Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 72 73 [74] 75 76 ... 342

Author Topic: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page  (Read 1566693 times)

NW_Kohaku

  • Bay Watcher
  • [ETHIC:SCIENCE_FOR_FUN: REQUIRED]
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1095 on: September 07, 2010, 02:33:52 am »

Not to mention drugs such as Salvia, Ibogaine, and Mescaline (mostly in South and Central Americas), as well as DMT (in the form of ayahuasca; Americas and parts of Africa), though admittedly these were more of a ritualised rather than recreational use. Things like Shamanistic vision quests, communing with dead ancestors, and adulthood trials.

This too. Psychoactive drugs were commonly used for these practices rather than privately, as far as I know.

Actually, many psychoactive drugs, like peyote or the like, that were part of some kind of shamanistic/ritualistic purposes were attended specifically because of the potential dangers of the drugs they were using - when letting a young person go on a vision quest, the shaman would often stay with them to make sure they don't overdose on the stuff, or dehydrate, since generations of working with the stuff let them know exactly how dangerous any substance they were taking actually was.

(Peyote, from what I've heard of the drug, is very nasty to take.  It causes you to frequently vomit unless you have developed quite a resistance to it, and you are in serious danger of dehydrating because you simply vomit out all your fluids.  Because of this, any use of peyote is done with a large number of others, including those who don't take the peyote, because they need to watch over the partakers, and ensure they don't vomit themselves to death.)

It is believed that psychoactive drugs were used by many "prophets" back around the time of the Greeks or Persians or the like.  The Oracle at Delphi, for example, was believed to have gotten the powers of foresight from a hallucination-inducing gas in the cave the oracle stayed in at Delphi. 

OPIATES on the other hand, were basically sold like any other product on the market.  Although there was no Heroine or Morphine, opium was often taken directly - you just plain drank it, often in alcohol, as a painkiller, or just a way of relaxing.  Basically, it was completely unregulated, and would even be supplied to soldiers for free by their generals if they wanted to gain some popularity, as a painkiller that could really get one's mind off of things would be of obvious use to soldiers in a foreign and hostile land.  (It even gained a reputation as a "gift of the gods", and a drug of mercy.)

Opium was an absolute bane of China, especially during the time of the British colonization of the nation, where as much as a third of the country was addicted to the drug, (specifically, smoking opium-laced pipes) to the massive profit of their British drug pushers.  This basically paralyzed China, as so much of its population was in a permanent drug haze that it was impossible to throw off their British oppressors or rebuild their nation with so much of their population almost total deadweights on society who could hardly even stagger out of their opium dens.

America, before the FDA, was plagued by "Patent Medicines", which were over-the-counter drugs sold in any general store, most of which used alcohol and opium as essentially their only ingredients.  As the History Channel documentary I saw on it explained, "It really would seem like a cure-anything wonder drug.  No matter what ache or pain you had, if you drank something that was 60% opium, you'd feel better for a while."  This was particularly harmful, as children were often spoon-fed opium as a way of just shutting them up by their mothers, who were often downing plenty of the stuff, themselves, to make the bitterness of being stuck in domestic "bliss" all her life a little easier.

Those last two examples are obviously more modern, but private drug use is fairly hard to track in earlier times, since it was seen as totally normal and somebody else's business. Basically, opium was a totally unregulated drug for all of human civilization up until the start of the 20th century, when chemistry gave us drugs that were actually powerful enough to really force governments to restrict them. 

Fantastic alchemically refined drugs, however, would rationally force a change to such a thing.  It's obvious that, while recreational drugs existed for the consumption of anyone who could buy them, poisons were obviously regulated substances, and it's probably more likely that an alchemist will accidentally create something generally bad for you rather than something good (or at least, good without devastating side-effects).  If you're brewing something toxic, it makes all the sense in the world to restrict access to it.

At any rate, the basic thing I'm trying to get at here is that you can't really think about new features from a modern perspective too much. The appropriate thing to do is attempt to research how these things were done in a similar time in real-world history as a baseline, and then speculate based on how the DF world in particular is different.

While realism is always a good goal to stretch for, as it makes the game more relatable, sometimes, interface just needs to be designed to make a good game first, and then you can work in what would be as realistic a way of producing that as possible.

What we need is a way of telling dwarves when it is OK and when it is not OK for them to consume potions or drugs or otherwise use single-use items, so that it can be implimented into the game in as sane and useful a way as possible.  If this involves a "pharmacy", that's just window dressing what it's called or how it is supposed to operate, exactly.

I'd also caution you not to get too hung up on a word. 

I've been using "drugs" and "potions" interchangably because all these things are is a consumable item with a syndrome attached to them.  "Drugs" are just one way of expressing something that can just as easily be "magic potions", since there's no telling what syndromes we might get down the road.  We might get a "drug" that lets dwarves breathe fire.  Or run around very fast before exploding, as previously mentioned.

This is, obviously, one reason why I was talking about ways to control when and how they get consumed (or shoved down murder holes to force "consumption" by enemies, as the case may be).

If we are talking about potions with potential negative consequences for a fortress that dwarves may want to just take for funsies, it makes perfect sense to keep those drugs behind lock and key with some sort of trusted "keeper of potions", whether we call them a "pharmacist" or not.  If this gets rolled in with the interface for how and when consumables are consumed, then it makes perfect sense.  (Of course, I still prefer it to be a part of an expanded Priorities List, so that we can view all our fiddling with dwarven AI from one single screen for the purpose of streamlining the interface.)
« Last Edit: September 07, 2010, 02:37:13 am by NW_Kohaku »
Logged
Personally, I like [DF] because after climbing the damned learning cliff, I'm too elitist to consider not liking it.
"And no Frankenstein-esque body part stitching?"
"Not yet"

Improved Farming
Class Warfare

Untelligent

  • Bay Watcher
  • I eat flesh!
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1096 on: September 07, 2010, 11:50:29 am »

I just noticed the ancient bug where dwarves would spam Cancels Rest: Interrupted by Creature when the creature isn't anywhere near the dwarf finally got fixed (presumably). Awesome.
Logged
The World Without Knifebear — A much safer world indeed.
regardless, the slime shooter will be completed, come hell or high water, which are both entirely plausible setbacks at this point.

Caldfir

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1097 on: September 07, 2010, 01:30:25 pm »

Completely ignoring the current drug debate, I have a question:

Is the current insane abundance of minerals a feature, testing tool, or bug?  Are there any plans on moving back to those in 40d / make them somehow changeable by the player?
(forgive me if this has been answered somewhere else already, but I've done all I can with the search tool)

While its nice to have smelters running full-steam for years, I would prefer the abundances of 40d.  It was a LOT more exciting to find ore and gems back then.  Exploratory mining is completely gone (unless you count the single shaft necessary to hit cavern), which is a shame because it was one of the most fun (and dorfy) parts of the game.  I realize that many players are enjoying all the ore... but when I play dwarf fortress, it is NOT because I want anything to come easy. 

Furthermore, while the abundance of fuel is nice, it also precludes the need for burning trees, so cutting trees is no longer a high priority, and thus my dwarves are GETTING ALONG WITH ELVES.  Which is dumb.
Logged
where is up?

Mike Mayday

  • Bay Watcher
  • gfx whr
    • View Profile
    • Goblinart
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1098 on: September 07, 2010, 02:05:53 pm »

Quote from: Toady One
Baughn's TrueType code is coming along nicely in the SDL version, so the next DF will have an experimental version of that. This frees up the glyphs in tilesets from most of their text display duties, so that, for example, the number zero won't generally be displayed as a coffin in custom tilesets now, and it supports variable width fonts. There are places where the TrueType fonts need to be used where they aren't currently and there are some justification issues etc. that need to be worked out, but it appears to be mostly working, so you'll be able to play with that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35Lt4bIXyrY
Logged
<3

Baughn

  • Noble Phantasm
  • The Haruhiist
  • Hiss
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1099 on: September 07, 2010, 02:17:53 pm »

What?

I mentioned I was working on this quite a while ago, you can't genuinely claim to be surprised *now*.
Logged
C++ makes baby Cthulhu weep. Why settle for the lesser horror?

G-Flex

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1100 on: September 07, 2010, 02:33:16 pm »

Completely ignoring the current drug debate, I have a question:

Is the current insane abundance of minerals a feature, testing tool, or bug?  Are there any plans on moving back to those in 40d / make them somehow changeable by the player?
(forgive me if this has been answered somewhere else already, but I've done all I can with the search tool)

While its nice to have smelters running full-steam for years, I would prefer the abundances of 40d.  It was a LOT more exciting to find ore and gems back then.  Exploratory mining is completely gone (unless you count the single shaft necessary to hit cavern), which is a shame because it was one of the most fun (and dorfy) parts of the game.  I realize that many players are enjoying all the ore... but when I play dwarf fortress, it is NOT because I want anything to come easy. 

Furthermore, while the abundance of fuel is nice, it also precludes the need for burning trees, so cutting trees is no longer a high priority, and thus my dwarves are GETTING ALONG WITH ELVES.  Which is dumb.

I know all this is bordering on suggestion (and directly involves it), but I'd like to know the answer to that question too. I mean, especially with the much higher z-level count, the absurd abundance really isn't necessary, and honestly gets kind of boring/weird after a while, since you're constantly running into things that should be rare/valuable (along with everything else).
Logged
There are 2 types of people in the world: Those who understand hexadecimal, and those who don't.
Visit the #Bay12Games IRC channel on NewNet
== Human Renovation: My Deus Ex mod/fan patch (v1.30, updated 5/31/2012) ==

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1101 on: September 07, 2010, 05:29:52 pm »

What?

I mentioned I was working on this quite a while ago, you can't genuinely claim to be surprised *now*.

On the bright side Baughn this is probably as close to a complaint that you personally are going to get dirrected at you.
Logged

Acanthus117

  • Bay Watcher
  • Angry Writer
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1102 on: September 07, 2010, 05:38:31 pm »

Is the reversion to the whole needing-mud-for-underground-farms thing permanent, or will that be changed in a later release?
Logged
Is apparently a Lizardman. ಠ_ಠ
YOU DOUBLE PENIS
"The pessimist is either always right or pleasantly surprised; he cherishes that which is good because he knows it cannot last."

Mike Mayday

  • Bay Watcher
  • gfx whr
    • View Profile
    • Goblinart
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1103 on: September 07, 2010, 05:54:13 pm »

What?

I mentioned I was working on this quite a while ago, you can't genuinely claim to be surprised *now*.

Sorry man, I was out of the forums for quite some time. Very glad to hear you're working on it though!
Logged
<3

G-Flex

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1104 on: September 07, 2010, 05:55:38 pm »

Is the reversion to the whole needing-mud-for-underground-farms thing permanent, or will that be changed in a later release?

From what Toady told me shortly after release, the INTENT is that you can farm underground as long as EITHER of the following conditions is true:
  • The soil is muddy.
  • Underneath the soil is another layer of soil.
I'm not sure if the latter case is working. Does aboveground farming work without mud? I forget.
Logged
There are 2 types of people in the world: Those who understand hexadecimal, and those who don't.
Visit the #Bay12Games IRC channel on NewNet
== Human Renovation: My Deus Ex mod/fan patch (v1.30, updated 5/31/2012) ==

Urist Imiknorris

  • Bay Watcher
  • In the flesh, on the phone and in your account...
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1105 on: September 07, 2010, 06:15:50 pm »

Quote from: The Dev Page

Adventurer Role: Hero

Villains
•Historical figures that come out of world gen and come to control segments of entity populations (bandits, etc.)
•Hideouts with some basic fortifications
•Hostile civ leaders and the new hist figs being able to harass others by sending out groups
•Need to handle seeing them depart, seeing them raid, seeing them arrive back, and running into them during travel (with or without spoils)
•Tracking information from hunting needs to apply to following these groups
•Generally, "villians" are just leaders of groups you oppose at the time, and in this way can include squabbling petty warlords in nearby towns as well, so the groups can be large armies or assassins, though the former will probably come through the dwarf mode expansions below
•Succession and succession struggles
•People that have been raided need to tell you what happened
•Megabeasts <-- Should this be subcategory color?
•Variety and randomization within constraints (e.g. various dragons)
•Reproduction
•Share any intelligent/diplomacy behavior that other hist figs have when appropriate

That's just been bugging me.
Logged
Quote from: LordSlowpoke
I don't know how it works. It does.
Quote from: Jim Groovester
YOU CANT NOT HAVE SUSPECTS IN A GAME OF MAFIA

ITS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE GAME
Quote from: Cheeetar
If Tiruin redirected the lynch, then this means that, and... the Illuminati! Of course!

snooptodd

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1106 on: September 07, 2010, 08:13:43 pm »

Is the reversion to the whole needing-mud-for-underground-farms thing permanent, or will that be changed in a later release?

From what Toady told me shortly after release, the INTENT is that you can farm underground as long as EITHER of the following conditions is true:
  • The soil is muddy.
  • Underneath the soil is another layer of soil.
I'm not sure if the latter case is working. Does aboveground farming work without mud? I forget.
Yep, above ground farming doesn't need irrigation, tho it only works in soil. I havent been able to get muddied stone to grow above ground crops.

Underground farming must be muded, my current fort has 3 z-levels of soil/sand. With a farm plot on z=2 it needed irrigation to start.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2010, 08:22:16 pm by snooptodd »
Logged

KrunkSplein

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1107 on: September 07, 2010, 08:32:59 pm »

Okay, I have a sneaking suspicion that I'm the only person who thought the name "Hoh river" was hilarious.

No, not because of the homonym, but because Hoh == H-O-H == H2O == water.  Never before was there a more precisely-named river.
Logged

Sunday

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1108 on: September 07, 2010, 09:46:18 pm »

It's even more hilarious because the Hoh river is a rainforest, and one of the wettest places in North America (and possibly the world!).
Logged

Acanthus117

  • Bay Watcher
  • Angry Writer
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress: The Development Page
« Reply #1109 on: September 07, 2010, 09:48:45 pm »

Is the reversion to the whole needing-mud-for-underground-farms thing permanent, or will that be changed in a later release?

From what Toady told me shortly after release, the INTENT is that you can farm underground as long as EITHER of the following conditions is true:
  • The soil is muddy.
  • Underneath the soil is another layer of soil.
I'm not sure if the latter case is working. Does aboveground farming work without mud? I forget.
Yep, above ground farming doesn't need irrigation, tho it only works in soil. I havent been able to get muddied stone to grow above ground crops.

Underground farming must be muded, my current fort has 3 z-levels of soil/sand. With a farm plot on z=2 it needed irrigation to start.

Oh well.

Thanks, guys! :D
Logged
Is apparently a Lizardman. ಠ_ಠ
YOU DOUBLE PENIS
"The pessimist is either always right or pleasantly surprised; he cherishes that which is good because he knows it cannot last."
Pages: 1 ... 72 73 [74] 75 76 ... 342