Print

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

[SirHoneyBadger]

I'd like it if we had more choices at the beginning of the game, as concerns my 7 dwarfs' relationship (or lack thereof) to the Mountainhome.

I think that would add a whole lot to our ability to tell a story, as well as helping to define the role of the Fortress, the role of Migrants, and the role of Nobles.

If we could decide certain very basic things about where our 7 came from, why they came, what their place in society was before they came here, where they got the goods and skills they came from, what some of their goals are, and how other dwarfs view them and relate to them, at the beginning of the game, I think it would add quite a bit of impact and impetus to the resulting game.

I'm not sure what those decisions and choices might be, exactly, and a lot of that would depend on the World background, as defined by Toady and Threetoe, but I think there's lots of other things we could decide, aside from skills and goods, that our 7 could also "carry" into the new land they're trying to colonise.

Maybe we could even make choices about the  nature of the Mountainhome, the background of the World, or even about the Dwarf species itself, that would further separate one game from another.

Are our dwarfs outcasts, or under orders? Is the Mountainhome prosperous and industrious, or poor and decadent? Maybe it's rich and decadent, and ruled by a council of criminals, Godfather-style.

Ofcourse, these are questions that we can already ask, in story form (and a lot of questions should remain the subject of stories), but there could also be certain things we could decide on, as a game mechanic, that would have real in-game effects, and each choice could make for a completely different gaming experience, which would lead to new and different stories being told.

[Pilsu]

Can't really expect the game to write stories at this point. You can come up with your own


Personally I'd want my dwarves to have parents and sometimes siblings listed. Does have some major problems, such as how the dwarves are retroactively generated without screwing up history or how to avoid massive inbreeding caused by your devastated home civ having only one married couple in it left. Then there's the whole hurdle with genetics Toady just added

If people are picked from the existing pool as immigrants, they'd eventually all immigrate to your fort, taking a crap on the concept of civs as a whole. Not to mention the issues with goblins, those guys would run out really, really quickly

[SirHoneyBadger]

Well, that's one thing you could choose:
How big is the pool your migrants come from? And do they all come from one place, or from several different places?

Maybe, in one game, there isn't a Mountainhome at all, maybe the dwarfs all live in ghettos and small forts, and your job is to found a Dwarf Nation. 

That choice alone could effect what migrants you get, and also what Nobles you get. If there's no centralized Dwarf power, then maybe all the Nobles that arrive in your Fortress are ones without Noble titles like the Dungeonmaster and the Philosopher.

You'd then be able to decide for yourself (or your dwarfs would elect) who's a Baron, who's the King/Queen, etc. from among your own dwarfs.

The tradeoff to this is, you wouldn't have a powerful dwarf trading partner, so dwarf caravans might not bring much. You'd also be expected to send aid to the other dwarfs on the map. You  wouldn't be able to rely on the Mountainhome for military aid, when the Army Arc comes in, since you're the Mountainhome.

The new genetic things coming in could go well with this, too, since you could maybe choose which Clan each of your 7 came from, and each Clan might have different genetic traits. You could then choose what your dwarfs' relationship is, with the different Clans (since they might also be powerful political entities), as well as with the Mountainhome.

If that caused you to have a good relationship with a Clan, but a bad relationship with the Mountainhome, you might end up part of a dwarf civil war, or you might end up founding a dwarf nation, as above, only one that's separate, and opposed to, the Mountainhome.

You might, alternatively, end up recieving migrants from your Clan, who are on the outs with (or criminal refugees from) the Mountainhome, causing you considerable strife with the Dwarf King (meaning a blockade on the Dwarf Caravan, more and worse Nobles, less and worse Migrants, no military assistance, etc.), and the challenge of "healing the rift" that's weaking the Dwarf people.

Another alternative to this is that you might have to hide refugees from arriving Nobles, who have been sent by the King to put your Fortress under their thumb (which leads to more hammerings than usual, demands for traditional dwarf items, etc.). Or they might be from the Clan, and plotting to use your Fortress as a staging-point for their insurrection (which means they'd order lots of weapons and armour to be made, and might send your soldiers off to fight, with the Army Arc.). Something that you, as a player, might not want happening, and would then have the challenge of preventing.

[Sowelu]

Something to keep in mind is that all decisions about the nature and flavor of the home civ has to be decided at worldgen, not before each fort, because history has already been established and is being updated every year.  It would make an awesome option to have this customization power on worldgen, though--interrupt worldgen every couple decades to ask a flavor question.  "X happens, in what way do things develop?"  Or even just let you specify "It should wind up like this".

[SirHoneyBadger]

Something to keep in mind is that all decisions about the nature and flavor of the home civ has to be decided at worldgen, not before each fort, because history has already been established and is being updated every year.  It would make an awesome option to have this customization power on worldgen, though--interrupt worldgen every couple decades to ask a flavor question.  "X happens, in what way do things develop?"  Or even just let you specify "It should wind up like this".

That's a great idea, and a good point. Thanks, Sowelu. 

I don't know how well Worldgen covers completely something as minute as the personal relationship your 7 have with the rest of the world, but it certainly would be cool to intertwine the lives of your founding dwarfs into the greater life of the World they're living in/on.

So maybe you could go from making basic, broad choices about the World, and then gradually narrow things down, until you're deciding more intimate details--perhaps that your founding Miner's father was a crazy Noble Philosopher who instilled in his son the strange idea that the world is an immense dragon (a decision you'd actually made at the beginning of the game)--And when later your Miner witnessed his father's fiery death in a volcanic eruption, your Miner decided to set off to kill the world-dragon with his pick, thus his chosen profession.

[Sowelu]

Hmmm.  Because the world always advances a year when you make a new fortress, minor changes like changing your specific founders is reasonable...  Although honestly I do kind of like being able to draw them from a pool, too.  I think a pool of dwarves could only work when there are TONS of dwarves out there though.

Specifically, a year is enough for any dwarf to train up ten skill ranks if he works hard enough (currently, anyway).  It's also enough time for political rifts to occur.  Hmm.

[Pilsu]

Can't really pick customizable dwarves from a pool since everyone gets a profession by default in the gen. Not that said mechanic is necessary, randomly generated civilians might as well be peasants for the most part. Makes more sense anyway, civs shouldn't have 200 mechanics milling about

[Felblood]

As the world and the fortress grow to become a more unified entity, I can see choosing a city and then selecting seven dwarves from it's population to be your expedition. The option to just pull seven custom dwarves out of a plothole, like we do now, probably shouldn't go away, since if a civ gets ground down to practically nothing in world gen, you should be able to rebuild it as a world power, over a century or two of founding new cities and conquering your enemies.

Choosing the type of colony you're founding from a short list would go a along way toward insuring that the fiction the player is writing for his fortress doesn't conflict too much with the actual mechanics. However, as the city grows, it should evolve into one of a set number of relationships with the civ that founded it: Allied nation (technically a seperate civ, but realtions are still good enough to keep trade flowing and stave off war), member city (a town of the parent civ, like they all turn into now), enemy nation (a seperate civ that they attack on a regular basis), or conquered city (forced to pay lots of tribute and treated like dirt).

As for reasons dwarves might set out to strike the Earth:

Royal expedition: The king orders a team to found a new fortress for the glory of the mountainhomes. This plays out pretty much like the current game.

Prospectors: Looking for a big break, or a lucky strike, or just a chance to prove their excellence, these explorers set out to found a new city of their own accord. This town has more of a rough and tumble vibe than the traditional fort. Expect to be over looked by the king and his nobles for longer, before they move in to take over, and expect less traditional dwarves to take exception to that. Whether this ends in a war for independence or just a lot of arguing until things cool off into the norm, depends of aspects of dwarven psychology that have not been adequately explored up until now.

Dissidents, leaving the mountianhomes entirely for religious or political reasons, would have very poor relations with their parent civ, and might have to work hard to not schism off, but don't have to pay a lot of taxes or put up with nobles, since they have effectively fled the country. If they successfully re-integate into other parent civ, their ideas are now tolerated, and they get treated just like a regular city. If they end up fighting with the mountainhomes, they become any enemy nation.

Military Outpost: The city is founded to serve as a lookout or supply station for the defense of the mountainhomes. Much more focused on military power than on trade or comfort, this city should see more martial immigrants, and many fewer skilled craftsmen, to represent serf laborers and military garrison being sent from the mountainhomes. Enemies should attack more often and more aggressively. It might should be harder to get counts and kings to move in, considering the already high strategic value of attacking the city.

[Footkerchief]

^^^ Those are all excellent ideas.  Quick addition: migrants should also have a variety of reasons to emigrate to your outpost, and those reasons might conflict with the founders' reasons, leading to fun problems.

[Felblood]

When migrants start coming from real places, it could even be possible for cities that aren't officially tied to a specific civ to get immigrants from more than one.

Minority groups might have a problem with the majority's nobles moving in an ordering them around. "I'm a citizen of the Crazy Treaty! Why should I take orders from the king, of the Hammers of Decapitation?"

Likewise, if the town represents a lot of potential profit, or strategic value, or the parent civs are enemies, they should fight it out, over whose people really founded the city on whose territory. "Those portions of The shining Hills, populated by Decapitation-ian peoples, should be part of the Hammers of Decapitation!"

Some system of changing citizenship once you have arrived in a city would probably be needed. Perhaps, this will give the baron something to do. "Look, if you're going to live on my fief, you're going to have to earn your keep, you might as well join up, and get the rights of a citizen."

Perhaps the player should approve these changes of loyalty, so that dwarves that decide to change loyalties, but are denied permission to naturalize become upset. If dwarves with particular traits start to get the idea that you're keeping them down, expect fun.

[Silverionmox]

There should be a myriad of circumstances that causes a group of dwarves to get out and set up their own place. Religious dispute, population colony, mining outpost, scouting tower, embassy, trading post, smuggling den, geological expedition, wizard's business, family feud, a bet, commercial undertaking, refugees, necropolis, exploration, fort, digging a channel/tunnel, building a bridge, fleeing from HFS, abbey, seasonal labourers/mercenaries, slavers, etc. etc.

For now they can be randomly assigned or by player's choice, later on they will be determined by history and geography.

[Felblood]

I don't think the purpose of your fort should ever be decided based on where it is. That's a concious decision for the payer to make.

If you decide that a military castle is needed, to facilitate the expansion of your empire, you don't want the game telling you that the dwarves you brought out to do the job are from a hated religious group, and the civ is more likely to have to fight this castle than use it as a staging ground.

Likewise, if you choose a site based on its mineral content, to make a manufacturing center, you don't want the game to decide that this is too close to the border for that, and give you no immigrant artisans.

Having the cities that are created at world gen based on the same list of possible charters, would help the world seem more involved and realistic.

Being able to designate a colony as a labor camp for non-military public works could also be useful. Canals, aqueducts, monuments and royal tombs could all be build by the same kind of town. It'd be like a military outpost, but with extra masons and engravers, instead of extra soldiers.

I'd like to see nomads found cities in the post worldgen environment, or just moving into existing cities. Dealing with a huge influx of refugee dwarves, as the population of an abandoned fort suddenly drops in and starts trying to buy food and shelter, could be a very mixed blessing. You'd get all your old legends back, but you'd also need to house all those extra haulers.

[Granite26]

Likewise, if you choose a site based on its mineral content, to make a manufacturing center, you don't want the game to decide that this is too close to the border for that, and give you no immigrant artisans.

I agree with most of it, but not this...

[Mikademus]

What if we tie this in a bot more closely with how things work atm. If instead of customising your dwarves you can point-buy a roster, where a "recruit" level is cheap and a "elite" one is expensive? The difference from fully customising your own starting set-up is that you have no control over their skills, only that they are somewhat relevant to your expedition type (farmers searching greener, or darker, pastures; warband; etc), and you get a rebate versus point buying since you give up detailed control?

[SirHoneyBadger]

One thing I was thinking was that you might be able to pick "better" backgrounds for your 7, or a "better" standing/relationship with the MountainHome, etc. and pay for that with points that you'd normally spend on skills/goods.

So that you might sacrifice short-term benefits for long-term strength?

And vicea-versa.