Print

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

[Domini0n]

The title says all! Wouldnt it be great if we could enable troops to take prisoners rather than slaughter the enemy.
Perhaps squads could be toggled to disable rather than kill, and than be given orders to place disabled enemies into cages/restraints with a prisoner option enabled. This would also grant military only forts the option of capping baddies without having to use cage traps.

However, one problem i see is how to determine whether or not an enemy is disabled. Do they have to be giving in to pain. it seems that "disabled" units in DF generally lack a few limbs, so bleeding out would be problematic... but who knows, perhaps this could be integrated with prisoner care.
Whaddya think?

[QuakeIV]

Awesome.

[Pilsu]

I think it's your own fault if you try capturing people using an axe squad

[Tamren]

Yeah, we would need to tack on a setting for less-lethal weapons. Its hard to take prisoners when your dwarves are hacking off limbs left and right.

[Haedrian]

Yeah, we would need to tack on a setting for less-lethal weapons. Its hard to take prisoners when your dwarves are hacking off limbs left and right.

Dwarven self defence class:

"And if you're attacked, you need to disarm your opponent. Yep, chop his arm clean off"

[GlyphGryph]

I agree - capture orders would be beautiful.

"Sir, why are we going to fight a dragon with no weapons?"
"Because, you bloomin idiot, we're gonna captcha da thing. Just wrestle it right into Tommy's cage there, we will, and the fort will hail us as heroes. Remember boys, try nots to hurt him too bad!"

[kalida99]

well you could just add another weapon that does subdual (i don't know if thats spelled right) or non-lethal damage, like a Sap. just a heavy bag on a stick that ye smack'em on the head with.

[LegoLord]

The Aztecs used obsidian knives to target areas that would cripple enemies so they could be caught and sacrificed.  For someone looking to have the thing heal eventually, that would probably narrow the number of available disabling targets.

[Tenth Speed Writer]

I like the idea. Although it would be hard with, say, spears and war hammers, most of the weapons in DF could be used in one non-lethal way or another.

If Toady ever expands the uses for POWs, I think it would be a fun addition. Even as is, you can't deny that a skeletal elephant and a goblin swordsman thrown in the same room isn't a good time.

[DanielLC]

Anything that's likely to knock someone out is going to have some chance of killing them. Of course, that just means you can't consistently capture them.

[kalida99]

Or you could use the total war aspect and any fleeing/routed enemies are captured!
(unless you gave "take no prisoners" orders or the like)

[Sutremaine]

However, one problem i see is how to determine whether or not an enemy is disabled.

Perhaps it would be down to a mix of an individual's personality and their entity's (or civ's, if that level of detail ever exists) ethics. Not sure how it would be represented though. Perhaps add MERCY or something like it to the personality measures? "Urist does not enjoy causing unecessary suffering to others" vs. "Urist will stop at nothing to annihilate a defeated foe".

Enemies could have levels of disablement at which they surrender, at which point the dwarf would either bring them straight in or beat them half to death (or all the way) first.

[lordcooper]

Brilliant idea, although I would say this should only be enabled for wrestlers (For one thing it will give me a reason to have them)

[LordDemon]

Ability could be given to all troops no matter how they are armed, but if the requirement is that the enemy must be unconcious to be captured (or maybe is some sort of good lock if wrestling has them), then you could capture with any squad, it would just be easier with wrestlers.

Maybe some sort of polearm with string loop in the end could be created? I think they had them in middle ages, so they would be great for capturing enemies, even at longer range so the capturer is less likely to get stabbed.

Units that are routed and retreating should try to run away if possible, and surrender if not. Of course the surrender option might be relative to your fortress reputation: If you are known to torture the prisoners to death, then they rather fight a gauntlet then surrender.

Speaking of which, is there a reason we don't have torture chanbers in the game? I mean we can always create ways to creatively kill the captured enemies, often involving magma or water, but we lack the ability to cut of the hands of the goblin baby snatcher who steps into the cagetrap, and release him as a warning to others. I don't care if that has no effect on the wider game, I just like just laws for crimes.
So far the most succesful method I've found is a tower of judgement: You throw the goblin down the tower. Sometimes they die, sometimes they just get horrible mangled in the fall, but can limb home.

Hmm. I seem to have veered off the course. Back to issue: Ordering capturing enemy = good idea.

[Chthonic]

Think I read that with this version's changes to body layers and so forth that creatures may end up being a little more durable.  In that case, wounded prisoners might succumb to the pain and you may have the option of either dragging a fallen opponent off for healthcare/imprisonment or coup-de-gracing him.  I think that an "imprison" option would be an excellent addition.