's pretty harsh.

Soap isn't just a mixture of lye and fat -- the lye reacts with the fat and the result is not nearly as corrosive.  It's still a harsh cleaner and will of course sting your eyes, but it won't dissolve you.

[0_0 OH MY SCIENCE 0_0]

[Hoborobo234]

Just noticed this. If you give zombies rotting flesh, Will they eventually rot to a skeleton/death?

[Arkose]

Ya, heart transplants are pretty modern, and even successful heart SURGERY is still waaaay out of period...

Sure, SUCCESSFUL heart transplants and SUCCESSFUL heart surgery are out of period, but ATTEMPTED heart transplants and ATTEMPTED heart surgery? Don't tell me dwarves wouldn't try.

[smjjames]

Does ANYONE know whether you can currently request soap as a trade good?

I'm going to try and find out, the human caravan is a bit over a game month away.

[Arkose]

Just noticed this. If you give zombies rotting flesh, Will they eventually rot to a skeleton/death?

I think they would rot down to just the bones, but I don't think Toady has mentioned a tag that would let the zombie elephant get reclassified as a skeletal elephant once enough flesh is gone.

[smjjames]

lol, great, just what I need, my fort bieng made a barony

I'll deal with the damn nobles later.....

Oh yea, economy is turned off, so I'm not worried about that, I just wasn't ready for the nobles....

[Dante]

This, originally on corsetry, from snopes.com:

"[...] The modifications, however, stopped short of surgery: one ate very little and wore tight corsets to get that effect.

To believe the Victorian rib removal canard is to believe that in an age when even the most uncomplicated of surgeries often proved fatal, women were lining up to take the risk and surgeons were happily sawing away. Never mind that anesthesia was still an iffy proposition and that post-surgical death due to infection claimed a horrifying number, according to this falsehood the fair sex was willing to take "suffer to be beautiful" down to new lows.

A statistical report from the mid-1800s listed these fatality rates from amputations; expected fatality rates from rib removal should be similar:
Forearm . . . . . . . 13 percent
Arm . . . . . . . 52 percent
Leg . . . . . . . 50 percent
Thigh . . . . . . . 85 percent

[...]"

Toady has said the 1400s tech level is only a guideline, but this is still data from 400 years AFTER that, and mere amputations are proving deadly approximately half the time.

Which means firstly, if survival rates anywhere near reflect reality, you're going to really need that legendary surgeon.

And secondly, simply no way there's going to be organ transplants. (Except, you know, maybe with magic and moods).