Print

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

[Toady One]

The child year issues just come from the absence of the Life Cycles arc.  Right now the historical figures (that is, all persistent creatures) it creates are born when they are born, then fast forwarded to the golden age.  Later it'll track their family trees somewhat, though with humans that would have dozens of generations during world gen, it probably won't track them all.

[Nobody]

I was always under the idea that goblins were subservient to orcs, and at least on a technical scale, smarter.

I guess this is my fault for being obsessed with Age of Wonders as a kid. By the way, while on the subject of evil races, will there be inherently evil races and inherently good races in the world, or will there be oppurtunities for differences?

I can guess that mostly all goblins are evil, but could I play in Adventure mode a good goblin? Just to, y'know, have fun or something. I already know that humans, dwarves, and elves aren't necessarily cooperative, but are evil races the same?

[Toady One]

When you have the opportunity to play goblins, you'll personally be able to do whatever you want, though you'll probably have trouble finding people that appreciate it since they'd initially be hard-wired to kill you.  As for the nature of evil, I haven't made any final decisions about that, and I probably won't have to if the computer can do it for me.

[Aquillion]

I can see the headline now:

VIDEOGAME RESOLVES NATURE OF EVIL
Kant, Hume now totally obsolete.

The world of philosophy was shook to is core today as Tarn Adams, freelance game developer, released an update to his popular Dwarf Fortress game that completely resolved the ten-thousand-year-old question as to the nature of evil.  The game--whose previous 'caravan arc' made its creator a multimillionaire when he applied its logic to the real-world commodities market--is expected to be studied by scholars and philosophers for decades to come.

Adams' solution, which is as simple as it is brilliant, is to realize that all good and evil can be expressed as with something known as a "float", a construct of ones and zeroes that computer scientists use to represent numbers with an arbitrary decimal place.  A creature can increase this number (becoming 'good') by killing things whose numbers are below zero; the number drops (becoming 'evil', in more traditional parlance) if you kill things with a positive alignment.  Differences in perception of morality are simply a result of the limited precision of floating-point operations.

Previous systems of morality, Adams says, failed not only because of their harmful precision, but also because they used integers.  Jean Rosand, for instance, who once said that "Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god", is thought to have been referring to the integer overflows encountered in calculating alignment under the old system.

[Nobody]

Welllll....Maybe two alignments. One determined by the political entity you belonged to, and one determined by...I dunno, the gods of the world. Aquillion, you yet again make with the funny.

EDIT: I said a lot of stupid stuff.

[ November 04, 2006: Message edited by: Nobody ]

[ November 04, 2006: Message edited by: Nobody ]

[DimmurWyrd]

Actually I believe mythologically speaking... goblins, hobgoblins, orcs, trolls, ogres, kobolds, and giants were all of the "goblinoid" species just of varying power and intelligence... (add imps and numerous others) christianity also made them all "demons" as well  

Most of them had no real organization in mythology but were often corrupted nature spirits.

[Zurai]

No, not really. Giants (in the form we're used to seeing in games, anyway), goblins, and trolls are all Nordic in origin, and all VERY different from each other. They aren't the slightest bit related. Orcs were made up by Tolkien (and Tolkienish orcs and goblins are the same species), and as far as I know kobolds are a D&D invention along with hobgoblins. I'm unsure of the origins of ogres.

[fmunoz]

DF is a game with a specific flavour.. a real true and original one. Even if currently uses a lot of generic fantasy stuff.
Add more and more unoriginal "standard" things to the mix (like the orcs) and you will get a bland game.
Go read the "Threetoe's Stories, and Analysis"

[Abyssal Squid]

Actually, kobolds are a German creation.  In folklore, though, they're just another kind of mischevious elf or goblin, so treating them as a sub-sentient evil nuisance is probably an invention of D&D.

[Aquillion]

quote:Originally posted by DimmurWyrd:
<STRONG>Actually I believe mythologically speaking... goblins, hobgoblins, orcs, trolls, ogres, kobolds, and giants were all of the "goblinoid" species just of varying power and intelligence... (add imps and numerous others) christianity also made them all "demons" as well    

Most of them had no real organization in mythology but were often corrupted nature spirits.</STRONG>

Yeah, that's completely wrong.

Modern fantasy Giants are based almost completely on the frost giants of Norse lore--huge, towering, monstrous creatures who live in chaos and seek the end of the world.  One major difference, though, is that the Scandinavian giants were actually fairly intelligent, being skilled at illusions and trickery...  they just weren't very organized.

Trolls, as we commonly see them in fantasy, are based on the same Scandinavian myth, which makes them out to be degenerate descendents of the giants, but even less organized.  Despite their heritage, they were extremely solitary and generally took no side in the war between the Gods and the Giants.

A slightly different concept of trolls as much smaller, more magical magical creatures existed in Norway (closer to what we might call a gremlin, a goblin, or a very, very ugly elf), but isn't really connected to the modern fantasy version...  although that is likely the version of troll that we see in the "Three Bully-Goats Gruff", for instance.

'Goblin' is a general term from much further south in Europe, one that generally referred to twisted, magical little creatures that tended to be unfriendly to humans, although as noted below there were exceptions.  They were considered akin to faeries, brownies, and that sort of thing.

Mythologically, hobgoblins were originally smaller, more friendly goblins; mischievous but not really spiteful, and sometimes even helpful.  Puck and Robin Goodfellow were described as hobgoblins.  The term is derived from 'elf-goblin', actually.  Tolkien got it backwards when reading about them, though (remember that the whole subject was less written-about before him), and fantasy has reversed the historical mythology ever since, making hobgoblins a larger and uglier form of goblin, rather than a smaller and more friendly one as was originally the case.

Orcs, as noted, are an invention of Tolkien's, although like all his inventions he tried to base it on earlier words.

The term 'kobold' comes from mischievous German mine-ghosts, yes...  but isn't that actually closer to the Dwarf Fortress version than the modern fantasy creatures?  Kobolds in Dwarf Fortress move and live like ghosts and are mischievous creatures that trouble miners.  Sounds about right to me.  

As an aside, the whole status of generic fantasy kobolds has been up in the air much more than the other races...  Until fairly recently, D&D couldn't even agree on whether they were mammals or some sort of lizards.  At one point they were dog-men, then smaller goblinoids, but now it says that they're degenerate dragonoids.

[ November 04, 2006: Message edited by: Aquillion ]

[psychologicalshock]

I had a mule in my history who was 300 years old. My friend was watching me play and he was like "That's an old ass mule."

[Aquillion]

quote:Originally posted by psychologicalshock:
<STRONG>I had a mule in my history who was 300 years old. My friend was watching me play and he was like "That's an old ass mule."</STRONG>

Known issue.  Currently all named creatures (any not created by the player or named during gameplay, anyway) are created in the age of legends by the world generator, then hyper-aged up to the present.  This works for elves and possibly for dwarves, but looks a little strange for other creatures.

[Nobody]

quote:Originally posted by fmunoz:
<STRONG>DF is a game with a specific flavour.. a real true and original one. Even if currently uses a lot of generic fantasy stuff.
Add more and more unoriginal "standard" things to the mix (like the orcs) and you will get a bland game.
Go read the "Threetoe's Stories, and Analysis"</STRONG>

'Sides, it's not much of a feat to modify the game engine to something more one's liking.

I intend to do a Rome mod, and an Age of Wonders mod myself, when there's a final version. I'll probably be forced to give up after two or three tries, but at least I can hope.

[Shingo]

(To Aquillion) I'm quite impressed with your various references to european mythologies, in regards to the origins of orcs, goblins, trolls, giants, kobolds, hobgoblins, etc.

However, I would like to point out that in-so-far as Tolkien was concerned, I don't think it likely that he chose to utilizie these "pre-existing" relationships between the race. In the world of LotR, Orcs were an offshoot strain of elves, who, through treachery and deceit, had been convinced to forego their journy to the undying lands. They were subsequently captured, and horribly twisted and tortured to the point where they resembled nothing so much as they seemed to be a mockery of the elves. Goblins, as envisioned by Tolkien, were nothing more than a lesser species of orcs. the "Moria Orcs" were something of an in-between variation of Goblins and Orcs, in that they were stronger than Goblins, but weaker and possessed of smaller stature than Common-Orcs. Hob-Goblins, as well as Kobolds, did not exist in the LotR world, and so any views Tolkien may have had upon them are either non-existent or irrelevant. Moving onto Trolls, we are informed by Tree-Beard, or perhaps Gandalf.... My mind always gets jumbled upon the subject of what character says these lines.... But regardless, we are informed that Trolls originate from animated hunks of rock, meant to be a mockery of the Ents. Giants do exist in the LotR world, but not in any meaningful way. Their only appearance is in a passing description of a thunder-storm, that takes place in "The Hobbit" and ends up being the driving force that pushed the adventurers into their encounter with the Misty-Mountain group of Goblins. One more thing - the Uruk-Hai. They are basically Tolkien's version of the Half-Orc (The other half being Human), and they seem to gain intellegence, strength, stature, and also overcome the inherent weakness of Orcs that causes them to fear sunlight and to encounter weakness when exposed to it.

Now, why did I take the time to go into that analysis? It was to point out that Tolkien does not stay within the original bounds and descriptions set forth by ancient mythology. Instead, he uses those elements of them that strike his fancy, and creates unique relationships for them instead of limiting himself to those that have establisbed by his forebears. I mean no disrespect, Aquillion, but I have supreme hopes that Toady One and Three-Toes not only make their own innovations and unique concepts, but that they throw out the most of the stereotypicallly "correct" ideas that every generic fantasy game and it's grandmother have, concerning the creatures and/or races seen in them.

[ November 06, 2006: Message edited by: Shingo ]

[lumin]

This post brings up a good point.  To what fantasy setting is DF trying to adhere too?  D&D, tolkien etc.  Or a combination of everything?  I think it would be a great idea for the community to begin working on a project to bring all of the creatures from the D&D 3.5 Monster Manual to DF.