51196
DF Gameplay Questions / Re: Gold dust snow - how to get rid of it?
« on: June 27, 2012, 11:09:58 am »
Not true; you should mention, just to check, but some things still SHOULD NOT happen, no matter what kind of DF you are using.
May 9, 2024: The May '24 Report is up.
News: April 23, 2024: Dwarf Fortress 50.13 has been released.
News: February 4, 2021: Dwarf Fortress Talk #28 has been posted.
News: November 21, 2018: A new Threetoe story has been posted.
Forum Guidelines
What if the scariness of a creature generally decreased as it took damage? So a drowning or burning creature would not be scary, neither would one caught in a room full of spikes or one that has had it's arms and legs broken.First off, since this is DF we're talking about, it's hard to define "damage." Sure, having an arm cut off is a lot of damage, but until/unless the goblin (or whatever) bleeds to death, it can beat you to death with the weapon in the other. Besudes, would YOU be less afraid of a dragon (say) if it had a bunch of bleeding gashes on it? I wouldn't--between its fire and its claws, I'm staying as far away from it until it's been turned into roasts and armor.
People don't want a logical interpretation of the ethics, they want their standard gameplay behavior rewarded.Well-put.
Requesting that dwarves get a positive thought from seeing foes burn to death is in essence the same as requesting that dwarves get a positive thought from witnessing an atomsmashing - only it seems more logical.
Well, we are getting magic someday and dwarven maigic is going to manifest itself through their works, but what you propose...The pick-throwing was just because it felt stupid to say "For the mining legendary feat, we should do what already happens!" I believe I included a note to roughly that effect. Same with smithing.
It's somewhat, well, ill-thought. Those pick throwing tricks are just ridiculous, armor using, architecture and most of other crafts already do what you propose, yet thats results of gradual improvement, not sudden ascension.
Those beekeeping and carpentry features are more appropriate for the elves.
Smelting feats aren't quite realistic too, I guess it's more than enough that any dwarf can forge with his bare hands.
I believe they should be called legendary because of quality of their work, not do weird stuff because they are called legendary.You're getting the idea backwards. They don't "do weird stuff" because they're legendary, they're legendary because their skill, strength, or what-have-you allow them to do things which are impossible to normal dwarves.
I want my legendary millers to have stories about them circulating the world, but I don't see what naming their skill level as "Legendary" does to detract from that. Again, I suggest that skill names get added to the "raws" (or, more probably, the init files, but that's nitpicking). That way everyone can have their own cake and...not eat it, that gets into some other metaphorical issues, but you get my point.I just found it an interesting exercise. I reckon if a committee argued back and forth about these in minute detail, for about a year, they could turn out a viable list at the end of it.What about scrapping comitee AND list?
Right now, we have seen tons of proposals and every single one has arguable portions where people disagree with order of names.
I hereby suggest simple number. There is no in-world reason to map levels to discriptive names, it is all for players sake and for players simple numeric level conveys information with comfort and speed.
I'd like my Carpenter to be called Impressive because he impressed lots of dwarves (lots of quality beds from him for example), not because he is L8 Carpenter - for that, game can just call him Level 8 and we can save adjective hunt in thesaurus which provides gems like "Flawless Woodutter" or "High Master Wood Burner" or "Legendary Miller".
I want my millers to be legendary because there are stories about them circulating the world.