Bay 12 Games Forum

Doing a forum search, I see that the subject of Polygamy has been brought up several times before in the Suggestions area. However, these conversations and suggestions were made a number of years ago. Two of the most recent topics on the subject date back to 2015:
Where is the Polygamy / Polyandry?
Polygamy

The suggestion of making dwarves capable of being polyamorous (or allowing polyandry / polygyny) seems controversial. However, the main complaint against it seems to be that it would inevitably result in (a lot) more dwarf children, which many players would not like.

Personally, I find this argument weak, considering that we can adjust the [BABY_CHILD_CAP:100:1000] token in d_init.txt. We can adjust both the absolute cap on babies+children as well as the percentage of the fort's adult pop. We could even turn child birth off.

A counterargument would be the possibility of adding a couple more d_nit.txt settings. For one, a new option to switch dwarves between being monogamous and polyamorous (or turn monogamous ON/OFF) could be added. Optionally, another setting might give some control of Fertility. That, or perhaps there could be an option to reduce the requirements of starting (and, thus, increasing the occurrence of) a Relationship or Marriage.

Alternatively, some new tokens in the raws could control such things.

On to my main point: (I only brought up dwarf polygamy because of how it would impact birth rates and because it ties in to my real suggestion below. I otherwise don't much care about dwarf polygamy.)

Why is it that dwarves mate for life? I'd love to see a possibility of a widow or widower remarrying after their spouse dies. Also, I find it silly that dwarves have to be within 10 years of each other's age for a relationship to happen. A dwarf's max age is between 150-170 years, which is about twice that of a human lifespan (IRL). Such a 10 year window severely limits hookups, which I suspect was the main point: It was probably made this way for gameplay reasons - because marriages and births would otherwise occur too frequently for most players.

What about those of us playing Fortress Mode with a modded civ other than dwarves? Must our fortress of humans, goblins, drow or whatever also be limited to mating for life and only marrying with 10 years of age?

I've searched the wiki and looked and looked in the init settings and Raws, but I can not find an adjustment to either of these things. And when I asked in the modding questions thread, I was told (with 99% certainty) that this was hard-coded.

Like Monogamy/Polygamy, I think it would be relatively simple to add a couple of new switches to d_init to adjust whether or not "dwarves" mate for life and to disable the check on age before allowing a relationship. Defaults could be set to leave things at the status quo.

Alternatively, I'd be satisfied if we just had some tokens we could use in the Raws to adjust such things. And I'm certain that I wouldn't be the only one grateful for this, considering how popular mods are that add custom races that are playable (or make other vanilla races such) in Fort Mode. Several of the biggest and most popular mods seem to do this.

Some of us want a higher than usual marriage rate / fertility rate and more dwarf babies - at least for certain experiments or goals. For example, consider Archcrystal: 410 years in a fortress. Everyone currently alive in Sethatos' fort was born there and descended from two dwarves down through 5 generations. He even set up arranging marriages for their descendants with pre-honeymoon suites. Imagine the micromanagement this must have involved, given the aforementioned limitations. (Read the Arranging marriages section of the wiki article on Marriage for details of how slow and tedious this actually is.)

May we please have some way to Butcher or otherwise utilize the remains of tame creatures that have died? It seems such a waste that we can't butcher the remains of our own livestock merely because they died before we could slaughter them ourselves. Our fort gets raided or attacked, killing some of our livestock, and we have to leave them to rot because... reasons?

This does not make sense to me and it breaks my suspension of disbelief. Especially in medieval times and especially when a village is isolated from civilization by great distances, it would be absurd to let food go to waste. It's too important.

Granted, if a lot of livestock was killed, it may spoil before it could be processed and either consumed or preserved (such as with salt or saltpeter). But you know that they would try to make use of it. If nothing else, the bones and hide would remain on spoiling remains. The fat, too, could probably be salvaged for making lye, even if it was going rancid.

Was this separation of Butchering and Slaughtering done to prevent players from arranging an "accident" for a dorf's pets (like how many forts had an overabundance of cats) in order to allow them to be Butchered for something usable? That's the only reason which I can think of.

I really want to find a way to change the Surroundings or region type of a biome. (Specifically, I want to be able to change an Evil region to Neutral.)

Are there any mods or utilities which can do this? At the very least, I suspect there might be a map/tile editor which could do this. Perhaps the only option is an outdated utility, such as DFMapEditor? Or, maybe by changing some values via DFHack?

Before I decided to ask, I looked on the Mantis bug tracker. I did not find this listed as a bug, so...

Did Toady intend for syndromes with paralysis, such as most venomous snakes and spiders, to lead to suffocation via paralysis of the lungs? Or is that an oversight/bug which may be changed some day?

I question it mostly because it seems like overkill, potentially making it a matter of game balance.

Having paralysis almost always affect the lungs means certain death, making a snake or spider bite almost certainly lethal. This renders the paralysis effect itself - and any other effects of the venom syndrome - a moot point as the poor dwarf or similarly "small" humanoid or creature is going to die anyway. As the saying goes, it's "Shooting a dead horse." Even better: "He's dead, he just doesn't know it yet."

It also tends to make such creatures far more deadly than similarly-sized predators.

If you would, consider for a moment if the game always ignored the lungs for paralysis syndromes. Without suffocation, the paralyzed creature is still a prone target - it can't move or do anything else. The effect still has a lot of potential for Fun, without death being absolutely certain.

Consider, too, that in v0.31 and earlier, the [CE_PARALYSIS] tag accepted a body part as a target (similar to CE_NECROSIS and CE_NUMBNESS). But as of v0.34, that was no longer possible...

I have a lot of respect for those who are able to create and maintain mods and utilities, particularly the massive ones like Genesis and Masterwork. Aside from the time, effort, and know-how required, the task of organizing and planning such a large project seems daunting.

Years ago, I released a tiny graphics set. But I wanted to try my hand at a mod or two and get into good habits - habits to help not just with DF modding, but also with other projects and creative writing I've attempted. I've had difficulty with organizing and planning such. Writing ideas down in drafts is a first step. But I wanted to ask if any of you have recommendations in terms of software and habits to help organize.

Do any of you use mind-mapping software to organize a mod project? A few years ago I played around with VUE a bit. But I never used it for much. And aside from mind-mapping, any other software you would recommend?

Software I currently use:

• Notepad++
• Metapad (A nice Notepad replacement.)
• OpenOffice
• WinMerge

I realize that parts of the wiki are out of date. So when I read the following about Floors in DF2014, I had to question whether this was still unknown:

It is not yet known how different types of floor affect the mood of the dwarfs, but it sure is a fact that covering a muddy sand floor with a layer of ash log floor, or anything else for that matter, would be pleasing for any player.

So... Does the type of floor affect Dwarf Thoughts? Surely, someone has either tested this or asked this by now. What about floor material? Engraving floors, at least, should affect room value...

Can anyone suggest mods that add new plants to the Tundra biome?
I did find Dwarf Pine Trees, but I'm looking for more.

I want to try Tundra, but it's a bit too empty for my taste. In the real world, tundras are not completely desolate. One can find dwarf shrubs, sedges and grasses, mosses, and lichens. And, in some areas, even some scattered trees.

In spirit, this is a continuation of the Reuse dwarves from abandoned fortresses suggestion thread. However, I wish to discuss the modding and practicality of the idea with v0.34 and current tools and techniques.

---

I don't suppose there's been any more official talk of having the option to retire a fort in a legacy manner?

But, at least in terms of modding, it is now - technically - feasible. Sort of.  (See this post in the DFusion thread and this thread for details.) Still, it requires technical knowledge and hacking the game. It's not at all a straightforward process and there's a chance to mess up.

I recently asked here in the new DFHack thread about further possibilities. I had hoped to hack the location of items and creatures to instantly move everything to a new embark at a different part of the world map. Sadly, according to Quietust, it cannot be done.

Anyway, here's part of Rumrusher's response (moved here to stay on topic):

I wonder to know what's your problem?.. oh wait you want migrants from a retired fort, they should move over to the new site easily in the upcoming migrant waves. Though the units are stuck in a pool of natural citizens of the civ and might take a couple sessions.

Interesting, but it's not what I'm talking about. I want to choose a selection of dwarves from my old fort to migrate to a new location to start a new one - as founders, not migrants. But more than that, I also wanted to bring along a selection of domestic and exotic animals and maybe some caged critters. In addition, I really want to select piles of supplies and stuff from my old fort to bring along - maybe even an artifact or two.

More importantly, there is a reason to bring along creatures from my old fort instead of buying new animals on embark or from caravans. A good one:

DF actually has some degree of genetics simulation. (See v0.31 Talk:Butcher.) There can be a surprising degree of variation in terms of a species' HEIGHT, BROADNESS and LENGTH. (Not to mention variation in hair, eye, and tissue colors. See TLCM_GENETIC_MODEL and other creature tokens.) And these traits can be inherited by offspring. In some cases an unusually large "breed" of dogs in DF can be butchered for more meat than an unusually small "breed" of donkeys. A lot of it seems a roll of the dice. But one can intentionally breed big specimins that produce more meat (or visa versa). And larger specimins are also a bit more powerful in combat.

But all that work in breeding super-cows or super-warbears would be largely wasted if one cannot bring them along for a new embark.

...though if you want people from another site to visit you could jump into adventure mode and walk them to the next site.

I thought about that. A lot! If push comes to shove, I might. But that method seems very tedious and fraught with peril. Boring, even. Embarking to a destination halfway across the world map could take a long time. And I would imagine I'd run into some nasty stuff along the way and most of the party would perish along with most of the goods.

That's just it: How would I haul a bunch of stuff across the world in adventure mode? Does 0.34 adventure mode allow the use of pack animals now? Fortress mode does not allow dwarves to use animals as pack animals - unlike caravans.

Can I have them carrying bins filled with stuff at the moment I retire the fort and turn them into adventurer companions? Maybe have them use wheelbarrows or minecarts? There would be no tracks for the minecart...

Well, I suppose I could do a "hopscotch" method. That is, I could move all I wanted to the edge of the map in fort mode, switch to adventure and move beyond the edge, then switch back to fort mode and move stuff again... rinse and repeat. But that's quite tedious. Even more so if one has to dig tunnels underground for a safe route, complete with minecart tracks.

Ah... I have an idea on a faster method (if it works):

One can use DFHack commands to change the location of items and creatures instantly. So one could have stacks of items and creatures a lined up for "rapid short-range teleporting". Then do a legacy-style fort retirement and switch to Adventurer Mode. Next, have a script to teleport everything to the edge of the map in the direction you want to go (N/S/E/W). And then keep repeating the teleport until you get where you want to go.