Print

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

[Dante]

in a update that promises to have strangers wandering in to your fortress's inn

No such promise has really been made. Dwarf mode inns may well cater only to your citizens. They could be as simple as a zone pretty much like a dining room, to which your dwarves go to drink.

[MrWiggles]

The update that has me excited is the rewrite of Dorf personalities, and wants. I think this will be in part, the ground work for guilds, and religions.

[freeformschooler]

The update that has me excited is the rewrite of Dorf personalities, and wants. I think this will be in part, the ground work for guilds, and religions.

Whatwhatwhatwhat? I didn't see that OR the "adventure mode pack mules" in release 9 when the page was first put up, but now they're there! Awesome! Maybe I just missed it but that's unlikely.

Do personalities need a rewrite?  :oI mean how much more complex and all-encompassing can personalities get?

[Rockphed]

Do personalities need a rewrite?  :oI mean how much more complex and all-encompassing can personalities get?

I suspect that more encompassing is not the problem.  The problem is that they don't interact with enough things meaningfully.

[monk12]

Wait, personality rewrite!?! HOW DID I MISS THAT!?! ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOADY ONE!


Incidentally, anybody have a clear idea of what exactly this coming update will incorporate? I know a lot of the framework for the rest of the caravan arc is in- site resources, trade routes etc. Bees, bricks, ceramics, eggs, new domestic creatures... am I forgetting anything? As if that isn't an embarrassment of riches itself.

[Jiri Petru]

The problem with the current personality system isn't not enough detail, it is too much detail. Or too much meaningless detail, because you have things like "liberalism", "self-efficiency", "vulnerability", and dozens others. These are scales you don't even perceive or judge in everyday life, but every dwarf has a rank in each of these, which leads to a huge list of random attributes that you can't really make heads or tails off. I never could translate the DF personalities to a coherent idea of who the dwarf is. If there weren't there, it would be basically the same. At the same time, the game is not able to grasp and communicate as simple character features as "cruel", "selfish", "kind", "evil," "arrogant," "innocent", "ignorant", "shy", etc. which are labels we use in everyday life.

In other words: the game uses an artificial, mechanical, and politically correct system of expressing personalities. A system that is useless in the end, because when we talk about people or tell stories, we don't operate in a mechanical way. Toady said in one of the DF talks he would like to gut the current system and replace it with something which feels a bit more like a story, a book - when an author is writing a novel, he doesn't take his characters and assign each of them values from 0-100 on 30 different personality scales. He sticks labels like "manipulative bitch" or "helpful uncle" to them and works with these. So presumably, the personalities rewrite means a move from numbered scales to more lively and less number-based tags and descriptions.

[metime00]

Human 1: Look at him! The dwarf scout is headed for that mountain.

Human 2: I think we can catch him before he gets there... He's almost in range!

Human 3: ... That's no mountain... It's a fortress!

Human 2: It's too big to be a fortress.

Human 1: I've got a bad feeling about this.  I'm making a backup save so I can savescum back to this point later in case I get greased instead of you cannon fodder companions I picked up back at that last cantina.

Inserting Dwarf Fortress into quotes is my favorite. Thing. Ever.

[NW_Kohaku]

Technically, each dwarf only has a rank in a half-dozen of those personality traits, which are picked at random.

Still, the general gist of it is correct, the problem with personalities is that they basically do nothing, are hidden in a wall of other text about ear lobe length and eyelash color, and there's basically no reason to ever read those or care about them. 

I said something about it in the class warfare suggestion, (and in Jiri's own personality suggestion that came a little before it,) but basically, everything you really need to know about a dwarf is expressed in what you see on the main screen: The happy face means it's a dwarf.  Which of the two happy faces describes whether it's a military or civilian dwarf.  The color describes job.  If they flash, it describes they are really good at their jobs, and hence, valuable dwarves. 

That's just about all you need to know most of the time, and anything more detailed, like how much longer until they flash and become valuable, is described in the 'v' menu.

There's just no way you can process all the information in the detailed view of your dwarves for TWO HUNDRED of the little buggers.  At best, you have your starting seven and nobles memorized.  Many of the long-time players who like the game for its Roguelikeness are the sorts who don't even care about that much.

Personalities need to be worked into a system where they actually have some meaning, and are presented to the player in a way that they can remember at least something unique about every one of hundreds of virtually identical little smileys milling around your fort.

Just picking up some threads on personalities, couldn't find the Jiri topic... did you write one, or did I imagine it?
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=61540.0
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=60463.msg1363636#msg1363636

[Mel_Vixen]

The problem with the current personality system isn't not enough detail, it is too much detail. Or too much meaningless detail, because you have things like "liberalism", "self-efficiency", "vulnerability", and dozens others. These are scales you don't even perceive or judge in everyday life, but every dwarf has a rank in each of these, which leads to a huge list of random attributes that you can't really make heads or tails off. I never could translate the DF personalities to a coherent idea of who the dwarf is. If there weren't there, it would be basically the same. At the same time, the game is not able to grasp and communicate as simple character features as "cruel", "selfish", "kind", "evil," "arrogant," "innocent", "ignorant", "shy", etc. which are labels we use in everyday life.

In other words: the game uses an artificial, mechanical, and politically correct system of expressing personalities. A system that is useless in the end, because when we talk about people or tell stories, we don't operate in a mechanical way. Toady said in one of the DF talks he would like to gut the current system and replace it with something which feels a bit more like a story, a book - when an author is writing a novel, he doesn't take his characters and assign each of them values from 0-100 on 30 different personality scales. He sticks labels like "manipulative bitch" or "helpful uncle" to them and works with these. So presumably, the personalities rewrite means a move from numbered scales to more lively and less number-based tags and descriptions.

So in short the System doesn't change at all but the displaying of this info changes? I think these dozen traits are meaningful as part of the interaction between NPCs or NPC and the Player. Its a good foundation for much later.

I wonder if the behaviour in terms of needs changes too thus people doing work eating and stuff like in rl.

edit: a bit spelling

[Jiri Petru]

Just picking up some threads on personalities, couldn't find the Jiri topic... did you write one, or did I imagine it?

You did imagine it but thanks for thinking about me anyway 

EDIT: Just a note, the same criticism of personalities could be applied to appearance too. It suffers from the same problems - when all is said and done the dwarves appear one like each other because you can't really grasp the walls of text and imagine any differences. Aside from hairstyles, I guess.

But I doubt Toady is planning or even willing to rewrite the appearance system so soon after its debut  It's not as needed as personalities anyway.

EDIT2:

So in short the System doesnt change at all but the displaying of this info changes? I think these dozen traits are meaningfull as part of the interaction between or NPC and the Player. Its a good foundation for much later.

I wonder if the behavior in terms of needs changes too thus people doing work eating and stuff like in rl.

No, it's not the same. The personalities actually miss important stuff like "cruel", "evil", "ambitious", "envious" etc... But even if they were there, the main point is that numbered 0-100 scales simply aren't the way people think and stories work.

[Jiri Petru]

So I tried a bit of Footkerchiefing but I've found only this quote:

So like I say, the system isn't ... I want to keep the personality facets, I like having the thirty different facets of the personalities, and just increasing the overall number of places those are used. But I think to complement the personality facets we also need stuff like different emotions that you can be feeling, and additionally some things along the lines of those likes and dislikes, but stuff that the dwarf could be into, or the dwarf's vices or something like that; some kind of more permanent characterstics, but that can be changed through exposure; just to give them more texture there. But happiness numbers are definitely going to go.

Which is weird because I seem to remember Toady talking something about how the system probably needs to be replaced because it's too modern, politically correct and generally unfitting. It was while they were talking about bandit leaders, I think, but I can't find it.

[MrWiggles]

While, having the personality affect the work ethic, or if they like their job.

In DF Talk, Toady spoke about guilds and family members mattering more, and helping each other in their various aims. I'm also hoping that some ground work for criminal Dwarf mode behavior gets some work. Thats what I think is going to get set up.

But time for a green question!

Will the personality and need rewrite include the foot work for the the ability for dorfs to commit crime? Such as but not limited to murder, theft, and corruption? (Like embezzling)

This would mean that the dorfs would need the ability to solve crime.

[Mel_Vixen]

Well in stories people are displayed from the view of the protagonist/reader and stories tend to exaggerate or stereotype personalities. How people actually are is a different thing and the point system is a good basis to classify them on which you can build a system to convey a good characterisation.

From my PoV we dont need actually traits for "cruelness", being "envious" or being "evil" because either they are can be calculated from the current pesonality values or are context based like the "evil" trait you mentioned. "Ambitious" could for example come from high scores in "Achievement striving", "Assertiveness" and "Self efficacy". A cruel person could have low "sympathy",  "altruism" and "cooperation" scores. 

edit:

So I tried a bit of Footkerchiefing but I've found only this quote:

So like I say, the system isn't ... I want to keep the personality facets, I like having the thirty different facets of the personalities, and just increasing the overall number of places those are used. But I think to complement the personality facets we also need stuff like different emotions that you can be feeling, and additionally some things along the lines of those likes and dislikes, but stuff that the dwarf could be into, or the dwarf's vices or something like that; some kind of more permanent characterstics, but that can be changed through exposure; just to give them more texture there. But happiness numbers are definitely going to go.

Which is weird because I seem to remember Toady talking something about how the system probably needs to be replaced because it's too modern, politically correct and generally unfitting. It was while they were talking about bandit leaders, I think, but I can't find it.

I think toady wants to have the basic traits but having the reactions that include these traits being influenced by various things. Like say the vulnerability and depression boosted a bit because of the recent death of a friend. Which would lead to less static characters and if the influence is great enough it could change the trait permanently. Say someone who goes from a low to a high sympathy score.   

[NW_Kohaku]

There's something to be said for basically having a character archetype that you can throw at a player. 

If I describe a small girl in plain, baggy clothing with thick glasses hiding behind her book in the library, nervously looking over as the glamourous girls of the high school walk by without stopping to notice her in their conversation that is loud enough to break the attention of everyone nearby... you get a pretty good idea of what those characters represent, don't you?  You've probably got some memory of media or real-life high school tropes to call upon to fill in some blanks, and make some assumptions about what both of those characters are going to be like, aren't you?  If I asked you to make up some story about how those people might react to some situation, you'd be able to make a good guess about it, wouldn't you?

Now, what if I describe to you a person who, "rarely feels discouraged, is self-conscoius, somewhat reserved, enjoys thrills, lives life at a leisurely pace, and constantly strives for perfection", then you'd probably have a bit more trouble.  Especially since some of those things kind of contradict one another. 

Likewise, go through all the description of about ten different dwarves' appearance, and tell me if you can say which one is the most handsome/beautiful, and which is the ugliest of the group.

[Mel_Vixen]

The thing is you cant say who is the ugliest in a group of ten because different people have different views. You could go by society standarts but these change too - twiggy for example was once praised for her looks while today she would be more average. 

Also people contradict themselfes many times. Most people arent stringent tropes and shouldnt be displayed as such. Frankly i can actualy imagine your example very well. Sure one trait might in one or another situation contradict another but in such situations people make decisions to ignore one or the other even if said decision might leave some doubts etc.

Because you characterise someone as meganekko in one paragraph does not mean that said meganekko has to be some disciplined and organized or cant be cruel. Likewise can the Libby be actually be pretty intellectual and vulnerable. You can thought say ok these character is not disciplined and is not striving for achievment thus s/he is lazy. On the other hand someone with a high discipline who lack the the striving for achievement  may appear to be lazy on the first glance but keeps working on stuff he realy likes. I think its just how the information is conveyed not the information itself - naturally you can say this one person is a Ditz/Libby/Meganekko/Emo/Jock/Geek etc. but in the end you end up with displaying flat Characers even if they arent flat at all.