Bay 12 Games Forum

Actually, for nobles making unreasonable demands, I figure they're given a pick and told that they're fair game for demons until they're done, but they're free to dig themselves out
Of hell.
And we all know what Dwarf Hell's made of.

So, now that footkerchief's posted the real reason, it's time for the joking reasons.

They were all eaten by serpentmen.

They all got rounded up by GW lawyers.

They were all eaten by tigermen.

They're still there, hiding... Waiting. PLOTTING.

They were all eaten by elves.

Quote from: Pilsu on April 22, 2010, 06:53:27 am

Quote from: Paul on April 22, 2010, 01:21:42 am

Being able to cure failed mood dwarves might be interesting too. Instead of a chance of just up and being cured, give them a chance of repeating their failed mood every so often in treatment. A second failure results in worsening crazy with no turning back, but succeeding the second time leads them down the road to recovery.

The idea is gone. It should stay gone, otherwise they become a dime a dozen and dwarves are just flipping shit over nothing.

And I think this is important to show how critical the idea of an artifact is to a dwarf. They literally lose their will to live if they fail. Making this curable seems to take away much of the significance of a mood to my mind. This is entirely a matter of preference, but I'd prefer that a dwarf who failed a mood stay damaged if not dead.

Maybe have the dwarf barred from ever crafting anything ever again? (at the very least, a permanent and extreme phobia for the crafts they were going to have become legendary in.)
Except in the case of possessions, where the possessing spirit just goes nuts and tries to burn out the poor host dwarf's entire personality. Those can be cured completely, in rare, particularly strong-willed cases. Of course in most, the best you can hope for is permanent amnesia (including really basic stuff, like walking or feeding themselves) and extreme personality changes.

Actually, since Elves have [KILL_PLANT:UNTHINKABLE], they should probably care about giant mushrooms, too.
Which leads on to my point, which is that this probably won't see any change until non-legends mode ethics are implemented (which, in turn, will probably make good relations with any other civ really complicated, knowing the average DF player).

It's certainly possible that that's how it's modeled, since we've got relsize for all limbs and all.

Taking out a whole group of people should be nigh impossible. As is, I can waltz through human towns murdering people and no one can actually hurt me much. I got an arrow that nicked my arm, but that's it.

Taking out a whole group of less-armed, less-armoured and less-trained people should be somewhat difficult, and not because they can just kill you through your armour, but because six of them can hold you down while a seventh gets your helmet off and slits your throat. (aka the only thing that's wrong is how everybody just rushes you)
Even so, Theseus or Odysseus or Hector could've beaten 'em, and that's who adventurers are when they use all their starting points.

So, I was thinking about how to mod in homosexual dwarves using castes, and I'm wondering how, exactly, the MALE and FEMALE tags work wrt dwarves having relationships, getting married and pronouns.
That last one is especially intriguing because I noticed that with ant-men, although only the queens and drones have gender tags, the workers and such are still referred to with female pronouns. I'm not seeing any tag that would do this...