Print

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

[LoSboccacc]

we'd finally have another goal apart elves genocide, we may have actual immortality to pursue!

[Areyar]

I am assuming that should civs have taboos/laws vs a certain sphere, they will also have them against secrets/interactions associated with said sphere. ?

knowing about a sectret and using said sectret could be 2 very separate things.

[tfaal]

Knowing about a secret and using said sectret could be two very separate things.

Possibly. I think Toady is taking a more Lovecraftian approach though, in which knowledge of the mythos is corrupting and transformative in itself. Since these are things the gods want kept secret, and which are often told to mortals by demons, I think that's thematically appropriate. It could vary by the secret of course.

[PTTG??]

...a syndrome which negates aging...

Well, there's at least one thing people (including myself) have suggested over and over again.

[Areyar]

...a syndrome which negates aging...

Well, there's at least one thing people (including myself) have suggested over and over again.

bathing in kittenblood does not work...

edit: this could vary depending on world seed ofcourse... unfortunately the world needs to end in order to change the seed.

[KillerClowns]

What's the time table for spheres other than Death granting transformations and secrets?  I know it's a long-term dev goal, I'm just curious to know if we can expect non-necromantic secrets and alterations next release.

[StatueOfWax]

knowing about a sectret and using said sectret could be 2 very separate things.

This was my first thought reading the update. The secret might be a sort of procedure or formula for attaining a set of powers. So to become an immortal necromancer, say, you might have to slaughter an innocent with a specific artifact bone dagger during an eclipse on a specific day of the year and then feast on their flesh after boiling it in gnomeblight. Or something. This kind of thing would actually open the door to setting personality requirements for different powers (not to mention make the bar for entry much higher), as you'd obviously have to be pretty heinous already to want to partake of the above ritual...and maybe this could be done without a huge personality rewrite? Could it also be possible that the knowledge around a given ritual might become tainted? Maybe a demon decides to mess with the wannabe necromancer he's teaching and adds an extra bit of awfulness that isn't required for the ritual to succeed. Or someone makes a translation error when reading the stone tablet they discovered in those undead-infested ruins. What about skill requirements? The first person to do the ritual above would have to be skilled enough to actually craft the dagger in question, but there's also another skill required by them and all future practitioners, like being a talented cook?

[Areyar]

"The carefull insicions indicate a knowledge of human anatomy or a lot of practice... a surgeon or perhaps a hunter."
- Law and Dorfness - Need for alcohol.

[tfaal]

A bit meta, but I must wonder why there's been such little discussing over the last few hours. The devlog is in its most active state in ages,

[darkflagrance]

Maybe people still need to get used to the sudden implications of magic secrets in DF. It's hard to speculate meaningfully about a new feature that is mostly shrouded in mystery and doesn't really have precedent in the current game.

Imagine the bugs though! Zombies + Carnivorous civ + babysnatched victims -> zombies =

[scriver]

Knowing about a secret and using said sectret could be two very separate things.

Possibly. I think Toady is taking a more Lovecraftian approach though, in which knowledge of the mythos is corrupting and transformative in itself. Since these are things the gods want kept secret, and which are often told to mortals by demons, I think that's thematically appropriate. It could vary by the secret of course.

There's no reason why a historical figure that gains immortality and the power to animate the dead should immediately become an antisocial evil tower-living guy, but we'll have to wing that part until we get to the personality rewrite in Release 6.

[Neonivek]

I guess Toady is going to need to impart "Secret Ethics" so that people who gain knowledge of some secrets won't nessarily like to use it.

and possibly some changes these secrets force upon the hearer. If this was a Lovecraftian universe each secret would impart insanity.

Actually I wonder why he doesn't just call it "The Arcane" (given it is the same thing)

I am sort of confused what I do in this case...

Do I create a new suggestion topic even though other people's input is totally unneeded... or do I just PM Toady in general? Last time I asked I was told by others to just contact Toady, but overtime I am wondering about that.

[Areyar]

A bit meta, but I must wonder why there's been such little discussing over the last few hours. The devlog is in its most active state in ages,

Many Baywatchers have been waiting for these new developments for quite a while. . .
can't you smell the baited breaths?

hehe

Magic type features have been discussed in very great detail in the suggestions forum (and dev thread), I find it refreshing that the such speculative ramblings are on the backburner for once. Not that I don't enjoy the occasional feature phantasia. I guess that in this case it is just better to wait a bit to see what develops.

Also, with the regular updates, we addicts are getting our fix. So we don't need to sollicit for small change at this dev-thread, I guess. :p

[Cruxador]

What's the difference between Inns and Taverns in DF?
They're usually pretty similar things, but they're in separate releases.

I guess Toady is going to need to impart "Secret Ethics" so that people who gain knowledge of some secrets won't nessarily like to use it.

Ideally this should function as an outgrowth of the personality system in general, without requiring a specific thing of its own.

and possibly some changes these secrets force upon the hearer. If this was a Lovecraftian universe each secret would impart insanity.

Just hearing a secret shouldn't usually do anything beyond granting the capacity to use it. Maybe in some particularly unusual instances it would, but I wouldn't care to see that be the norm.

Actually I wonder why he doesn't just call it "The Arcane" (given it is the same thing)

Connotation. Calling it "arcane", while technically accurate, implies it is generic magic and separate from the normal rules of the universe, due to the use of that word in fantasy.

[Neonivek]

Just hearing a secret shouldn't usually do anything beyond granting the capacity to use it. Maybe in some particularly unusual instances it would, but I wouldn't care to see that be the norm

It is a common theme that arcane knowledge were not meant for mortals to have. Either the power corrupting them or the secrets by their very nature corrupt those that know it. For example in Lovecraftian universes it is that the true knowledge of the world is inherantly maddening and we remain ignorant for our own safety/sanity.

Connotation. Calling it "arcane", while technically accurate, implies it is generic magic

But instead it is "Secrets" which implies 'cheating'.

I am just surprised because it is probably the MOST accurate use of "Arcane" I ever seen and yet it isn't going to have its name. It is almost disapointing. It is like seeing someone use classical fairies and call them "Pranksters".