Print

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

[DrKillPatient]

It just came to mind that massive goblin-murdering arenas would be much more useful if spectating dwarves would get a happy though from enemies being slaughtered for their enjoyment.

Some thoughts...
- Caged enemies would be marked as prisoners, and dwarves would not run from them, but would get happy thoughts from their injuries
- If a prisoner was to attack a dwarf, he would lose prisoner status and be treated as an enemy
- Perhaps more drawn-out injuries before death would result in more happiness

[Jeoshua]

Actually, that would be exactly counter to what happens now.  Dwarves are disturbed by the sight of death.  It gives them unhappy thoughts to be living in a world with that much blood.  They CAN become desensitized to it, but it never piques their fancy in this way.  Nor do I think it should.

Theres already enough reasons for players to be cruel.  No need to reward them for it.

[irmo]

It just came to mind that massive goblin-murdering arenas would be much more useful if spectating dwarves would get a happy though from enemies being slaughtered for their enjoyment.

We don't all agree that the game mechanics ought to encourage this kind of thing.

[DrKillPatient]

Actually, that would be exactly counter to what happens now.  Dwarves are disturbed by the sight of death.  It gives them unhappy thoughts to be living in a world with that much blood.  They CAN become desensitized to it, but it never piques their fancy in this way.  Nor do I think it should.

Theres already enough reasons for players to be cruel.  No need to reward them for it.

Oh, they're disturbed by the death of other races as well? That changes everything, actually. I always assumed they were cold-hearted (elf) murderers... Perhaps I must study dwarven psychology further.

[Jeoshua]

They're disturbed by the death of neutrals, as their ethics say that killing them is "UNTHINKABLE".

Which is very counter to the way many of the psychopaths who play this game play them, killing every elf comming to trade with MAGMA!  I laugh when they cause tantrum spirals due to stuff like this and wonder "Why."

[IT 000]

Yeah... this suggestion comes off to me more of 'sadistic' then dwarven and it crosses a line in my opinion.

[Michael]

Oh, they're disturbed by the death of other races as well? That changes everything, actually. I always assumed they were cold-hearted (elf) murderers... Perhaps I must study dwarven psychology further.

Dwarfy ethics and dwarven ethics are two very different things.

Notice that in DF2010 Toady took a potshot at dwarfy-ness by making dead bodies rot to "skeletons" rather than directly to bones, forcing the involvement of the butcher.  That in turn forced dwarfy players to respect dwarven ethics regarding dead sentients, denying the ability to make kobolds and goblins into practice bolts.

Which is very counter to the way many of the psychopaths who play this game play them, killing every elf comming to trade with MAGMA!  I laugh when they cause tantrum spirals due to stuff like this and wonder "Why."

Psychopath Defamation League on Line 2...

[harborpirate]

I wouldn't mind seeing dwarven ethics change over time to better align with how the player plays. This would actually give some players a reason to play longer, to watch their fort change until it was just as insane as them. With enough major differences, the dwarven civ could first exile your fort and even end up declaring war on it.

But I'm with the others, I'd rather not see this be the default.

[IT 000]

I wouldn't mind seeing dwarven ethics change over time to better align with how the player plays. This would actually give some players a reason to play longer, to watch their fort change until it was just as insane as them.

I am interested in this idea, and I would like to discuss it further. So you are suggesting that say, an entire fort that has been starving for a year may turn to consuming sapients and change the ETHIC to PERSONAL_MATTER. Correct? Also, would this change be temporary or permanent or temporary for certain ethics?

[Sutremaine]

That in turn forced dwarfy players to respect dwarven ethics regarding dead sentients, denying the ability to make kobolds and goblins into practice bolts.

Well, unless you go out of your way to either chop the limbs off before death or blow them off the torso through sheer force of impact. Between DF's complexity and the players' ingenuity, there are days when Toady must utterly despair.

I do like the idea of changing ethics, and perhaps changing dwarven personalities to match. A temporary change from unthinkable to some form of acceptable could possibly cause the act to become even more strictly punished than before as a kind of backlash against the idea. Dwarven justice doesn't get more strict than a hammering, but shunning the family or friends of the dwarf in question could be an option. This would work especially well if Toady brings factions and loyalties into the fortress game.

[Jeoshua]

As to ethics being variable over time, due to environmental concerns, I say "yes".  Imagine an elven community, on the brink of death due to starvation, yet surrounded by fruit trees they must "kill" to survive.

Their ethics would say killing those plants were "unthinkable", but their stomachs would say "FOOD!"

[Brotato]

I wouldn't mind seeing dwarven ethics change over time to better align with how the player plays. This would actually give some players a reason to play longer, to watch their fort change until it was just as insane as them.

I am interested in this idea, and I would like to discuss it further. So you are suggesting that say, an entire fort that has been starving for a year may turn to consuming sapients and change the ETHIC to PERSONAL_MATTER. Correct? Also, would this change be temporary or permanent or temporary for certain ethics?

If they continued to require sapients for food maybe it would eventually change from necessity to something they enjoy?

[lordcooper]

I support the initial proposal.  Then we can say:

DF: making massive goblin-murdering arenas more useful.

[Evil One]

I support the initial proposal.  Then we can say:

DF: making massive goblin-murdering arenas more useful.

Seconded!

[Urist McCheeseMaker]

Of course, seeing goblins go "WHEEEE" all the way down a glass shaft straight through the dining room doesn't bother them, as long as they don't get to witness the "EEEEESPLAT" part.