Print

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

[Foehamster]

Considering that the man added individual ribs and teeth, he could add drunkeness.

Knowing you have 32 teeth doesn't really help storytelling or gameplay either.

All I can tell you is my method for judging ideas.  Besides, maybe the drunk you punched in the tavern last night has decided to call in favors from his Thug allies since you knocked out some of his teeth.

[Cyx]

We can always say that the game doesn't outrigt force you to do it. Even if you risk being chased and killed because you refuse to kill defenseless people as a member of an evil entity, you still are the only one pressing the buttons. However, this can be said of many controversial games : you could potentially just sit there and do nothing. You don't hit an invisible line where you just witness your cherished avatar skullfuck a puppy to death in a cutscene, then find yourself at command again, asking your God why would anyone do something like that. You always have a choice ; the tool isn't blamed, even when an actual crime is commited. This leaves the "video games corrupt children" argument, and I don't believe it. I know, the point is that some people do. But it's not like they'd let their kids play DF as it is now.

As for the aura of nastiness, I don't know whether it would draw people in because of the publicity or keep them out because of the false accusations. I'd lean towards the first but at this point it's a matter of opinions.


I don't have much more to add to this. I didn't know that so many places had ridiculous laws about these kind of things, and it's pretty sad. Anyway, as you said, we can't be sure how this would turn out.

[Vester]

Considering that the man added individual ribs and teeth, he could add drunkeness.

Knowing you have 32 teeth doesn't really help storytelling or gameplay either.

All I can tell you is my method for judging ideas.  Besides, maybe the drunk you punched in the tavern last night has decided to call in favors from his Thug allies since you knocked out some of his teeth.

You mean, like... one ally per tooth?

[Foehamster]

You mean, like... one ally per tooth?

Or the fact that he might have left you alone if you had only given him a black eye.

[SSBR]

Dwarves? Drunk? That'd take, what, five times their weight in whiskey?

You can add the feature, but it'll never happen. Dwarves are stout fellows.

[Vester]

Drunkeness is for humans and elves.

For the dwarves, it's sobriety that's the problem.

[KaelGotDwarves]

Well, the amount of teeth is to be expected of DF, an homage/throwback to the gruesome Armok 1 levels detailed combat.

[The Architect]

Whatever the tentacle demons do happens "off camera" so to speak, and it's vague enough that well, you have to already know what tentacle demons do in other media to get the joke.

All this other manufactured righteous posturing is starting to put me in a Fell Mood

Whatever tentacle demons may do elsewhere is irrelevant. They may very well strangle enemies to death like a tangle of boa constrictors, or lash them painfully. Although Toady did once mention very specifically that if you wanted to take the game there, the RAWs are open to editing. "you could change all of the Tentacle Demons' attacks to fucks" or something differing by a word or two.

I haven't seen any righteous posturing at all, period. I would hope we can all avoid insinuating things that irritate us into this thread (such as righteous posturing). It is a sure way to go downhill if you start seeing what you want to see or are used to seeing in others' writing, rather than paying attention to what is really there. Honestly I've been very happy with the maturity up to this post (the last I've read before making the comment, still catching up).

As for the need to discuss this: discussions about the inclusion of these elements to various degrees within the game (which is explicitly planned by Toady) have evoked controversy and the worst kind of "flaming" and degenerate mudslinging. Any conclusions we come to peaceably here can only help our forums in resolving these disputes and having a formulated mature view of the issues.

Oh, someone read into my parenthetical (and other people) etc to be attempts at making my comments "less sexist". Well, they weren't. I was literally stating that everyone has a moral obligation to protect those who may momentarily be in a position where they need protection, rather than to exploit them. Men are physically stronger than women (exceptions occuring, as with all generalizations) and should not use that for their own sexual pleasure, no more than anyone should coerce children to work long hours because they can't fend for themselves. Speaking preemptively, let's not use any of my statements (or anyone else's) to degenerate this into an argument over rape, sexism, or child labor.

[Vester]

Oh, someone read into my parenthetical (and other people) etc to be attempts at making my comments "less sexist". Well, they weren't. I was literally stating that everyone has a moral obligation to protect those who may momentarily be in a position where they need protection, rather than to exploit them. Men are physically stronger than women (exceptions occuring, as with all generalizations) and should not use that for their own sexual pleasure, no more than anyone should coerce children to work long hours because they can't fend for themselves. Speaking preemptively, let's not use any of my statements (or anyone else's) to degenerate this into an argument over rape, sexism, or child labor.

I'm from a country and a city where that's necessary a bit of the time. It just sometimes gets annoying - for example, my dad never lets me out of the house after 6 PM unless I'm with a guy friend. I understand his motive, and respect his decisions, but it's annoying all the same.

(Okay, and maybe some people don't like being reminded of the fact. )

The thing is, is putting sexual dimorphism in the game sexist? I mean, if the humans in-game reflect humans in real life, what's the problem? I mean, the dwarves can be taken in any direction Toady or the community wishes (via modding), ditto with the elves.

I realize that I'm taking this sexism thing in a weird direction right now, but I don't think the Architect made sexist comments. Wait, who accused you of that?

[The Architect]

As for the aura of nastiness, I don't know whether it would draw people in because of the publicity or keep them out because of the false accusations. I'd lean towards the first but at this point it's a matter of opinions.

First I would like to apologize for pulling just this quote out of your post. There is much there of worth, so I hope by acknowledging that I will be excused.

This is a serious case of "forum logic", which is something we all see a lot of but hopefully we can educate ourselves to avoid, when someone is around to point it out. In this case it is important to realize that the fact that none of us here are properly qualified to make a judgement does not make it a matter of opinion. More specifically we have not done the research, nor do we practice the field of commercial videogame marketting. The important point being that something does not become a matter of opinion due to a lack of present experts, only a matter of conjecture. An important point, in my mind, as this amended view does not eliminate the possibility of a definitive answer.

Sorry for the difficult vocabulary, it's my education and the best way to lazily convey a point. I'm not trying to show off; it would be painful for me to sift through it and translate it into a larger number of less complicated and less precise words.

The thing is, is putting sexual dimorphism in the game sexist? I mean, if the humans in-game reflect humans in real life, what's the problem? I mean, the dwarves can be taken in any direction Toady or the community wishes (via modding), ditto with the elves.

I realize that I'm taking this sexism thing in a weird direction right now, but I don't think the Architect made sexist comments. Wait, who accused you of that?

Your point about the arbitrary nature of dimorphism in imaginary creatures is great. Dwarves and Elves can be whatever we want them to! But why have humans be different than we really are? I think the answer must necessarily be that most of us love the idea of a strong female warrior, and some people love the idea of sexes that do not differ substantially (which would be a horrible thing leading most likely to the extinction of mankind, by the way). *Maybe that comment seems a little off to those with an axe to grind on the subject, but think about the way the sexes balance each other out and it will make sense. I'm not talking about "roles", just reality. Men need women to keep us in check (just look at the troubles of any temporary all-male society) and from my experience with my 5 sisters and of life in general I will venture to say that women need men just as much.*

*That was a lot of typing I wish were unnecessary to excuse a single sentence, but in the world of the forum it is always necessary. I wanted to type f*ing necessary.

As far as who accused me of the sexist commentary, let's not go there. Trading accusations or flaming is exactly what I hope to avoid with this discussion, so a quote was intentionally avoided.

[Vester]

Yeah. The thing is, when you have a "strong female warrior", it's actually a lot more impressive if she exceeds or is performing at the same level as the "strong male warriors" despite the discrepancies in strength. I suspect it's the same reason as why people root for the underdog.

[The Architect]

Rising above adversity and all that, eh?

Yea, if those female champions had to start from a weaker position than the males and beat them at the art of warfare, it would really make them stand out. In terms of attaining truly legendary status (on the forums and in our hearts) the women would have an edge over the men.

It's so very much more impressive when a woman can outperform a man in something like swordsmanship than it is when a man outperforms other men.

[Pilsu]

So, how will the relevant insecurities be handled? You can't very well plaster the mood list with "had a small penis recently"

Do consider that such a system would be used for more than that type of insecurity. For instance, a dwarven woman could worry about her marriageability because of her potato nose or lack of chest hair

[Vester]

That's actually interesting. Can you imagine entire wars caused by penis envy?

Sure, they'll blame it on "the violation of a formalized agreement", but the real cause will be the human leader's deep-rooted insecurities.

As to chest hair... Something tells me that Toady could eventually get around to simulating individual follicles. That would be an exercise in excess. (I'm joking of course, but we all know that Toady is basically the incarnation of Beyond the Impossible).

Actually, are we getting a more in-depth thought system next update? Someone told me that the current system has been around since 2d.

[SSBR]

The thing is, is putting sexual dimorphism in the game sexist? I mean, if the humans in-game reflect humans in real life, what's the problem? I mean, the dwarves can be taken in any direction Toady or the community wishes (via modding), ditto with the elves.

I realize that I'm taking this sexism thing in a weird direction right now, but I don't think the Architect made sexist comments. Wait, who accused you of that?

Of sexism? I don't think anybody did, directly. Of making sexist comments? Two people did, I was one of them. And the comment in question was not about sexual differentiation. I wouldn't bother arguing much about it, it's a polarizing issue that is totally irrelevant. I took offense to what he said, and said as much. He explained what he wanted me to understand from the post. There's nothing more, then, to say.


I'm not even sure what this thread is about anymore.