Is there hope for another dwarf race?

[Deep Dwarf Fighter]

To make a long story short: I'm still butthurt about the mean-spirited removal of Mountain Dwarfs, and it will be a cold day in hell before they come back. So I'm stuck with Deep Dwarfs ever since. The only problem is that, thanks to their inability to regenerate naturally, they are quite restrictive as far as character builds go.

So for the love of the soon-to-be 19 gods, could you consider introducing a new race of dwarfs? Different than Deep Dwarfs and different than old Mountain Dwarfs? If you can establish an innovative race with a distinct culture like Deep Dwarfs and even make oddball races like Octopodes work, I fail to see why you can't make another unique dwarf race. The only old trait they should absolutely keep is that they should be an easy race to play (because I think the newer races are going out of control in terms of complexety and we could use something more "salt of the earth"-like for newer players.)

I am not yet experienced enough of a player to make specific suggestions for how this new race should look like in terms of aptutudes and abilites, but I wanted to start a discussion anyway. I might come up with a more concrete plan in the future.

Also, while we are still on the subject, there are still hostile dwarfs in the game that are not Deep Dwarfs, how does that make any sense?

[One-Eyed Jack]

There is a method that some players use to cope with the paucity of dwarves in the game currently.

The trick is to mentally append "dwarf" to the name of species and play the game as you would if they were dwarves. So, for example, you can play as a "minotaur dwarf" or a "vampire dwarf" or a "hill orc dwarf" or, if you're feeling adventurous, a "deep dwarf dwarf"

This is the awesome power of the human imagination

[Amnesiac]

We could make a human-like race with +1 HP -1 MP, +1 all weapon/armour abilities and -1 All magic abilities. Sounds fun!

[Deep Dwarf Fighter]

There is a method that some players use to cope with the paucity of dwarves in the game currently.

The trick is to mentally append "dwarf" to the name of species and play the game as you would if they were dwarves. So, for example, you can play as a "minotaur dwarf" or a "vampire dwarf" or a "hill orc dwarf" or, if you're feeling adventurous, a "deep dwarf dwarf"

This is the awesome power of the human imagination

Ach, friend, it is jut not as satisfying as the real deal. Sure, you can imagine that you are eating a tasty hamburger when you are really biting on a rock, but it will only work until you broke all of your teeth.

[wheals]

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=8298

You could pretend that formicids are still dwarfs. They even have the high armour aptitude MD had!

[dck]

Dwants are likely to land in stable at some point and are already in trunk.
Other dwarf species like forge dwarves have been proposed in the past and afaik were met with some interest.

[Deep Dwarf Fighter]

https://crawl.develz.org/tavern/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=8298

You could pretend that formicids are still dwarfs. They even have the high armour aptitude MD had!

Are you telling me that a suggestions for a dwarf/ant race got through and they cut the dwarf part in the last minute? No. No! that's not true! That's impossible! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

I will never fathom why the devs hate dwarfs so, so much. Why not just axe Deep Dwarfs too and be done with it...

Edit: I apologize for that emotional outburst. Well, let's hope that Dwants or Forge Dwarfs make the race. All we need is faith...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCYsNjGncD4

[twelwe]

People make all sorts of ridiculous suggestions. The idea of a half dwarf half insect species falls somewhere in the middle of that spectrum, despite the good ideas attached to them. Good design prunes out bad ideas. If vine stalker was proposed as a half dwarf, would you be freaking out about that as well?

[duvessa]

Hill orc is nearly identical to mountain dwarf except significantly stronger. This is, in fact, why mountain dwarf was removed! So I recommend just playing those.

[twelwe]

Hill orc is nearly identical to mountain dwarf except significantly stronger. This is, in fact, why mountain dwarf was removed! So I recommend just playing those.

One words: post it note

[dck]

Reflavor VS as beard stalker and give it +7 axes.

[Igxfl]

...but it takes quadruple damage from all fish.

[johlstei]

tolkien races are really boring and overplayed if they aren't subverted in some way, and if we could vote to rename humans, and all elf races I would be all for it

[Amnesiac]

Yeah, humans are the most boring Tolkien race and should be eradicated.

[Senban]

To me it seems a little quirky to rip off 99.9% of the things that are in D'n'D and then not bother doing dwarves properly.
If there are balance or distinction problems with them versus other cool stuff that is in the game then wouldn't thinking of ideas be a better approach than just going "people like this element for thematic reasons, hehehe, Ctrl-A Del." ?
I'd use High Elves, Mountain Dwarves and Hill Orcs to provide a core triad of physical combat styles with each branching into casting, evoc or invoc for buffs.

[dpeg]

To make a long story short: I'm still butthurt about the mean-spirited removal of Mountain Dwarfs, and it will be a cold day in hell before they come back. So I'm stuck with Deep Dwarfs ever since. The only problem is that, thanks to their inability to regenerate naturally, they are quite restrictive as far as character builds go.

So for the love of the soon-to-be 19 gods, could you consider introducing a new race of dwarfs? Different than Deep Dwarfs and different than old Mountain Dwarfs? If you can establish an innovative race with a distinct culture like Deep Dwarfs and even make oddball races like Octopodes work, I fail to see why you can't make another unique dwarf race. The only old trait they should absolutely keep is that they should be an easy race to play (because I think the newer races are going out of control in terms of complexety and we could use something more "salt of the earth"-like for newer players.)

I don't see why this rant belongs to GDD.
Technically, the answer to your question is yes: if a good proposal for a species comes about which has natural dwarf flavour, then there'd be no problem with Foo Dwarf. Ideas have been toyed around (Forge Dwarf, Iron Dwarf, if I remember correctly), but to no avail. Discussing these would've been proper GDD stuff. The Formicid species was originally called Dwants -- as in Dwarf Ants -- and the proponents didn't do themselves a favour with that. (The problem is not the dwarvophobic devteam or dpeg, but that it made the proposal look like a joke. When in fact the species is jolly good and will hopefully dig around in stable at some point.)

[Senban]

tolkien races are really boring and overplayed if they aren't subverted in some way, and if we could vote to rename humans, and all elf races I would be all for it

There are no Tolkien races in crawl only Gygax ones, and if we're playing a game that's set in a dungeon and revolves around casting fireballs at packs of Knolls getting all sensitive about calling the races doing it elves or dwarves seems like a little bit pointless. Better to recognize the games heritage and make it a homage than have it be some confused closet case. Even if you renamed the dungeon to a basement and all the dragons became brontosaurs every one else would get the reference even if you were blissfully ignoring it.

[dck]

Theme aside, md were almost literally worse ho that couldn't worship beogh (beogh isn't a very fun or good god but that's a different matter) and I never read any idea to make them any different from that which wasn't bad on its own or didn't make them overlap with other species.
I do understand one can like flavour and a dwarf race that was fun to play and wasn't just some other race with a couple of apts shifted would be, I think, welcome by all; but until such a race is proposed I don't see any point in trying to bring back a race that did nothing worth being brought back for.

[WalkerBoh]

We all know dpeg stands for "Dwarf Purging Excites Greatly". You can't fool us!

[dpeg]

Senban: This talk about pro/anti Tolkien/D&D is pointless. That was not the reason why MD got the axe, and it's definitely not the way to bring them back either. I also deny your point about the "homage" -- who are you to tell us what the flavour of our game should be? (I have never played any RPGs, and while I am aware of the history, that does not make me feel in any way obliged to the elders.) Crawl has a rich enough lore and history on its to inspire others! And that's completely natural -- it would be a poorer world if we're all still sticking to the blueprints of whatever was the main motivation at some point.

Species, to take the example at hand, need labels so that players can distinguish them and have an easy time associating their traits. This is why "Troll" and "Dwarf" are better than "1" and "2". There is absolutely no reason to support the tropes (there is also no reason against it! -- it is a matter of taste), as can be seen from players getting into "Octopode" as easily as they get into "Orc". Yes, most players of Crawl's audience have an easy time to parse "Mountain Dwarf". But they get "Gargoyle" just as well.

Seems like Gimli didn't whisper "farewell" softly enough.

[Klown]

Crystal Dwarf
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=10091&p=140277

Instead of ant people, magma golems called orcs, or essence creatures, Mountain Dwarves will be back in 0.14! A new 'Mountain Dwarf Fortress' mode will be implemented as well. 0.14 will be titled 'Gimli's Ascent'.

[Deep Dwarf Fighter]

Looks like I will have to come up with an idea so good that even the devs will have no choice but to surrender.

[Senban]

Senban: This talk about pro/anti Tolkien/D&D is pointless. That was not the reason why MD got the axe, and it's definitely not the way to bring them back either. I also deny your point about the "homage" -- who are you to tell us what the flavour of our game should be? (I have never played any RPGs, and while I am aware of the history, that does not make me feel in any way obliged to the elders.) Crawl has a rich enough lore and history on its to inspire others! And that's completely natural -- it would be a poorer world if we're all still sticking to the blueprints of whatever was the main motivation at some point.

Firstly, just to get vested interests out of the way I am a member of the camp which would be happy to see MD return even if they weren't rebalanced to give them an interesting and unique niche, but not in a big deal axe to grind kind of way, this goes along with an idea that there is a place for theme and flavour alongside number crunching and precise tactical footwork in the design of games.

As far as me thinking I'm anything more than my post-count would indicate, I apologise if I gave that impression. I'm certainly not trying to say that everything in crawl should follow the orthodoxies of anything else, but crawl is, rather inescapably, a brand-x version of D'n'D in many respects (even by the standards of other rogue-likes). There should be a line where you can openly acknowledge the people to whom these ideas were original to without restricting you own creativity. Whether this means that classic ginger bearded dorfs are mandatory or optional is a bit of a different issue - my leaning on this is that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck you might as well go the whole hog and stick a beak on it. But it's not an issue I'm going to take a die-hard stance on.

[twelwe]

Looks like I will have to come up with an idea so good that even the devs will have no choice but to surrender.

People emotionally attached to their ideas have had a zero percent success rate in implementation