v50 Steam/Premium information for editors
  • v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
  • Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
This notice may be cached—the current version can be found here.

Ethic

From Dwarf Fortress Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is about the current version of DF.
Note that some content may still need to be updated.

List of acceptable ethics tags

Ethics tags are used in the entity raw files to determine how different civilizations feel about various issues. Relationships between civilizations are based on their ethic responses in relation to each other; similar ethics result in friendship, while conflicting ethics result in animosity. Strongly conflicting ethics often trigger wars during worldgen.

In practice, this generally causes Elves to declare war on everybody else over killing plants and making trophies, and everybody else to declare war on the Elves over the devouring of sapient beings.

Ethics types

Token Extra Information
ASSAULT The result of a tantruming citizen attacking another in fortress mode. Other effects unknown.
EAT_SAPIENT_KILL This determines if the race will sometimes devour dead enemy combatants.
EAT_SAPIENT_OTHER This also determines whatever or not a race is willing to butcher other sapients.
KILL_ANIMAL A response between MISGUIDED and UNTHINKABLE (see below) causes the entity to refuse animal products in trade — namely, materials with [IMPLIES_ANIMAL_KILL].
KILL_ENEMY If REQUIRED, all lethal combat with an enemy who is an enemy of the whole entity will put the creature in no quarter mode.
KILL_ENTITY_MEMBER If REQUIRED, all lethal combat with an enemy in the same entity will put the creature in no quarter mode.
KILL_NEUTRAL If REQUIRED, all lethal combat with an enemy who is neutral with the entity will put the creature in no quarter mode.
KILL_PLANT This determines a race's position towards wood as well — a response between MISGUIDED and UNTHINKABLE (see below) causes the entity to refuse wooden objects (except for "grown" wooden objects) in trade, and it also prohibits them from bringing caravan wagons.
LYING
MAKE_TROPHY_ANIMAL
MAKE_TROPHY_SAME_RACE
MAKE_TROPHY_SAPIENT
OATH_BREAKING The result of a citizen violating noble mandates in fortress mode. Other effects unknown.
SLAVERY
THEFT This determines whether the race will try to steal goods.
TORTURE_ANIMALS
TORTURE_AS_EXAMPLE
TORTURE_FOR_FUN
TORTURE_FOR_INFORMATION
TREASON
TRESPASSING
VANDALISM The result of a tantruming citizen breaking furniture in fortress mode. Other effects unknown.

Ethics values

As used internally (see below), roughly in order of acceptability:

Num Token
0 NOT_APPLICABLE
1 ACCEPTABLE
2 PERSONAL_MATTER
3 JUSTIFIED_IF_NO_REPERCUSSIONS
4 JUSTIFIED_IF_GOOD_REASON
5 JUSTIFIED_IF_EXTREME_REASON
6 JUSTIFIED_IF_SELF_DEFENSE
7 ONLY_IF_SANCTIONED
8 MISGUIDED
9 SHUN
10 APPALLING
11 PUNISH_REPRIMAND
12 PUNISH_SERIOUS
13 PUNISH_EXILE
14 PUNISH_CAPITAL
15 UNTHINKABLE
16 REQUIRED

Ethics value numbers in relation to each other

The following table describes how entities respond to other cultures, with the observer on the vertical axis and their target on the horizontal axis. If an entity's accumulated animosity towards another passes a certain threshold (determined by ruler's personality) then it will run a risk-assessment check. If passed, this will lead to a declaration of war.

In general, entities react much more strongly to actions that violate their taboos than to the outlawing of their customs in other civilisations. For example, Civ A finds slavery Acceptable, but Civ B considers it a Capital Offence.

  • Civ A will consider Civ B most unreasonable (−5) for executing people over such a non-issue.
  • Civ B will be shocked and disgusted (−15) that Civ A engages in such a debased activity.
  • The end result is mutual negativity. However, Civ B is 3× more offended, and much more likely to go to war over the issue — assuming, of course, they think they have a chance of winning.
  TARGET
Accept. Personal Reperc. Good Extreme Self-Def. Sanctioned Misguided Shun Appalling Reprimand Serious Exile Capital Unthinkable Required
OBSERVER      Acceptable +1 +1 +1 0 0 0 0 -1 -2 -2 -2 -3 -5 -5 -2 +1
Personal +1 +1 +1 0 0 0 0 -1 -2 -2 -2 -3 -5 -5 -2 +1
No Reperc. +1 +1 +1 0 0 0 0 -1 -2 -2 -2 -3 -5 -5 -2 +1
Good Reas. 0 0 0 +2 +1 0 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0
Extreme Rs. -1 -1 0 +1 +2 0 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1
Self-Defence -2 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 0 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -2
Sanctioned -2 -2 -1 0 +1 0 +2 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -2
Misguided -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 +2 +1 +1 +1 0 0 -1 +1 -1
Shun -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 +1 +2 +1 +1 0 0 -1 +1 -1
Appalling -5 -5 -3 -2 -1 -1 -2 +1 +1 +2 +1 +1 +1 0 +1 -5
Reprimand -5 -5 -3 -2 -1 -1 -2 +1 +1 +1 +2 +1 +1 0 +1 -5
Serious -10 -10 -7 -3 -2 -2 -3 0 +1 +1 0 +2 +1 +1 +1 -10
Exile -10 -10 -7 -3 -2 -2 -3 0 +1 +1 0 +1 +2 +1 +1 -10
Capital -15 -15 -10 -5 -3 -3 -5 0 0 +1 0 +1 +1 +2 +1 -15
Unthinkable -15 -15 -10 -5 -3 -3 -5 0 +1 +1 0 +1 +1 +1 +2 -15
Required +1 +1 +1 0 0 0 0 -1 -2 -2 -2 -3 -5 -5 -2 +1

All above info was collected and interpreted from the data given by Toady himself at [1].