Print

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

[cameron1124]

Ever wanted to dig out some lava without losing any of your legendary miners? need some cannon fodder during a siege but dont want to make your dwarves sad? want a use for those stupid elfs?

I give you, SLAVES!

if you capture an enemy in a cage a dwarf with the slavemaster labor on can turn him into a slave. dwarves put as slavemasters will need a weapon though. The higher the slavemaster skill is the more slaves you can have before there is a chance of a slave rebellion (explained further down)

Slaves will live in a slave quarters, its a zone saying where the slaves will sleep (it doesnt need beds although this will make the slaves unhappier) and they can do what is designated as unskilled work. such as wood burning, woodcutting, farming, hauling, butchery, tanning, smoothing, military, and mining. However, crafting can only be done by dwarves and slaves never reach legendary.  slaves also cant have moods.

If you enslave members of a race that think slavery is unethical then they will get mad at you. and possibly siege you.

Slaves are permanently capped at unhappy. they can never be content, happy, or estastic. the unhappier slaves are the more likely they are to revolt. the number of slaves on the map  also increasas the chances of revolt. also slaves eat less than your dwarves and they drink water. dwarves also dont get unhapyy when slaves are killed.

whenever there is a slave revolt a large portion of the slaves on a map will suddenly turn hostile and use whatever they were working with to attack your dwarves. (so woodcutters will have axes and miner will fight with picks) the slave revolt stops whenever all teh revolting slaves are dead. Note: salvemasters have a chance of making a slave stop revolting when hitting them. this is based on skill level.

[irmo]

Ever wanted to dig out some lava without losing any of your legendary miners? need some cannon fodder during a siege but dont want to make your dwarves sad? want a use for those stupid elfs?

I give you, SLAVES!

- Already suggested many times.
- Not going to happen, because slavery is against dwarven ethics and elves can't mine.
- The non-descriptive subject line is annoying.
- Elf-bashing is neither clever nor funny nor interesting.

[cameron1124]

Ever wanted to dig out some lava without losing any of your legendary miners? need some cannon fodder during a siege but dont want to make your dwarves sad? want a use for those stupid elfs?

I give you, SLAVES!

- Already suggested many times.
- Not going to happen, because slavery is against dwarven ethics and elves can't mine.
- The non-descriptive subject line is annoying.
- Elf-bashing is neither clever nor funny nor interesting.

-where?
-Toady can change that because he is god of the dwarf fortress universe
-ignore it then.
- funny and interesting are entirely subjective. and I was never going for clever.

[Starver]

-where?
-Toady can change that because he is god of the dwarf fortress universe
-ignore it then.
- funny and interesting are entirely subjective. and I was never going for clever.

• Try a simple search for "slave".  Being prepared to wade through some other stuff, of course, but it's there.
• Just because he could (he can do loads of things, like make dwarfs as tough as BCs and capable of flying[1]) doesn't mean that it would fit with his vision.
• My own complaint about your title is that I wasn't entirely sure whether the "mine" was "Belongs-to-me" or "Hole-in-ground", and what's more, actually thought the former (as in something like "How do I confiscate something from the elven caravan?", when expanded and punctuated) was going to be what this thread was about.  Consider this to be supportive of irmo's complaint
• It's not particular interesting to see elves being bashed, because it happen a lot.  The fun is subjective but almost entirely in the eye of the beholder[2].

[1] Incidentally, we could do that, through modding.  Still doesn't mean that it'd be true to Toady's vision.  And we have very limited ability to institute new nobles/elected positions, or even solve problems with the ones that are currently broken, before you wonder about that...

[2] The results of abusing the elven traders can be fun that everyone can appreciate, of course, but that's a different teapot of tench...

[Capntastic]

While correct about searching for things that have been discussed a ton before posting, I'll note that the slavery-vs-dwarf-ethics things is negligible since cultural ethics will be derived procedurally in time.

[Starver]

While correct about searching for things that have been discussed a ton before posting, I'll note that the slavery-vs-dwarf-ethics things is negligible since cultural ethics will be derived procedurally in time.

As I (probably mis-)understand it, it'll either be "NPC races" that get that treatment (like the sheer amount of variation of night-creatures, and their soon-to-be-realised syndrome collection, as a kind of follow-up to the FBs, et al), or there'd still be a "range" of possible moralities, so that one Dwarven civilisation might consider it a Capital Crime to use slaves, whereas another might "really rather not"...  And, like finding the 'civ that hasn't failed to work out how to make High Boots, when given a choice, it might be similarly necessary to find the Dwarven 'civ that has sufficiently compatible morales with the human 'civ so as to be able to trade with them rather than one or other of you getting the hump over some slight.  (Or, conversely, aiming to get a pre-annoyed potential trading partner...  If that's the way you roll.)

I'm pretty sure, though, that while toady could make it all an absolutely procedural "%RandomlyGeneratedRaceName% Fortress" game, there certainly are (at present) a number of things that are constant.  And even if it's open to changing, I'd still advise that for the foreseeable future it's probably a given that any change to the slavery-moralities of the dwarfs (noting that I've mentioned it in the past, myself, although usually as just one option in something like a creature-driven power source) almost certainly isn't at the top of the agenda.

Later, maybe.  By which time all the current suggestions are probably going to be significantly out-of-date anyway and largely inapplicable without a lot of new thought.

[cameron1124]

I searched and the threads were either old or not very fleshed out.

Also you act like you know what toady's vision for dwarf fortress is. This is just a suggestion, maybe it is in toady's vision or maybe its not, either way atleast it could be in a mod.

I understand where there could be confusion so I changed the title.

Also yet again interesting is subjective aswell as funny. for instance disprove this sentence "I find starting at drying paint is very interesting"

At any rate this is entirely beside the point. We arent even arguing about the suggestion but instead that I dared post a suggestion of mine on the suggestions forum. So how about we move on to that topic?

[Capntastic]

I searched and the threads were either old or not very fleshed out.

Then why not add to them?  Your own thread isn't a sterling example of being fleshed out, and doesn't really add anything new.  Here's a recent thread that also had nothing new to say, and has links to all of the previous big slavery threads.  Also, a lot of the slavery threads are from less than 6 months ago.  This one in particular is good because it goes into player desire vs. civ ethics

We don't need 100 threads saying "add slavery" when one thread discussing how to do it is infinitely more useful and concise and organized and all around better.  Jumping on people for being off-topic is kind of silly considering you're basically doing the same thing via going out of your way to ignore the conversations about the topic you're trying to discuss already taking place.

[cameron1124]

one of those threads has people complaining to the thread maker that there are tons of threads already here. the other is months old.

[Capntastic]

one of those threads has people complaining to the thread maker that there are tons of threads already here. the other is months old.

So now that we've established that you're not gonna actually respond to anything anyone says about your complete lack of effort, I see no reason to continue.

[cameron1124]

you mean the people that Completely and utterly INSIST on not creating new topics if its been talked about before? If I necroe'd a thread I would get mauled by a completely diffrent group of poeple that completely and untterly INSIST on never necroi'ng a topic.

[FallingWhale]

you mean the people that Completely and utterly INSIST on not creating new topics if its been talked about before? If I necroe'd a thread I would get mauled by a completely diffrent group of poeple that completely and untterly INSIST on never necroi'ng a topic.

No, a new topic just needs to be much better; you however are pushing par.

[Capntastic]

It's also the wondrous power of forums that allows one to read what others have to say and use that to make useful contributions when they do post stuff, without treading on both old ground the the toes of people who have gone before.

[IT 000]

you mean the people that Completely and utterly INSIST on not creating new topics if its been talked about before? If I necroe'd a thread I would get mauled by a completely diffrent group of poeple that completely and untterly INSIST on never necroi'ng a topic.

Necroing is perfectly fine in my mind if you add something new to the talk. If you just post 'I agree' you deserve getting told not to necro. If you say 'I agree because xxx' and give a good reason that hasn't been said before I personally would step in to defend you if anyone gave you crap.

But everything you have posted has been gone over in every topic about slavery. And just because a topic is 'old' doesn't make it less relevant. Please look over old posts before posting your own ideas.

[cameron1124]

allright I see the point youll are making. Now could an admin lock this thread then?