Bay 12 Games Forum

Quote from: GreatWyrmGold on January 04, 2013, 08:07:21 pm

I'm not sure why this would be possible, problematic, or insoluble once detected.

I haven't learned about evolution much past a high school biology level, so for all I know it could be impossible. It would be a simple thing to put in a system to regulate breeding, so there's no significant disadvantage to doing so over letting it be purely random. A bit of regulation to prevent some things from going wrong is all it would be.

Well, if such a thing is possible and simple, why not.

Quote from: GreatWyrmGold on January 04, 2013, 08:07:21 pm

I contributed some ideas a while back. Now I'm commenting on others' because no one commented on mine.

Novel's topics promote some worthwhile discussion, so I welcome them. I don't really know why/how some topics are more popular than similar ones, but I'm fine with whatever works. I don't see them as hideous blotches on the beautiful face of the GD topic list or anything like that - if I don't want to read them I don't have to - so there's no disadvantage that I know of there.

Oh, you meant the thread as a whole, not ideas in the thread. Never mind.

Quote

I explained how a society with no altruism could function.
Want more ways? Look at US society now, subtract charities and most subsidies, and add a demon in the White House who wants to keep everyone alive and functioning. Now make everyone 15% shorter and have green skin, and reduce us to the Iron Age. You have goblin society

Altruism does more then apply to Charity. It affects even how societies function and how they treat others. The lack of ability to work for a "Greater goal" is what not having Altruism ultimately means.

Altruism means the will to help others at your expense.
Working for a generic "greater goal" is called "planning."

Goblins will never work with other goblins because they cannot establish relationships because they lack altruism and thus they lack diplomatic ability because they lack "gifting".

What part of altruism is required for trade?

The US society without charities and with a goblin in the whitehouse does not make goblin society.

Demon.
There's tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions, of people who work to benefit themselves (whether because of greed, callousness, or simple inability to provide for both themselves and others). The remainder either contribute only inconsequentially or fall under charities.

Quote

Interesting...any of these not temples?

Yes

Funny, I've never heard of them.
Hint: This and the last post were requests to provide examples.

Quote

And how "tiny" do intelligent creatures get?

Insectile.

Which ones?
Hint: This and the last post were requests to provide examples.

Quote

What makes you think they don't exist?

It cannot, it is an entirely different set of biology.

Would it kill you to quote context? Just a little context?
It's the same species, with essentially the same social structures (where applicable), biomes, lifestyles, organs, etc. How does the addition of some rare species, most of which are either able to be fit into Terran taxonomy or else clearly inorganic (and thereby obviously exempt) "an entirely different set of biology?"

Quote

That doesn't make any sense. If there was a food shortage that was long enough for basic psychology to be affected, the size of the brain and amount of resources it used would also be reduced, because without a complex social structure, you don't need as complex a brain (certainly not as complex as a human's), and a brain like ours is a huge drain on resources.

Not nessisarily remember even right now Humans have several superfluous organs and redundencies. If the brain proved useful after the famine as well.

It wouldn't, not at that size.
The upper limit on usefulness on tools which one person can create can be reached far below human brain size, especially when the law of diminishing returns is applied. Without any social interaction, there's no need to retain the parts of brain associated with speech and language. Even the idea that a lack of food leads to smaller rather than fewer groups is flawed.

Quote

Unless their food sources were also larger.

They are not, Dwarf Fortress has nothing like that.

Um...It has no giant animals? Silly me, those giant badgers that attacked my dwarves and the giant moose that trampled my adventurer must have been elaborate hallucinations. Even if giants (somehow) couldn't eat those, what do they eat?

Nor do their migration patterns show this.

Where do migration patterns come in, in DF or in being germane?

Quote

1. Well excuse me for applying realism to the most realistic fantasy in history.
2. You don't need sentience for that. Any mammal can be smart or clever, but only humans (and maybe some of the [social] cetaceans or primates) are sentient.
3. If I can tolerate someone, I can work with them if I have to

1. Yes, you do need to be excused. You are applying things that do not exist in Dwarf Fortress.
2. It is the degree and the ability to abstract that is required. Something that just being "smart and clever" doesn't fulfill.
3. You also do not want to work with them. You want to stay away from them. It suggest aversion.

1. Sorry, I assumed that Toady was trying to create as realistic a simulation of fantasy as possible. I guess you've convinced me that I can just throw biology out the window while keeping DF's realistic geology. Hint: Sarcasm.
2. Even "normal" mammals learn. It's why baby wolves play. You don't need sentience to learn and innovate. It might make it easier but isn't needed.
3. I'm not trying to prove that semimegabeasts commonly work with each other (or would, in DF 1.0), only that they could.

Quote

I never said that this would be typical. It seems we're arguing about the same thing. WHY ARE WE ARGUING THEN?

We are still having an arguement because there is still one fundemental difference.
A solitary creature would NOT form societies themselves, they would not form long term groups, and if they joined a society they would isolate themselves in someway. That is my arguement.

Interesting. Seeing as there is no evidence that semi/megabeasts are solitary by anything but necessity, how does it apply here?

You are suggesting that the social aspect of sentience overwrites this and that a Giant for example, if they were solitary, would have little issues with this and could, if he wanted, form large scrawling societies with other giants if they were able to unite enough giants because in order to be sentient they must have internal motivators that prevent them from killing their babies and mates (ignoring that... they may kill their mates)

Um. This is a fair bit past what I said...
But I actually don't see any big issue, if enough of an external pressure was applied. The US was an isolationist nation in the 1930's and early 40's, yet it joined with the Soviet Union (which was incredibly different from the US, to the point that the two of them had a cold war after WWII) by the pressure of an outside threat.

Which is where our oppinions differ.

Indeed.

Where I argue that Solitary nature overwrites sentience/sapience and you argue that Sentience overwrites solitary nature. In otherwords which takes precidence.

Can. Can overwrite.

Quote

If true, why would the goblins attack a settlement which is no threat to them instead of the other goblins, who are?

Not only do they do fight other goblins constantly on an individual basis and that currently no race fights itself. Likely were the game expanded there would be succession wars to prove who "Owns" that goblin settlement.

Interesting...but why waste goblins on fighting a random dwarven settlement when they could be channeled towards local conflicts, ie ones that matter?

Quote

You're making assumptions. What part of zero altruism implies maximum sadism? An intelligent person (and most dumb ones) realizes that working together is usually in your best interest

No Altruism means that you live in perfect self-interest. It is only your self-interest you are interested in any you know that it is the same for everyone else. Working together in a state where no one actually had a need to work together, like humans do, means that logically betraying everyone is the best course of action. Yet it is also the best course of action for them as well. In otherwords ALL goblins are Psychopaths (No really).

Exactly. They want to promote their well-being. They don't mind hurting others, but they don't mind helping each other either.

The sort of "logic of working together" needs to be established first, so goblins COULD function in a human society where social rules keep them in line. Yet in a society entirely populated by beings who think alike, there is an issue.

Why? They can all predict each other's actions. "I promised that I'd give Grok a free kid in exchange for the bag. If I don't, he'll likely call some of his criminal warbands to get my head. Therefore it's worth giving Grok a kid to stay alive." Stuff like that.

Early human societies relied on our altruistic instincts to function and we couldn't have gotten along without it because it served a very logical nessisity.

Where does that mean they're necessary?

An group of psychopaths would find survival difficult.

But not impossible, especially if it occurred to them that working together garnered more benefits than not doing so. Or if a demon threatened to kill them all if they couldn't work together.

It all pretty much boils down to this as I see it.

Quote

Well excuse me for applying realism to the most realistic fantasy in history.

Nothing wrong with assuming and applying realism to those aspects based on reality. Applying realism to fantasy creatures and themes however is pretty oxymoronic. Sure, some part of fantasy creatures can be realistic, but to assume and suggest that they should follow realism as much as possible would make them not be fantasy creatures anymore. Lets take the ogre for example. I think most people would agree that letting the ogre behave in whatever way makes it the most fun/interesting is the way to go, rather than limiting it to just being a slightly dumb, large, mammalian humanoid behaving the general way a slightly dumb, large, mammalian humanoid would if ogres were real. If the two just so happens to be relatively the same then yay, win win, if not no harm done, because they're fantasy creatures. Limiting fantasy for the sake of realism is frankly a pretty stupid thing to do ^^

In what way does having ogres work together intelligently make the game less fun than if they acted like idiots and never got into any kind of group without killing each other?

Quote from: GreatWyrmGold on January 04, 2013, 05:36:42 pm

Quote from: Lectorog on January 03, 2013, 09:40:40 pm

Technology is adopted that gives humans ultimate pleasure/satisfaction. Systems are created to keep humans hooked into this and keep them alive, as well as creating and growing babies at a rate matching that of death from old age, breeding properly so as to avoid excessive evolution. Humans never do anything again; everyone is happier than ever before; no immortality.

I'm not sure if you understand evolution either. Why would it be bad?

Over a long enough period of time (this system would be designed to last as long as the solar system) some humans may "adapt" in such a way that keeps the machines from fulfilling their purpose, like remaining conscious of the world around them. With random breeding this is very unlikely, but having a system to keep watch over it just in case ensures that humanity will never do anything like have to adjust the system or consider leaving it.

I'm not sure why this would be possible, problematic, or insoluble once detected.

I dunno, Novel seems to be capturing the essence of General Discussion pretty well. He has things he wants to discuss, so he discusses them with people and starts other people discussing various topics. It works, and no-one else is doing much there.

I contributed some ideas a while back. Now I'm commenting on others' because no one commented on mine.

I look forward to killing off all the fae through removal of limbs, then promoting devils to Lesser Godhood, putting them under my control and demoting all the other Greater Gods to angels.

There's only one of those you can do. Especially once the others playing greater gods (and other halfway sane non-devil people) read that.

Respawn with a gigantc shiv.
Shiv everyone and steal their things.

[3] You shiv a thing and steal a really neat hat. I wonder what it was doing by the adamantine?

Learn to breathe air. Become big in Japan.

[2] *gasparidrown* Nope.

obtain a goldfish bowl helmet and wear it. ride out against the demons

[3] You grab a cracked goldfish bowl from the waves. [1+1] You promptly ride into a winged steel shark with deadly dust, but manage to avoid death.

Respawn on another island.
Make spawn point.

[3] You respawn on an island off the northern coast of Greenland. [1-1] You turn the island into a giant stoney shark. That eats you. Respawn?

respawn as derm. Continue to derm till the forum collapses.

[1] You respawn as a shark. A dogfish, to be exact.

Chestburst out of Persus13's corpse.
Look around, shrug, blow the fabric of reality to hell and leave without actually joining the game or looking at the first post.

[6] ...Derm'd by the best.

press A to blend. blend with the demons. assassinate the lead one.

[4] You somehow blend with the demons. [5] You kill a big demon, making the other demons angry.

KILL SOMETHINGS. :V

[4] You kill a demon.

GM TURN:
As dermonster derm'd it, there are [4/2] 3 turns left until the world kinda derms itself.
[1] A massive rift opens between you and Greenland, dumping the rocky giant shark near you.
The demons flee back into the former fortress and start mining to the adamantine.

Relay information on the base quietly over the intercom, as well as intel picked up from me recon. Oh, and while I'm giving my action, I'm watching the base and keeping an eye out for foes. Possibly through the scope, with my finger WELL off the trigger.

Research ancient occult rituals in order to extend our guy's lifespan.  If it seems dangerous, test it on the towelgirls first. 

It's rude to research occult rituals instead of entertaining our guest.