Print

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

[origamiscienceguy]

I noticed in the new update that Dwarven Children would "Play Make Believe" which I think is amazing, but that got me thinking. Wouldn't it be awesome if children would run around the fortress playing tag with each other? One child would be "it" and the other children playing would run away from that child, and the child who is "it" would try to get to the child that is currently closest to him/her. Once somebody is tagged, the new "it" person will have a few moments of standing still to let everybody get away, then he/she would resume the chase. It would be even better if the game created a reasonably sized burrow while they are playing (the "boundaries" of the tag game) so the children wouldn't stray too far away.
EDIT:
Many people gave some excellent ideas to expand this idea. Children would have a range of activities to do. Each one would also very slowly train that child's skills. Some ideas are given below:

Hide & Seek: Trains either Observer or Ambusher, depending on the role played.
Dodgeball: Trains Thrower and/or Dodger, possibly more or less simultaneously.
Sack Race: Crutch-walker, perhaps?
Button, Button, Who's Got the Button?: Trains Liar and Judge of Intent skills.
Jump Rope: Trains Kinesthenic sense & Endurance.
Musical Chairs: Not a damn thing, except for whoever's playing the music.
Marbles: Trains Spatial & Kinesthenic senses.
One for you, Dirst: Blindfold games, be they called Blind Man's Bluff or Marco Polo or whatever the heck this is called, could train the currently nonexistent skill of Blindfighting, which would currently be useful only for actual blinded dwarves, but which could markedly rise in importance once the Lighting arc kicks in.
Tag and other running games should train agility, not Strength. It makes no sense for Urist to be able to lift heavy boulders simply because she played so much Capture the Flag as a kid.

[Dirst]

I like the idea to expand of Make Believe, but maybe not the specific game of Tag.  Perhaps some word-soup name along with a simple description that may or may not involve toys.  One example would be a "ball game for two teams" (e.g., Soccer or Volleyball) or "leader/follower game" (e.g., Simon Says or Redlight/greenlight) or "chasing game" (e.g., Tag) or "pretend battle for two teams" (e.g., Cowboys and Indians).

But please don't clutter up the logs with "Urist pretends to strike Lam with a toy sword, but she jumps away!"

[cochramd]

But please don't clutter up the logs with "Urist pretends to strike Lam with a toy sword, but she jumps away!"

I can't speak for everyone, but I would gladly take that one on the chin if it trained combat skills at a rate equal to or slightly lower than sparring does.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

If that's true, my brothers would be Great Swordsmen already.

[mirrizin]

I, for one, *really* like this idea. Perhaps add an option for turning off notifications for child's play as a particular category of action (you can do that for other kinds of notifications, right?).

If it qualifies as early combat training, fantastic.

[SixOfSpades]

I like the idea to expand of Make Believe, but maybe not the specific game of Tag.

I disagree, I think outright naming it "Tag" has a lot more flavor than just "chasing game", possibly because I have zero nostalgia for running up to my childhood friends & asking, "Hey, who wants to play Chasing Game?".

Some "word salad-ism" could be beneficial; for example, "Duck, Duck, Goose" could easily be renamed to animals more familiar to the biome of the fortress and/or Mountainhome. But until people start coming up with more formulas for alternative names & and reasons for using them, I'd support just making a set list of games and the skills & attributes they might improve. Once there are enough games, perhaps civilizations could get a randomized selection of which ones they know, with new games possibly being learned through trading/studying/tavern play.

Hide & Seek: Trains either Observer or Ambusher, depending on the role played.
Dodgeball: Trains Thrower and/or Dodger, possibly more or less simultaneously.
Sack Race: Crutch-walker, perhaps?
Button, Button, Who's Got the Button?: Trains Liar and Judge of Intent skills.
Jump Rope: Trains Kinesthenic sense & Endurance.
Musical Chairs: Not a damn thing, except for whoever's playing the music.
Marbles: Trains Spatial & Kinesthenic senses.
One for you, Dirst: Blindfold games, be they called Blind Man's Bluff or Marco Polo or whatever the heck this is called, could train the currently nonexistent skill of Blindfighting, which would currently be useful only for actual blinded dwarves, but which could markedly rise in importance once the Lighting arc kicks in.
Tag and other running games should train (the currently nonexistent) Speed, not Strength. It makes no sense for Urist to be able to lift heavy boulders simply because she played so much Capture the Flag as a kid.

[origamiscienceguy]

Wow, these are very good ideas, do you mind if I update the OP to add them?

[IndigoFenix]

This would be great.  Also, toys should be given skill training tags.  What is the point of toy hammers and toy miniforges if not to train young dwarves in the art of metalworking?

The only problem is that, thanks to the length of childhood, even with experience gain penalties you might still wind up with children being at master skill levels by the time they grow up.  I wouldn't think that the skill a child gains through play would be above 'dabbling'... except for prodigies who could do actual work.

However, it might be interesting if children with dabbling skill could choose to perform a labor in an actual workshop.  Even if a child does as they please, they still might be interested in working like the grown-ups... You could make toys to encourage them to become interested in the labor you need.  If you want smiths, make toy forges.  If you want soldiers, give them toy swords instead.

[Bumber]

Tag and other running games should train (the currently nonexistent) Speed, not Strength.

You mean Agility?

[SixOfSpades]

Wow, these are very good ideas, do you mind if I update the OP to add them?

Go ahead. As far as I know, most users won't mind having their contributions to a suggestion added to the original suggestion itself, at least not if they're given proper credit.

In addition, I've always believed that dwarves should also enjoy the pastimes of Bowling, Darts, Chess, and various games of Cards, Tiles, and Dice. Again, different civilizations could randomly be assigned which specific games they know, such as Poker & Dominoes vs. Whist & Mah-Jongg. These new games would mostly just add flavor and give more stuff to craft . . . although Chess would be a useful pastime to encourage, as it trains Analytical Ability at a very high rate.

. . . even with experience gain penalties you might still wind up with children being at master skill levels by the time they grow up.  I wouldn't think that the skill a child gains through play would be above 'dabbling'... except for prodigies who could do actual work.

So use the child's age as an additional limiter. Start with a 50% cap on their experience gain because they're not doing it for their livelihood, and then multiply by ( 10% * ( age - 1 ) ). That way, a 4-year-old playing Hide & Seek would get only 15% of the Ambusher training that an adult stalking a real quarry would get, whereas a 10-year-old, nearly old enough for the real thing, would get 45%. Add in time for skill rust, and only kids that really love Hide & Seek will suddenly turn into Proficient Hunters.

If you want smiths, make toy forges.  If you want soldiers, give them toy swords instead.

It shouldn't be that easy. Sure, the player should be able to influence a child, but it should still do as it pleases. Most importantly, children should naturally prefer games that they are already good at--if a child scores highly in attributes that are used in a certain game, the child would receive more happy thoughts from winning that game. As the game would almost certainly also raise those same attributes, a positive feedback loop is created, where the child cultivates a small number of favorite games, and generally shuns others (unless asked by a friend), thus specializing the child toward a certain set of skills, and therefore toward a more particular set of adult professions.

Tag and other running games should train (the currently nonexistent) Speed, not Strength.

You mean Agility?

Nope. Sure, I'm glad Agility exists, but it's just as irrelevant as Strength when it comes to running. You don't see Usain Bolt trying out for gymnastics or weightlifting, nor do you see those Olympic athletes attempting the 100 meters, and that's because there is very little overlap between those skills.

According to the wiki, a dwarf's walking speed is determined by an average between Strength and Agility. A much better setup would be to have it determined by Speed. Strength determines how much additional weight can be carried (& up what kind of an incline) before it starts to cut into the dwarf's movement rate. Agility would control the amount by which having to negotiate a trap-filled corridor would slow the dwarf down. Etc.

[Bumber]

Nope. Sure, I'm glad Agility exists, but it's just as irrelevant as Strength when it comes to running. You don't see Usain Bolt trying out for gymnastics or weightlifting, nor do you see those Olympic athletes attempting the 100 meters, and that's because there is very little overlap between those skills.

According to the wiki, a dwarf's walking speed is determined by an average between Strength and Agility. A much better setup would be to have it determined by Speed. Strength determines how much additional weight can be carried (& up what kind of an incline) before it starts to cut into the dwarf's movement rate. Agility would control the amount by which having to negotiate a trap-filled corridor would slow the dwarf down. Etc.

They're not skills, they're physical attributes. Strength is overall muscle strength. Agility is the rate at which they can fire and their flexibility. That DF's attributes synergize with a variety of skills indicate that they're not specialized. It doesn't track just leg muscle, or whatever, even if that seems right up DF's alley.

Navigating a trap filled corridor sounds more heavily reliant on Spacial and Kinesthetic Sense, which are "soul" attributes. If your soul found itself an extremely agile body, you'd still stumble through all the traps without the sense to control it. Speed is a property of an object in motion.

[cochramd]

Personally, I think that tag would train Striking, Fighter and Dodging. From what I recall of playing the game, just because you can outrun a guy doesn't necessarily mean you can lay finger on him.

[Sanctume]

Utilize the teacher and student attributes and expand the scholar labors to include children also instead of just adults. 

There already is a game function that teaches skills, albeit dabbling levels.  Just make it apply to children also, maybe via a classroom zone; or allow kids to hangout in library and temples and taverns also. 

Obviously it will not just cover increasing military related skills, and it will cover skills related to other jobs, and even musical instruments and performances and arts.

[PatrikLundell]

I'm slightly off on a tangent here, but it seems to me the new needs system generates children who're complete strangers with nearly everyone until they become adults and can start to gain friendship points (which I think mainly comes from the unspecified Socialize activity). Thus, I'd like to see the child activities tweaked so they spent some time striking up social relations with others (in particular other kids). In the slightly longer perspective, the group play activities ought to award some friendship points. As it stands currently, nobody would invite their friends for a game of tag since they don't have any friends, but I guess a "hey, you kid! Do you want to play something?" invitation should probably be included to make it possible for the social ball to start rolling.

[SixOfSpades]

You don't see Usain Bolt trying out for gymnastics or weightlifting, nor do you see those Olympic athletes attempting the 100 meters, and that's because there is very little overlap between those skills.

They're not skills, they're physical attributes.

Strength, speed, and agility are attributes, yes, but I was comparing Running vs. Gymnastics, which are definitely skills--skills which are greatly dependent on separate attributes. Yes, speed (velocity), agility (velocity / time), and strength (mass * (velocity / time)) are all very closely related in mathematical terms, but biological bodies still differentiate; being extremely good at one of them does NOT necessarily mean being any good at the others.

That DF's attributes synergize with a variety of skills indicate that they're not specialized.

Agility is used by damn near every skill there is, because it's an essential aspect of just about any kind of job a person could do. Speed would be similarly useful, except that it would be essential for just about everything that happens between jobs.