Dwarf Fortress Wiki - User contributions [en]

Topic

2020-02-08T18:04:58Z

Scruiser: /* Discovering Topics */

{{Quality|Superior|06:10, 17 May 2015 (UTC)}}
{{av}}

{{new in v0.42}}
{{Expand Topic}}

[[File:Topics.svg|thumb|500px|A diagram of all knowledge topics.]]

'''Topics''' (also '''Tech''' or '''Innovations''') are part of [[knowledge]].

There are around 300 innovations that can be discovered. Many of them have requirements, and many do not, so it's kind of a tech forest/grassland rather than a tree. Notably missing are innovations related to practical labors in the game (which will be added later in development). Only the discovery of certain "form" type topics has any effect on gameplay, as it allows scholars to write new types of [[book]]s; star charts, atlases, dictionaries and various historical forms.

Several innovations require innovations from other branches, and since all knowledge is individually tracked, that implies some investigators will need to be at least well-read if not skilled in various topics (there aren't currently joint research projects). There are some old and new mechanisms in place to ensure this happens.

There are 9 "branches" of the knowledge system. Each branch is further divided into categories of topics, such as methodologies, theories, etc.

==Discovering Topics==

According to a [http://www.bay12forums.com/smf//index.php?topic=169696.msg8071983#msg8071983 Future of the Fortress reply]:
<blockquote>
Fortress [[scholars]] do activity cycles, the length of which is 1-2 days (whether they are pondering or discussing etc.) Once they get through 50 cycles, it rolls 0-50 vs. the number of completed cycles minus 50 to see if they get "breakthrough credit." So at 51, they have a 2% chance, and at 100, they have a 100% chance. Then, it resets the cycle number to zero and gives them breakthrough credit, based on a skill roll plus 100 (for discuss, the other researchers contribute half of their summed skill rolls.) Based on the difficulty (1-4) of the topic, total lifetime breakthrough credit is then assigned a number of 50-sided dice. An easy topic is dice=credit/2500, then /5000, then /10000, then /20000 for level 4 topics. The number of dice cannot exceed 10. Then roll these dice -- if you get a 50 on any of them, discovery! This is a bit archaic, and I'm not suggesting it works particularly well. But that is how it works. Also: if they fail to get the breakthrough after the 50-sided rolls, they have a 2% chance of switching topics, or if their credit exceeds 100000, they always switch topics (though they keep the credit, so returning to the topic later gives them a decent chance at breakthrough.)
</blockquote>

For unskilled roles, some initial back-of-the-envelope calculations and some rough estimates observed through dfHack gives a basic idea of just how long research can take. Note that player testing had found that the skill roll contributes a lot to the breakthrough credit. Even dabbling dwarfs can gain over 2000 breakthrough credit at once and may average around 1000 breakthrough credit. Additionally the formula for the skill roll seems to have a very large spread, players have reported as low as 3000 breakthrough credit and as high as 25000 breakthrough credit awarded to a dwarf with legendary skill. Analytically calculating from the algorithm Toady gave, it takes an average of 58.54 cycles to get a breakthrough credit. Player testing has confirmed breakthrough credits typically take 55-65 cycles, so this calculation seems plausible. Likewise, player testing has not shown any correlation between skill level and number of cycles to get breakthrough credit. An unskilled dwarf might average around 120+ cycles to get their first breakthrough dice for a level 1 topics With only a single research dice, it would take an average of 2528 cycles to get a breakthrough. Pondering takes slightly over 2 days per cycle, so this would be around 14 years. In a real fortress, the research dice and skill level will be increasing during the process. However, in a real fortress, the scholars will also need to take breaks to eat, drink, and meet other needs. A more reasonable estimate is around 5-10 years for a breakthrough starting with no skills. In short, research takes an unreasonably long time with an unskilled dwarf.

To optimize for research, there are several ideas worth considering. Discussion is faster, taking only a single day, but requires at least 2 dwarves. [http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=174850.msg8061426#msg8061426 Player testing] has found discussion also awards more XP, (0-5 for pondering vs. 15-30 for discussion). So to optimize research, dwarves should be separated by topic/skill, with unskilled dwarves paired with skilled dwarves. This way, discussions will be equally divided between increasing the skilled dwarf's cycle count and the unskilled dwarf's cycle count. Only half the cycles will go to the skilled dwarf's cycle count, but discussion only takes a single day, so this is at net the same speed for the skilled dwarf with the additional bonus of the unskilled dwarf's cycle count also being increased. Both dwarves benefit from the increased XP gain.

Note several topics benefit from skills that can be trained through faster means. Diagnostician and Wound Dresser can be trained through intentionally causing injuries or simply engaging in dangerous activities that require regular dwarf healthcare. Organizer can be trained through assigning make work to the manager. Mechanic can be trained by spamming the creation of mechanisms. Skill level will increase much faster through these activities than through pondering or discussion. Thus to optimize for producing breakthroughs in engineering topics, mechanics could first be quickly trained to a legendary within a year or two at only the cost of the stones for the mechanisms, and then assigned as a scholar.

[http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=174850.msg8061426#msg8061426 Player testing] has also found that [[visitors]] can come with research credits already done, thus, for forts aiming to maximize research, it makes sense to prioritize attracting wandering scholars.

==Astronomy==
These topics are relevant to [[astronomer]]s.

{{/table/astronomy}}

==Chemistry==
These topics are relevant to [[chemist]]s.
{{/table/chemistry}}

==Engineering==
These topics are relevant to [[engineer]]s.
{{/table/engineering}}

==Geography==
These topics are relevant to [[geographer]]s.
{{/table/geography}}

==History==
These topics are relevant to [[critical thinker]]s.
{{/table/history}}

==Mathematics==
These topics are relevant to [[mathematician]]s.
{{/table/mathematics}}

==Medicine==
These topics are relevant to many medical professions, including [[doctor]]s and [[diagnostician]]s.
{{/table/medicine}}

==Nature==
These topics are relevant to [[naturalist]]s and [[tracker]]s.
{{/table/nature}}

==Philosophy==
These topics are relevant to [[logician]]s.
{{/table/philosophy}}

{{Category|World}}
[[Ru:Topic]]

DF2014 Talk:Topic

2020-01-18T19:52:54Z

Scruiser: /* New Info From Toady */

==We aren't even half way there==
There are around 130 innovations/topics/technologies listed so far. Toady says there are around 300.

Techniques for researching:

* Turn entire Fortress into scholars
* Monitor what they discuss / ponder every few minutes
* Record the innovation name and description (Press {{k|j}} when highlighting the dwarf in the unit list to see the description)
* Might be best to do this in several worlds generated with longer histories

I also went through Legends mode and sorted through a crap load of books (under artifacts), but this way doesn't always give you the innovation name. And it's a pain.

Any other suggestions? [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 16:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Writing books in adv mode is also a good way to do it.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 17:07, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

:Didn't think of that. Very nice.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 17:21, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah, having not played fortress mode in the new release, I didn't realize that there were official names for the topics. I just thought the name was supposed to briefly describe the topic. I will remove the names from all the topics I have added.
One good thing about using legends mode is that you know for certain which field a topic is a part of, since it says stuff like, "In 88, Sut became a philosopher in Hawktwinkle." "In the early summer of 91, Sut independently discovered discourse on medical ethics." That could have conceivably been a medical science innovation, but obviously since Sut was a philosopher, it is a philosophy inovation. --[[User:Figwat|Figwat]] ([[User talk:Figwat|talk]]) 05:57, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Lots of knowledge flags have been [https://github.com/DFHack/df-structures/commit/db79fe8058839d1582cc1bfdd73a51ec9bbde20c added to df-structures] recently. I don't know how the names were found or how reliable the information is, but it might be a good starting point for the full list of topics. --[[User:FortressBuilder|FortressBuilder]] ([[User talk:FortressBuilder|talk]]) 15:57, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
:Used this list to complete the list in the article. Some of the names are probably wrong, however.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 06:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
::Maybe we could look for the correct strings in the exe file? Version 0.42.06 seems to have them around offset 0xB72AA0. [[User:FortressBuilder|FortressBuilder]] ([[User talk:FortressBuilder|talk]]) 12:07, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
:::In response to you most recent edit: Some of the topic names in the article are carried-over from before the revamp. The terminology used for the flags is different from what appears in the game.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 17:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
@Brightgalrs that section on value agendas you deleted needs to come back books on value agendas were a feature toady made a big deal about .

(They were formatted as nuances/nature/worthlessness/value of "belief" (belief being any personality attribute, nature, truth, cunning etc.)
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 03:00, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
:I had a feeling that dwarfs could write value-pushing books, but not philosophize about them. I think it's fine how it is now though, added to the bottom of the philosophy section. [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 20:25, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

== Reminders ==

* Record both the name and description
* The description should be all words after "The topic being discussed concerns..." or whatever it is.
* Try to sort the innovation in the right section of this article
* If it isn't obvious which it fits under (or it seems fits under multiple) just put it in the "unsorted" section
* More research will be done when Dwarf Therapist is updated
** In particular, monitoring dwarf's skill gain to pinpoint the correct branch(s) a topic should be sorted under.
[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 16:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

== Names of Innovations ==
Apparently there are different names the innovations/topics/technologies are called in different fortresses. Example:
{|
|The Screw
|The construction and use of the screw
|-
|Screws within Reason
|The construction and use of the screw
|}
Are they the same?

Do we keep both / combine them / try to find a more common name?
Another example of how it is currently handled on the page:
{|
|Gear Mechanics Gears
|The reasons why gears are effective
|}
[[User:Ashameron|Ashameron]] ([[User talk:Ashameron|talk]]) 11:19, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
:Are you sure "Screws within Reason" is not a title of a book or something? [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 06:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Who deleted the section in the philosophy section on value agendas, ? that is important, it should be brought back. Toady has even talked about it, that bit needs to be brought back, nature of nuances of etc were in the same section for a reason.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 02:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

== Skill gain ==

So, I've noticed that specific topics use specific skills when they're being pondered about. I've thus added a new column with whatever skillgain tests I can make. There are some things we can sort of guess, for example, I guess most of the logic topics in philosophy use logician, and most of the form topics in history use record keeper, but I'll be good and actually fiddle my dwarves into pondering about the topic first before I make assumptions :< [[User:Therahedwig|Therahedwig]] ([[User talk:Therahedwig|talk]]) 19:11, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

:Doneish, can't get the propositional logic topic to appear though :( [[User:Therahedwig|Therahedwig]] ([[User talk:Therahedwig|talk]]) 22:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

==New Info From Toady==

I copy pasted Toady's comments on breakthroughs/discoveries from here: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf//index.php?topic=169696.msg8071983#msg8071983 I haven't worked out the full implications of Toady's comment yet, it might require some SCIENCE? Anyway, I figured I would get it on the page for now and then come back to it when there has been more work figuring out the implications of this information. I think, for example, this comment implies that we can estimate the average total number of 1-2 day cycles that are required for a breakthrough for level 1/2/3/4 topics. It also implies that breakthroughs come faster if you can get particular Dwarfs to each focus on particular topics, as opposed to all Scholars working on a single topic at once or Scholars repeatedly changing topics. [[User:Scruiser|Scruiser]] ([[User talk:Scruiser|talk]]) 15:34, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

I added some back of the envelope calculations to provide a rough estimate of time to make a breakthrough, and I ran into an ambiguity in Toady's description of the process. Does the 2% chance of switching topic only start after more than 0 "dice" have been rolled on the chance to make a breakthrough? In my current calculations I assumed so, but if not, then that means that unskilled Dwarfs will switch topics much more often than they make breakthroughs. I haven't done any long forts focused on long term research in order to find out, but if anyone has this seems like something they would notice... [[User:Scruiser|Scruiser]] ([[User talk:Scruiser|talk]]) 21:07, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

I realized I had misread how Toadys comments and reworked the example calculations for breakthrough time. I used the following matlab code to come up with the estimate of 8.54 additional cycles on average to get breakthrough credit:
odds_of_finishing_at_ith_cycle(51)=0;
odds_of_finishing_at_ith_cycle(1)=0;
expected_value=0;
for i=1:50
odds_of_finishing_at_ith_cycle(i+1)=(.02*i)*(1-sum(odds_of_finishing_at_ith_cycle(1:i)));
expected_value=expected_value+odds_of_finishing_at_ith_cycle(i+1)*i;
end

[[User:Scruiser|Scruiser]] ([[User talk:Scruiser|talk]]) 02:18, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

I roughly confirmed the 58.54 number using dfHack and keeping track of the times pondered until the number reset and then recording the last number observed+1. [[User:Scruiser|Scruiser]] ([[User talk:Scruiser|talk]]) 19:52, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Topic

2020-01-18T19:51:49Z

Scruiser: /* Discovering Topics */

{{Quality|Superior|06:10, 17 May 2015 (UTC)}}
{{av}}

{{new in v0.42}}
{{Expand Topic}}

[[File:Topics.svg|thumb|500px|A diagram of all knowledge topics.]]

'''Topics''' (also '''Tech''' or '''Innovations''') are part of [[knowledge]].

There are around 300 innovations that can be discovered. Many of them have requirements, and many do not, so it's kind of a tech forest/grassland rather than a tree. Notably missing are innovations related to practical labors in the game (which will be added later in development). Only the discovery of certain "form" type topics has any effect on gameplay, as it allows scholars to write new types of [[book]]s; star charts, atlases, dictionaries and various historical forms.

Several innovations require innovations from other branches, and since all knowledge is individually tracked, that implies some investigators will need to be at least well-read if not skilled in various topics (there aren't currently joint research projects). There are some old and new mechanisms in place to ensure this happens.

There are 9 "branches" of the knowledge system. Each branch is further divided into categories of topics, such as methodologies, theories, etc.

==Discovering Topics==

According to a [http://www.bay12forums.com/smf//index.php?topic=169696.msg8071983#msg8071983 Future of the Fortress reply]:
<blockquote>
Fortress [[scholars]] do activity cycles, the length of which is 1-2 days (whether they are pondering or discussing etc.) Once they get through 50 cycles, it rolls 0-50 vs. the number of completed cycles minus 50 to see if they get "breakthrough credit." So at 51, they have a 2% chance, and at 100, they have a 100% chance. Then, it resets the cycle number to zero and gives them breakthrough credit, based on a skill roll plus 100 (for discuss, the other researchers contribute half of their summed skill rolls.) Based on the difficulty (1-4) of the topic, total lifetime breakthrough credit is then assigned a number of 50-sided dice. An easy topic is dice=credit/2500, then /5000, then /10000, then /20000 for level 4 topics. The number of dice cannot exceed 10. Then roll these dice -- if you get a 50 on any of them, discovery! This is a bit archaic, and I'm not suggesting it works particularly well. But that is how it works. Also: if they fail to get the breakthrough after the 50-sided rolls, they have a 2% chance of switching topics, or if their credit exceeds 100000, they always switch topics (though they keep the credit, so returning to the topic later gives them a decent chance at breakthrough.)
</blockquote>

For unskilled roles, some initial back-of-the-envelope calculations and some rough estimates observed through dfHack gives a basic idea of just how long research can take. Note that player testing had found that the skill roll contributes a lot to the breakthrough credit. Even dabbling dwarfs can gain over 2000 breakthrough credit at once and may average around 1000 breakthrough credit. Additionally the formula for the skill roll seems to have a very large spread, players have reported as low as 3000 breakthrough credit and as high as 25000 breakthrough credit awarded to a dwarf with legendary skill. Analytically calculating from the algorithm Toady gave, it takes an average of 58.54 cycles to get a breakthrough credit. Player testing has confirmed breakthrough credits typically take 55-65 cycles, so this calculation seems plausible. Likewise, player testing shows has not shown any correlation between skill level and number of cycles to get breakthrough credit. An unskilled dwarf might average around 120+ cycles to get their first breakthrough dice for a level 1 topics With only a single research dice, it would take an average of 2528 cycles to get a breakthrough. Pondering takes slightly over 2 days per cycle, so this would be around 14 years. In a real fortress, the research dice and skill level will be increasing during the process. However, in a real fortress, the scholars will need to take breaks to eat, drink, and meet other needs. A more reasonable estimate is around 5-10 years for a breakthrough starting with no skills. In short, research takes an unreasonably long time with unskilled dwarf.

To optimize for research, there are several ideas worth considering. Discussion is faster, taking only a single day, but requires at least 2 dwarfs. [http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=174850.msg8061426#msg8061426 Player testing] has found discussion also awards more XP, (0-5 for pondering vs. 15-30 for discussion). So to optimize research, dwarf should be separated by topic/skill, with unskilled dwarfs paired with skilled dwarfs. This way, discussions will be equally divided between increasing skilled dwarf's cycle count and the unskilled dwarf's cycle count. Only half the cycles will go to the skilled dwarf's cycle count, but discussion only takes a single day, so this is at net the same speed for the skilled dwarf with the additional bonus of the unskilled dwarf's cycle count also being increased. Both dwarf's benefit from the increased XP gain.

Note several topics benefit from skills that can be trained through faster means. Diagnostician and Wound Dresser can be trained through intentionally causing injuries or simply engaging in dangerous activities that require regular dwarf healthcare. Organizer can be trained through assigning make work to the manager. Mechanic can be trained by spamming the creation of mechanisms. Skill level will increase much faster through these activities than through pondering or discussion. Thus to optimize for producing breakthroughs in engineering topics, mechanics could first be quickly trained to a legendary within a year or two at only the cost of the stones for the mechanisms, and then assigned as a scholar.

[http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=174850.msg8061426#msg8061426 Player testing] has found that [[visitors]] can come with research credits already done, thus, for forts aiming to maximize research, it makes sense to prioritize attracting wandering scholars.

==Astronomy==
These topics are relevant to [[astronomer]]s.

{{/table/astronomy}}

==Chemistry==
These topics are relevant to [[chemist]]s.
{{/table/chemistry}}

==Engineering==
These topics are relevant to [[engineer]]s.
{{/table/engineering}}

==Geography==
These topics are relevant to [[geographer]]s.
{{/table/geography}}

==History==
These topics are relevant to [[critical thinker]]s.
{{/table/history}}

==Mathematics==
These topics are relevant to [[mathematician]]s.
{{/table/mathematics}}

==Medicine==
These topics are relevant to many medical professions, including [[doctor]]s and [[diagnostician]]s.
{{/table/medicine}}

==Nature==
These topics are relevant to [[naturalist]]s and [[tracker]]s.
{{/table/nature}}

==Philosophy==
These topics are relevant to [[logician]]s.
{{/table/philosophy}}

{{Category|World}}
[[Ru:Topic]]

DF2014 Talk:Topic

2020-01-02T02:18:41Z

Scruiser: /* New Info From Toady */

==We aren't even half way there==
There are around 130 innovations/topics/technologies listed so far. Toady says there are around 300.

Techniques for researching:

* Turn entire Fortress into scholars
* Monitor what they discuss / ponder every few minutes
* Record the innovation name and description (Press {{k|j}} when highlighting the dwarf in the unit list to see the description)
* Might be best to do this in several worlds generated with longer histories

I also went through Legends mode and sorted through a crap load of books (under artifacts), but this way doesn't always give you the innovation name. And it's a pain.

Any other suggestions? [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 16:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Writing books in adv mode is also a good way to do it.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 17:07, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

:Didn't think of that. Very nice.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 17:21, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah, having not played fortress mode in the new release, I didn't realize that there were official names for the topics. I just thought the name was supposed to briefly describe the topic. I will remove the names from all the topics I have added.
One good thing about using legends mode is that you know for certain which field a topic is a part of, since it says stuff like, "In 88, Sut became a philosopher in Hawktwinkle." "In the early summer of 91, Sut independently discovered discourse on medical ethics." That could have conceivably been a medical science innovation, but obviously since Sut was a philosopher, it is a philosophy inovation. --[[User:Figwat|Figwat]] ([[User talk:Figwat|talk]]) 05:57, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Lots of knowledge flags have been [https://github.com/DFHack/df-structures/commit/db79fe8058839d1582cc1bfdd73a51ec9bbde20c added to df-structures] recently. I don't know how the names were found or how reliable the information is, but it might be a good starting point for the full list of topics. --[[User:FortressBuilder|FortressBuilder]] ([[User talk:FortressBuilder|talk]]) 15:57, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
:Used this list to complete the list in the article. Some of the names are probably wrong, however.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 06:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
::Maybe we could look for the correct strings in the exe file? Version 0.42.06 seems to have them around offset 0xB72AA0. [[User:FortressBuilder|FortressBuilder]] ([[User talk:FortressBuilder|talk]]) 12:07, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
:::In response to you most recent edit: Some of the topic names in the article are carried-over from before the revamp. The terminology used for the flags is different from what appears in the game.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 17:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
@Brightgalrs that section on value agendas you deleted needs to come back books on value agendas were a feature toady made a big deal about .

(They were formatted as nuances/nature/worthlessness/value of "belief" (belief being any personality attribute, nature, truth, cunning etc.)
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 03:00, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
:I had a feeling that dwarfs could write value-pushing books, but not philosophize about them. I think it's fine how it is now though, added to the bottom of the philosophy section. [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 20:25, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

== Reminders ==

* Record both the name and description
* The description should be all words after "The topic being discussed concerns..." or whatever it is.
* Try to sort the innovation in the right section of this article
* If it isn't obvious which it fits under (or it seems fits under multiple) just put it in the "unsorted" section
* More research will be done when Dwarf Therapist is updated
** In particular, monitoring dwarf's skill gain to pinpoint the correct branch(s) a topic should be sorted under.
[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 16:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

== Names of Innovations ==
Apparently there are different names the innovations/topics/technologies are called in different fortresses. Example:
{|
|The Screw
|The construction and use of the screw
|-
|Screws within Reason
|The construction and use of the screw
|}
Are they the same?

Do we keep both / combine them / try to find a more common name?
Another example of how it is currently handled on the page:
{|
|Gear Mechanics Gears
|The reasons why gears are effective
|}
[[User:Ashameron|Ashameron]] ([[User talk:Ashameron|talk]]) 11:19, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
:Are you sure "Screws within Reason" is not a title of a book or something? [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 06:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Who deleted the section in the philosophy section on value agendas, ? that is important, it should be brought back. Toady has even talked about it, that bit needs to be brought back, nature of nuances of etc were in the same section for a reason.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 02:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

== Skill gain ==

So, I've noticed that specific topics use specific skills when they're being pondered about. I've thus added a new column with whatever skillgain tests I can make. There are some things we can sort of guess, for example, I guess most of the logic topics in philosophy use logician, and most of the form topics in history use record keeper, but I'll be good and actually fiddle my dwarves into pondering about the topic first before I make assumptions :< [[User:Therahedwig|Therahedwig]] ([[User talk:Therahedwig|talk]]) 19:11, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

==New Info From Toady==

I copy pasted Toady's comments on breakthroughs/discoveries from here: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf//index.php?topic=169696.msg8071983#msg8071983 I haven't worked out the full implications of Toady's comment yet, it might require some SCIENCE? Anyway, I figured I would get it on the page for now and then come back to it when there has been more work figuring out the implications of this information. I think, for example, this comment implies that we can estimate the average total number of 1-2 day cycles that are required for a breakthrough for level 1/2/3/4 topics. It also implies that breakthroughs come faster if you can get particular Dwarfs to each focus on particular topics, as opposed to all Scholars working on a single topic at once or Scholars repeatedly changing topics. [[User:Scruiser|Scruiser]] ([[User talk:Scruiser|talk]]) 15:34, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

I added some back of the envelope calculations to provide a rough estimate of time to make a breakthrough, and I ran into an ambiguity in Toady's description of the process. Does the 2% chance of switching topic only start after more than 0 "dice" have been rolled on the chance to make a breakthrough? In my current calculations I assumed so, but if not, then that means that unskilled Dwarfs will switch topics much more often than they make breakthroughs. I haven't done any long forts focused on long term research in order to find out, but if anyone has this seems like something they would notice... [[User:Scruiser|Scruiser]] ([[User talk:Scruiser|talk]]) 21:07, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

I realized I had misread how Toadys comments and reworked the example calculations for breakthrough time. I used the following matlab code to come up with the estimate of 8.54 additional cycles on average to get breakthrough credit:
odds_of_finishing_at_ith_cycle(51)=0;
odds_of_finishing_at_ith_cycle(1)=0;
expected_value=0;
for i=1:50
odds_of_finishing_at_ith_cycle(i+1)=(.02*i)*(1-sum(odds_of_finishing_at_ith_cycle(1:i)));
expected_value=expected_value+odds_of_finishing_at_ith_cycle(i+1)*i;
end

[[User:Scruiser|Scruiser]] ([[User talk:Scruiser|talk]]) 02:18, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Topic

2020-01-02T02:11:51Z

Scruiser: /* Discovering Topics */

Topic

2020-01-02T01:53:14Z

Scruiser: /* Discovering Topics */

Topic

2020-01-02T01:52:54Z

Scruiser: /* Discovering Topics */

DF2014 Talk:Topic

2020-01-01T21:07:43Z

Scruiser: /* New Info From Toady */

==We aren't even half way there==
There are around 130 innovations/topics/technologies listed so far. Toady says there are around 300.

Techniques for researching:

* Turn entire Fortress into scholars
* Monitor what they discuss / ponder every few minutes
* Record the innovation name and description (Press {{k|j}} when highlighting the dwarf in the unit list to see the description)
* Might be best to do this in several worlds generated with longer histories

I also went through Legends mode and sorted through a crap load of books (under artifacts), but this way doesn't always give you the innovation name. And it's a pain.

Any other suggestions? [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 16:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Writing books in adv mode is also a good way to do it.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 17:07, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

:Didn't think of that. Very nice.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 17:21, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah, having not played fortress mode in the new release, I didn't realize that there were official names for the topics. I just thought the name was supposed to briefly describe the topic. I will remove the names from all the topics I have added.
One good thing about using legends mode is that you know for certain which field a topic is a part of, since it says stuff like, "In 88, Sut became a philosopher in Hawktwinkle." "In the early summer of 91, Sut independently discovered discourse on medical ethics." That could have conceivably been a medical science innovation, but obviously since Sut was a philosopher, it is a philosophy inovation. --[[User:Figwat|Figwat]] ([[User talk:Figwat|talk]]) 05:57, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Lots of knowledge flags have been [https://github.com/DFHack/df-structures/commit/db79fe8058839d1582cc1bfdd73a51ec9bbde20c added to df-structures] recently. I don't know how the names were found or how reliable the information is, but it might be a good starting point for the full list of topics. --[[User:FortressBuilder|FortressBuilder]] ([[User talk:FortressBuilder|talk]]) 15:57, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
:Used this list to complete the list in the article. Some of the names are probably wrong, however.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 06:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
::Maybe we could look for the correct strings in the exe file? Version 0.42.06 seems to have them around offset 0xB72AA0. [[User:FortressBuilder|FortressBuilder]] ([[User talk:FortressBuilder|talk]]) 12:07, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
:::In response to you most recent edit: Some of the topic names in the article are carried-over from before the revamp. The terminology used for the flags is different from what appears in the game.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 17:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
@Brightgalrs that section on value agendas you deleted needs to come back books on value agendas were a feature toady made a big deal about .

(They were formatted as nuances/nature/worthlessness/value of "belief" (belief being any personality attribute, nature, truth, cunning etc.)
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 03:00, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
:I had a feeling that dwarfs could write value-pushing books, but not philosophize about them. I think it's fine how it is now though, added to the bottom of the philosophy section. [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 20:25, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

== Reminders ==

* Record both the name and description
* The description should be all words after "The topic being discussed concerns..." or whatever it is.
* Try to sort the innovation in the right section of this article
* If it isn't obvious which it fits under (or it seems fits under multiple) just put it in the "unsorted" section
* More research will be done when Dwarf Therapist is updated
** In particular, monitoring dwarf's skill gain to pinpoint the correct branch(s) a topic should be sorted under.
[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 16:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

== Names of Innovations ==
Apparently there are different names the innovations/topics/technologies are called in different fortresses. Example:
{|
|The Screw
|The construction and use of the screw
|-
|Screws within Reason
|The construction and use of the screw
|}
Are they the same?

Do we keep both / combine them / try to find a more common name?
Another example of how it is currently handled on the page:
{|
|Gear Mechanics Gears
|The reasons why gears are effective
|}
[[User:Ashameron|Ashameron]] ([[User talk:Ashameron|talk]]) 11:19, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
:Are you sure "Screws within Reason" is not a title of a book or something? [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 06:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Who deleted the section in the philosophy section on value agendas, ? that is important, it should be brought back. Toady has even talked about it, that bit needs to be brought back, nature of nuances of etc were in the same section for a reason.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 02:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

== Skill gain ==

So, I've noticed that specific topics use specific skills when they're being pondered about. I've thus added a new column with whatever skillgain tests I can make. There are some things we can sort of guess, for example, I guess most of the logic topics in philosophy use logician, and most of the form topics in history use record keeper, but I'll be good and actually fiddle my dwarves into pondering about the topic first before I make assumptions :< [[User:Therahedwig|Therahedwig]] ([[User talk:Therahedwig|talk]]) 19:11, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

==New Info From Toady==

I copy pasted Toady's comments on breakthroughs/discoveries from here: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf//index.php?topic=169696.msg8071983#msg8071983 I haven't worked out the full implications of Toady's comment yet, it might require some SCIENCE? Anyway, I figured I would get it on the page for now and then come back to it when there has been more work figuring out the implications of this information. I think, for example, this comment implies that we can estimate the average total number of 1-2 day cycles that are required for a breakthrough for level 1/2/3/4 topics. It also implies that breakthroughs come faster if you can get particular Dwarfs to each focus on particular topics, as opposed to all Scholars working on a single topic at once or Scholars repeatedly changing topics. [[User:Scruiser|Scruiser]] ([[User talk:Scruiser|talk]]) 15:34, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

I added some back of the envelope calculations to provide a rough estimate of time to make a breakthrough, and I ran into an ambiguity in Toady's description of the process. Does the 2% chance of switching topic only start after more than 0 "dice" have been rolled on the chance to make a breakthrough? In my current calculations I assumed so, but if not, then that means that unskilled Dwarfs will switch topics much more often than they make breakthroughs. I haven't done any long forts focused on long term research in order to find out, but if anyone has this seems like something they would notice... [[User:Scruiser|Scruiser]] ([[User talk:Scruiser|talk]]) 21:07, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Topic

2020-01-01T16:21:07Z

Scruiser: /* Discovering Topics */

DF2014 Talk:Topic

2020-01-01T15:34:35Z

Scruiser: /* New Info From Toady */

==We aren't even half way there==
There are around 130 innovations/topics/technologies listed so far. Toady says there are around 300.

Techniques for researching:

* Turn entire Fortress into scholars
* Monitor what they discuss / ponder every few minutes
* Record the innovation name and description (Press {{k|j}} when highlighting the dwarf in the unit list to see the description)
* Might be best to do this in several worlds generated with longer histories

I also went through Legends mode and sorted through a crap load of books (under artifacts), but this way doesn't always give you the innovation name. And it's a pain.

Any other suggestions? [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 16:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Writing books in adv mode is also a good way to do it.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 17:07, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

:Didn't think of that. Very nice.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 17:21, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah, having not played fortress mode in the new release, I didn't realize that there were official names for the topics. I just thought the name was supposed to briefly describe the topic. I will remove the names from all the topics I have added.
One good thing about using legends mode is that you know for certain which field a topic is a part of, since it says stuff like, "In 88, Sut became a philosopher in Hawktwinkle." "In the early summer of 91, Sut independently discovered discourse on medical ethics." That could have conceivably been a medical science innovation, but obviously since Sut was a philosopher, it is a philosophy inovation. --[[User:Figwat|Figwat]] ([[User talk:Figwat|talk]]) 05:57, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Lots of knowledge flags have been [https://github.com/DFHack/df-structures/commit/db79fe8058839d1582cc1bfdd73a51ec9bbde20c added to df-structures] recently. I don't know how the names were found or how reliable the information is, but it might be a good starting point for the full list of topics. --[[User:FortressBuilder|FortressBuilder]] ([[User talk:FortressBuilder|talk]]) 15:57, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
:Used this list to complete the list in the article. Some of the names are probably wrong, however.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 06:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
::Maybe we could look for the correct strings in the exe file? Version 0.42.06 seems to have them around offset 0xB72AA0. [[User:FortressBuilder|FortressBuilder]] ([[User talk:FortressBuilder|talk]]) 12:07, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
:::In response to you most recent edit: Some of the topic names in the article are carried-over from before the revamp. The terminology used for the flags is different from what appears in the game.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 17:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
@Brightgalrs that section on value agendas you deleted needs to come back books on value agendas were a feature toady made a big deal about .

(They were formatted as nuances/nature/worthlessness/value of "belief" (belief being any personality attribute, nature, truth, cunning etc.)
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 03:00, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
:I had a feeling that dwarfs could write value-pushing books, but not philosophize about them. I think it's fine how it is now though, added to the bottom of the philosophy section. [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 20:25, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

== Reminders ==

* Record both the name and description
* The description should be all words after "The topic being discussed concerns..." or whatever it is.
* Try to sort the innovation in the right section of this article
* If it isn't obvious which it fits under (or it seems fits under multiple) just put it in the "unsorted" section
* More research will be done when Dwarf Therapist is updated
** In particular, monitoring dwarf's skill gain to pinpoint the correct branch(s) a topic should be sorted under.
[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 16:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

== Names of Innovations ==
Apparently there are different names the innovations/topics/technologies are called in different fortresses. Example:
{|
|The Screw
|The construction and use of the screw
|-
|Screws within Reason
|The construction and use of the screw
|}
Are they the same?

Do we keep both / combine them / try to find a more common name?
Another example of how it is currently handled on the page:
{|
|Gear Mechanics Gears
|The reasons why gears are effective
|}
[[User:Ashameron|Ashameron]] ([[User talk:Ashameron|talk]]) 11:19, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
:Are you sure "Screws within Reason" is not a title of a book or something? [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 06:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Who deleted the section in the philosophy section on value agendas, ? that is important, it should be brought back. Toady has even talked about it, that bit needs to be brought back, nature of nuances of etc were in the same section for a reason.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 02:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

== Skill gain ==

So, I've noticed that specific topics use specific skills when they're being pondered about. I've thus added a new column with whatever skillgain tests I can make. There are some things we can sort of guess, for example, I guess most of the logic topics in philosophy use logician, and most of the form topics in history use record keeper, but I'll be good and actually fiddle my dwarves into pondering about the topic first before I make assumptions :< [[User:Therahedwig|Therahedwig]] ([[User talk:Therahedwig|talk]]) 19:11, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

==New Info From Toady==

I copy pasted Toady's comments on breakthroughs/discoveries from here: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf//index.php?topic=169696.msg8071983#msg8071983 I haven't worked out the full implications of Toady's comment yet, it might require some SCIENCE? Anyway, I figured I would get it on the page for now and then come back to it when there has been more work figuring out the implications of this information. I think, for example, this comment implies that we can estimate the average total number of 1-2 day cycles that are required for a breakthrough for level 1/2/3/4 topics. It also implies that breakthroughs come faster if you can get particular Dwarfs to each focus on particular topics, as opposed to all Scholars working on a single topic at once or Scholars repeatedly changing topics. [[User:Scruiser|Scruiser]] ([[User talk:Scruiser|talk]]) 15:34, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

DF2014 Talk:Topic

2020-01-01T15:34:21Z

Scruiser:

==We aren't even half way there==
There are around 130 innovations/topics/technologies listed so far. Toady says there are around 300.

Techniques for researching:

* Turn entire Fortress into scholars
* Monitor what they discuss / ponder every few minutes
* Record the innovation name and description (Press {{k|j}} when highlighting the dwarf in the unit list to see the description)
* Might be best to do this in several worlds generated with longer histories

I also went through Legends mode and sorted through a crap load of books (under artifacts), but this way doesn't always give you the innovation name. And it's a pain.

Any other suggestions? [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 16:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Writing books in adv mode is also a good way to do it.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 17:07, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

:Didn't think of that. Very nice.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 17:21, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah, having not played fortress mode in the new release, I didn't realize that there were official names for the topics. I just thought the name was supposed to briefly describe the topic. I will remove the names from all the topics I have added.
One good thing about using legends mode is that you know for certain which field a topic is a part of, since it says stuff like, "In 88, Sut became a philosopher in Hawktwinkle." "In the early summer of 91, Sut independently discovered discourse on medical ethics." That could have conceivably been a medical science innovation, but obviously since Sut was a philosopher, it is a philosophy inovation. --[[User:Figwat|Figwat]] ([[User talk:Figwat|talk]]) 05:57, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Lots of knowledge flags have been [https://github.com/DFHack/df-structures/commit/db79fe8058839d1582cc1bfdd73a51ec9bbde20c added to df-structures] recently. I don't know how the names were found or how reliable the information is, but it might be a good starting point for the full list of topics. --[[User:FortressBuilder|FortressBuilder]] ([[User talk:FortressBuilder|talk]]) 15:57, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
:Used this list to complete the list in the article. Some of the names are probably wrong, however.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 06:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
::Maybe we could look for the correct strings in the exe file? Version 0.42.06 seems to have them around offset 0xB72AA0. [[User:FortressBuilder|FortressBuilder]] ([[User talk:FortressBuilder|talk]]) 12:07, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
:::In response to you most recent edit: Some of the topic names in the article are carried-over from before the revamp. The terminology used for the flags is different from what appears in the game.[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 17:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
@Brightgalrs that section on value agendas you deleted needs to come back books on value agendas were a feature toady made a big deal about .

(They were formatted as nuances/nature/worthlessness/value of "belief" (belief being any personality attribute, nature, truth, cunning etc.)
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 03:00, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
:I had a feeling that dwarfs could write value-pushing books, but not philosophize about them. I think it's fine how it is now though, added to the bottom of the philosophy section. [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 20:25, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

== Reminders ==

* Record both the name and description
* The description should be all words after "The topic being discussed concerns..." or whatever it is.
* Try to sort the innovation in the right section of this article
* If it isn't obvious which it fits under (or it seems fits under multiple) just put it in the "unsorted" section
* More research will be done when Dwarf Therapist is updated
** In particular, monitoring dwarf's skill gain to pinpoint the correct branch(s) a topic should be sorted under.
[[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 16:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

== Names of Innovations ==
Apparently there are different names the innovations/topics/technologies are called in different fortresses. Example:
{|
|The Screw
|The construction and use of the screw
|-
|Screws within Reason
|The construction and use of the screw
|}
Are they the same?

Do we keep both / combine them / try to find a more common name?
Another example of how it is currently handled on the page:
{|
|Gear Mechanics Gears
|The reasons why gears are effective
|}
[[User:Ashameron|Ashameron]] ([[User talk:Ashameron|talk]]) 11:19, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
:Are you sure "Screws within Reason" is not a title of a book or something? [[User:Brightgalrs|Brightgalrs]] ([[User talk:Brightgalrs|talk]]) 06:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Who deleted the section in the philosophy section on value agendas, ? that is important, it should be brought back. Toady has even talked about it, that bit needs to be brought back, nature of nuances of etc were in the same section for a reason.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 02:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

== Skill gain ==

So, I've noticed that specific topics use specific skills when they're being pondered about. I've thus added a new column with whatever skillgain tests I can make. There are some things we can sort of guess, for example, I guess most of the logic topics in philosophy use logician, and most of the form topics in history use record keeper, but I'll be good and actually fiddle my dwarves into pondering about the topic first before I make assumptions :< [[User:Therahedwig|Therahedwig]] ([[User talk:Therahedwig|talk]]) 19:11, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

==New Info From Toady==

I copy pasted Toady's comments on breakthroughs/discoveries from here: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf//index.php?topic=169696.msg8071983#msg8071983 I haven't worked out the full implications of Toady's comment yet, it might require some SCIENCE? Anyway, I figured I would get it on the page for now and then come back to it when there has been more work figuring out the implications of this information. I think, for example, this comment implies that we can estimate the average total number of 1-2 day cycles that are required for a breakthrough for level 1/2/3/4 topics. It also implies that breakthroughs come faster if you can get particular Dwarfs to each focus on particular topics, as opposed to all Scholars working on a single topic at once or Scholars repeatedly changing topics.

Topic

2020-01-01T15:26:15Z

Scruiser: In a recent future of the fortress reply, Toady gave a detailed description of the process by which scholars make breakthroughs in discovering topics. I added a copy paste of that here. I still haven't worked through the implications of this info.

DF2014 Talk:Adventurer mode

2019-12-17T16:58:38Z

Scruiser: /* It's too big */

==Reputation==
Given the huge amount of variance we now have and will be getting with reputations it may be a good idea to create a table of all possible reputations and their levels.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 20:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
== Adventure Mode Performances and performance skills and taverns==
There is currently no part of the article devoted to performances, given this is now a huge chunk of content it might be a good idea for us to add that stuff
also, there is nothing on the new taverns here either among other things. In a sense, this article is very outdated.Ill work on it a bit more tonight but it will take time to gather screenshots.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 21:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
:The crafting section will soon need an update too. For the next version, a list is probably still good, but in the future we might want to expand it a little.[[User:CLA|CLA]] ([[User talk:CLA|talk]]) 10:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Ayy, updated the skills section with the new crafting skill and all the performance skills
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 20:05, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

== .40.0X Adventure Mode Playable Races ==

In the newest update, if all standard adventurer civs are extinct you can play as a goblin or kobold if those civs exist.
Can someone confirm the goblin part of this statement?
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 20:08, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

== Memory. ==

Memory makes no difference to how much of the map you can see. I tested, and adventurers with superior and very low memory performed exactly the same: the map resets after about 74 moves to exactly 30 spaces behind you being visible. (this is in a straight line of course) [[Special:Contributions/210.55.212.242|210.55.212.242]] 01:20, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

From My experience, it lets you remember different sites better, this may have been a change that happened since 2014 [[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 22:09, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

==Kids ==

Is there any way to have kids, and then say, become those kids when you die. It would be a cool mod. You would have generations of dragon slaying vampire kings :D

It is possible to have kids once you retire, to play as them you can body swap in adventure mode with dfhack.

== 0.42.01 update discussion ==

>The recent update has basically overhauled large portions of adventure mode, and there needs to be massive work done as such.
This is intended as notepad to collect changes in 42.01 that should be mentioned in one way or another in this article.

*needs, personality: which traits directly influence your game, which are "cosmetic"; can you make an adventurer that has little or no needs, or rather minimal to no penalties from not satisfying them. On the other hand, which give the most benefits; in summary, what should a beginner adventurer choose?
*new skills; which are useless, which aren't. How do the attributes influence them
*playing as other races
*food and drink: 3-at-a-time limit is gone, inebriation changed
*Renting rooms at inns
*Ordering drinks at inns
*arguments
*arguments can change people's values
*becoming the official performer for a lord.
*Performance troups, bard skills, how to perform etc.
*story telling exists and spreads rumors similarly to actual rumor spreading dialogue
*bone carving
*hearth-quests are now more variable and you can get quests to kill beasts now aswell (proper quests)
*Reputation has been overhauled
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 04:08, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/137.28.226.25|137.28.226.25]] 04:01, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
[[User:CLA|CLA]] ([[User talk:CLA|talk]]) 12:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

This article is ludicrously outdated guys, we need to fix it
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 18:06, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

:I've been doing some work on this as well as .43.01 features, but might want help for filling out the section on building. I did do some !!SCIENCE!! on which writing options have what results at least.--[[User:Valos|Valos]] ([[User talk:Valos|talk]]) 22:21, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

== Overhaul, cut and port ==

Most sections of this article pertain to features that exist in all modes, so there's no reason to segregate information that belongs with the main topic. It's really past time to maintain an Adventure Mode ghetto here where fortresses and adventurers don't risk exposure to insights from each others' mechanics, which are more alike than different. This article needs to be cleaned of subjective and narrow-sighted slant and revised to inform players with objective fact and links to more details, so they may form their own conclusions.
[[User:Uzu Bash|Uzu Bash]] ([[User talk:Uzu Bash|talk]]) 18:57, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

I tend towards agreeing with this statement [[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 21:12, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

== Weaponmasters ==

I actually found one in adv mode! https://imgur.com/a/yUKpH [[Special:Contributions/178.187.154.32|178.187.154.32]] 12:01, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
How does this contribute to the article? [[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]]) 18:50, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

The page said they weren't able to be found. --[[Special:Contributions/176.50.179.46|176.50.179.46]] 10:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Oh! Ill amend the article, needs to be updated in several way sin fact :) [[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]])

== Identities And Reputations And 0.44.02 discussion==
Does anyone else think its about time to either create a "reputation" page or to add information about this to the article?
Also, we have identities now, since we have a section for each ui screen here, it might be helpful to add that here aswell.
Artifact quests need a part of the article devoted (though that can probably go on the Quests page)
Also, performances are currently bugged.
[[User:Untrustedlife|Untrustedlife]] ([[User talk:Untrustedlife|talk]])

== It's too big ==

This article is too big, even the "content" table is three screens height. It's hard to read, to check, to edit and to translate this.

Do you really need to describe everything, every symbol of map, every word you can say and every playable creature of night in here? Maybe it's better to write only a basic info here (like in article about fort mode) and create additional pages for additional info?

Is there any reason to keep everything about adventurer mode in one article? [[User:Tankistqazwsx|Tankistqazwsx]] ([[User talk:Tankistqazwsx|talk]]) 10:10, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

I'll second this suggestion. I'm fairly new to editing the wiki... would the right approach to implementing this idea be to make new pages, copy the current blocks of text from this page to the new pages, and then once people are happy with the new pages cut the blocks of text out of this page and add in links to the new page? Also, it looks like we are organizing an effort to research and test some of the less well understood mechanics... the results of these tests could go on the new pages (therahedwig already started [http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=175195.0 a thread on ]the [[DF2014:Reputation|Reputation page]]). [http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=175214.0;topicseen Recent Forum thread on improving the wiki] [[User:Scruiser|Scruiser]] ([[User talk:Scruiser|talk]]) 16:58, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

== Skill inconsistency ==
"Your character will have a limit on the maximum number of companions that is based on your reputation level and the Social Awareness attribute. With average social awareness and the maximum level of fame, the limit is 19 companions." Yeah, kinda bugging me honestly...shouldn't it be maximum social awareness/fame instead?