Another dwarf focus thread

[Majikal]

Focus                                                              (Gameplay)

   What your character wants in life, or what they need in life, is their
focus.  Your character's focus can be placed in your objective, which is
altered by the "change objective <objective>" syntax.  While almost all
races have some ideal they are trying to work towards, one of the most
well known is the dwarven race.  Dwarves have a unique tendency amongst
themselves to select an objective and stick to that objective--through
thick and thin--until it is completed, at which point they select a new
and more challenging goal.

See also:
   Dwarf, Dwarf Roleplay, Objective

I've always felt like I had a good grasp on focus, and a large open-ended focus has always been my joy of the role, but recently something as simple as wanting to play an instrument on a pc made me curious of something.

Would a dwarf pick up a hobby that entertained them, such as whittling or painting (neither being focus involved) that cut into their time. Or would this just bother them because it's time they could spend working towards their focus. Assuming their focus was something that required their time and dedication such as 'become a master swordsman'. Would that mean that while a dwarf spent time doing something that was only mentally amusing, would they be bothered that they didn't devote that time to say.. swordplay?

Not sure how clear I worded that, I'm pretty medicated right now. Would a dwarf have time/drive for non-focus related hobbies is what I'm asking.

[Marc]

"I like lute music.  It relaxes me.  When I am relaxed I do better work and I need to be at my best to make the greatest izdari set in the world/slay a mekillot/lasso the moons.  I will learn to play the lute so that I am a more relaxed dwarf."

Your hobby wont distract you from your focus.  You cannot be distracted from your focus.  You're focused on your focus.  Your hobby helps your focus or at least you think it does.

[Lizzie]

Also, if your focus requires the use of your hands in any way at all, then learning to play an instrument will help keep your fingers in good shape, strengthen your dexterity, and the process of learning musical, whether percussion, string, or other, is a process of logical thinking. Logical thinking is always good for a focus.

[valeria]

I'm pretty sure that a dwarf could maintain a hobby, as long as they could justify the hobby as (like the examples by the previous posters) somehow related to their focus.  It's the same thing with joining a clan or maintaining a profession, when the focus is personal.

[catchall]

I think it's reasonable to imagine a dwarf might end up latching onto activities that outsiders wouldn't regard as being particularly focus-related, because they found some way that they believe it relates to their focus..  However, in my personal opinion, it should be a fairly direct link and not just an excuse to play a human with high STR.  It shouldn't be something as vague as "I'm going to whittle because it will make me a more relaxed and well-rounded person which is good for achieving my focus."  That's more like "human with a goal" than "dwarf with a focus."   Dwarves aren't interested in being well-rounded for its own sake, and hobbies unrelated to their focus shouldn't relax them.  They should cause them incredible anxiety because they are neglecting their focus.  Setting aside your goals for a while when you're tired of them in order to come back to them later with more energy is the behavior of weak, uncommitted humans.  Dwarves don't get sick of their focus and they don't need a break from it.   No matter how you spin it, indulging an unrelated hobby is a break.  It's like saying you need a break from breathing so you can breathe better. 

In my opinion working -directly- on their focus should relax them.  Working out your fingers?  Well, okay, but wouldn't any self-respecting dwarf be doing finger exercises that directly relate to the activities of their focus objective?  Focused on becoming a famous performer?  Sure, pick up a lute!  Want to become a scrab tamer and think, for whatever reason, that lute music will do the trick?  Go for it!  Want to become the world's best chef?  Chances are, your dwarf will think that the lute is a waste of time.

IMO, if you want to play the kind of PCs that picks up frivolous hobbies on a lark, you are looking for a human, half-elf, elf, or half-giant.  Pretty much any race but a dwarf. 

[Zerero]

Focus: Become the greatest warrior in the Known

Why would you pick up a lute and start playing? Well, because obviously playing the lute would make you appear more friendly and therefore people might try and engage in conversation with you. One of those people might be a great, ancient warrior who would be willing to take you under his wing in some bad ass warrior training. Or, uh, those strings are good for your fingers? And it makes you calm?

I don't know, it seems like you could come up with an excuse for a lot. I don't know where the borders start to form.

[QuillDipper]

Wouldn't that be part of the fun? Having a dwarf who comes up with some super obscure and totally lame excuse for everything related to their focus?

"Ah, yes, buying these fancy pants will make me the greatest swordsman in the Known because what kind of swordsman would be wearing these rags?"

[Kryos]

Note:  everyone's just giving their opinions, so I will to.  Based on the docs, and trying to play dwarves now and again:

Have to say, no.  Dwarves aren't human beings, they don't *think* like we do.  They are alien.  Trying to rationalize why something is doable with regards to their focus likely doesn't even enter their brains.  This is something a lot of folk here seem to be forgetting.

A dwarf with the focus 'see the entire world with my own eyes' is not going to pick up a lute and start playing it.  He might, though, join the Byn.  Because even in their alien mindsets, dwarves have reasoning.  There are many places in the world where if you can't fend for yourself, something horrible will kill and or eat you.  So, a year in the Byn has lots of benefits:  he volunteers for every contract that is off to somewhere he hasn't seen, and he toughens up so he can ride off to new places.  He might even talk to a lot of people in taverns, asking them about where they've been and what they've seen. 

But he's never, ever, going to just randomly walk out, pick up a lute, and try to learn to play it. 

A dwarf with the focus 'join the circle' however, would never join the Byn.  The Byn has a reputation, and being a veteran would lower his chances of success.  He would, however, take the chance to learn about, of, and how to play, nearly any instrument that crossed his path (especially if a bard was playing that instrument).  If he wasn't a Tuluki citizen, he would work with great zeal to become one. 

There isn't wiggling room for indulgences, because dwarves are simply not wired to think that way.

[Kalai]

The difference is in the approach.

Seeing pants/lute and making an excuse to tie them to focus ... a bit questionable.

Thinking ... 'How will I be the greatest swordsman?' 'I will need to be skilled and recognized for that skill.'
 'To be recognized for that skill I will need to have an outfit worthy of the greatest swordsman.'
   'I must go out and seek appropriate pants fulfilling qualities <x> <y> <z>.'
     'These are nearly perfect but not quite. I will buy them and seek out a craftsman who can learn from and fulfill more suitable pants from this example.'
 'Rhythmic music ties those who fight together closer together and improves their skill.'
   'In order to perfect my skill I must seek out music and tie myself into the rhythm by which people fight, learning to both harness and disrupt it.'
     'The lute is an instrument that will be suitable for rhythm, song and therefore breathing training, and has a known ability to appeal to emotions such as those that fighting music channels.'
        'The lute is therefore the ideal musical instrument to learn in pursuit of being the greatest swordsman.'

tl;dr: Pursuing a focus is better active than reactive, but you can wander off on quite the tangents anyway, as long as it is the best plan.  

[Cutthroat]

I think a dwarf would consider his or her focus and look at the fewest steps required to attain it. That is, the best way to achieve the focus without dying (thus failing your life mission). I think a dwarf's hobby would have to be pretty closely related to their focus, and staying alive while achieving said focus. Anything less would be a waste of time to the dwarf. It doesn't really make sense to want to be the best warrior and spend time crafting silk or learning an instrument, because dwarves aren't immortal and have a limited amount of time to reach their focus.

That is for the objective foci though. It is possible as a dwarf to have a "maintenance" focus, like to protect someone or something in particular or do a particular thing every day. In which case having a hobby would be more justifiable and your options for a hobby would be more numerous.

[Barzalene]

I neverwanted to play a dorf till just now! It was the pants

That said I am in the no hobbies for distraction camp.

[Kalai]

Here's an example thought path of how I might pursue this example focus.

Focus: Being the greatest swordsman in the Known.
Actual Elements:
 Skill with swordsmanship.
 Recognition.
 There can be only one.

Steps to achieve:

Skill with Swordsmanship:
 Establish what improves skill with swordsmanship.
   Inquire with those likely to have some knowledge what improves skill with swordsmanship.
   Currently known: Practice, learning from others, a well-balanced weapon. Pursue these.
   Theories: Exercise. A diet rich in ocotillo bulbs. Music, specifically rhythmic. Investigate and test these claims. Keep the effective.
Recognition:
 Tell stories of my accomplishments as a swordsman and hire others to tell stories of my accomplishments as a swordsman.
   Get such stories in the first place: accomplish swordsman-related things.
 Present myself as a great swordsman.
   Determine what results in people perceiving a great swordsman (taste in weaponry, elaborate sheathes, impressive pants). Acquire it.
 Authority: Determine who has the authority to decide who is the greatest swordsman.
   When these people recognize my talent as a swordsman, or are dead and replaced by the more perceptive, I will have accomplished my goal.
There can be only one:
 Smear the reputation of other swordsmen so they are not recognized as better than I.
 Once I have learned all I can from a teacher, if they remain better than me, arrange for their death or discredit.
 Seek out knowing who others think the best swordsman is. Learn from them, surpass them, or kill them.
 Discourage others from seeking the title. Since I wish to be the best swordsman, encourage the use of axes.

Results are a dwarf who likes to chat with people about swords, puts them down as an inferior weapon and brags about how they did amazing things with them anyway, and disparages other swordsmen. He might be into fashion or weaponscrafting or food or spice or music - but, really in the same sense that Arm and D&D get me into bonecarving, or anthropological research; it's very much tied back to an obsession, he happened to hear about how music can really put you in the mood to fight better and is therefore doggedly pursuing this investigation. Never not thinking about how what is going on applies to focus. If it can't apply to what he's interested in the words/experiences just go in one ear and out the other. On the other hand, has at least a brief interest in anything that possibly could, to establish if it does.

[lordcooper]

Anyone else think Kalai has just described the greatest Byn Sergeant ever?

[Zerero]

Here's an example thought path of how I might pursue this example focus.

Focus: Being the greatest swordsman in the Known.
Actual Elements:
 Skill with swordsmanship.
 Recognition.
 There can be only one.

Steps to achieve:
...

This is a great post and has inspired me. Thank you!

[Kalai]

This is a great post and has inspired me. Thank you!

Great, I'm glad!

[KankWhisperer]

How would dwarfs reproduce? Or would it only be dwarfs with a focus related to it? I have met some. To me dwarfs are hard to fathom because I believe they would go extinct as far as current docs go.

[lordcooper]

Dwarves are aware that they will get old one day.  An old dwarf may need the help of a younger dwarf to complete their focus.

[Kalai]

How would dwarfs reproduce? Or would it only be dwarfs with a focus related to it? I have met some. To me dwarfs are hard to fathom because I believe they would go extinct as far as current docs go.

Remember, you can achieve your focus! Once you do your goals change. Sometimes, they may be reproductive. Sometimes, young dwarves are quite an asset to have around.

If you have a maintenance focus, reproduction may help or hinder its accomplishment. Protecting Tuluk, for example, is greatly aided if you can produce and raise a few patriots who share your zealotry towards the Sun King, and allow you to continue your focus past your current life.

As stated, dwarves are not immortal. If your goal is not one that has a set endpoint, or is particularly long-term, indoctrinate the next generation!

[RogueGunslinger]

Dwarves are aware that they will get old one day.  An old dwarf may need the help of a younger dwarf to complete their focus.

Are you kidding? Kids are like little dwarf slaves to help you with your focus.

[valeria]

For every dwarf with a remarkably dangerous focus, I bet there are three or four dwarves with more mundane, homey focuses.  They just aren't PC dwarves because "have the cleanest apartment" would be very boring to RP.

[lordcooper]

There's also probably the occasional dwarf with a maintenance focus revolving around having children.  That's a lot of kids.

[IntuitiveApathy]

Note:  everyone's just giving their opinions, so I will to.  Based on the docs, and trying to play dwarves now and again:

Have to say, no.  Dwarves aren't human beings, they don't *think* like we do.  They are alien.  Trying to rationalize why something is doable with regards to their focus likely doesn't even enter their brains.  This is something a lot of folk here seem to be forgetting.

A dwarf with the focus 'see the entire world with my own eyes' is not going to pick up a lute and start playing it.  He might, though, join the Byn.  Because even in their alien mindsets, dwarves have reasoning.  There are many places in the world where if you can't fend for yourself, something horrible will kill and or eat you.  So, a year in the Byn has lots of benefits:  he volunteers for every contract that is off to somewhere he hasn't seen, and he toughens up so he can ride off to new places.  He might even talk to a lot of people in taverns, asking them about where they've been and what they've seen. 

But he's never, ever, going to just randomly walk out, pick up a lute, and try to learn to play it. 

A dwarf with the focus 'join the circle' however, would never join the Byn.  The Byn has a reputation, and being a veteran would lower his chances of success.  He would, however, take the chance to learn about, of, and how to play, nearly any instrument that crossed his path (especially if a bard was playing that instrument).  If he wasn't a Tuluki citizen, he would work with great zeal to become one. 

There isn't wiggling room for indulgences, because dwarves are simply not wired to think that way.

I don't know, I'm in the "justifiable distractions" camp when it comes to dwarves and their foci.

In your first situation, what if as a young dwarf, he heard tales of a famous travelling musical troupe which played in all parts of the Known?  Would he not consider that (a) joining or creating such a troupe of his own would be a good way to complete (or at least give him a good start on) his focus, and that (b) learning to play the lute would be a good way to join or create such a troupe?  What if this particular dwarf realizes his fingers are more dextrous than his body is tough, or that being a mercenary in the Byn is a dangerous occupation and might get him killed before he is able to see the world and/or wants a backup plan of creating his troupe in case his Sergeant asks him to go on what he considers a suicide mission?  I consider it a hallmark of the dwarf that they are stubborn when it comes to their focus - it would take something evidently better to cause a dwarf to change tact to achieve their focus.  But one should also consider how wise the dwarf is - are they able to see another route for how much better it is immediately?  Are they so guillible that they can be easily convinced a different way to achieve their focus is better even though it's not?  I really think there's so much more room for varied play that many players allow for - dwarves while alien, aren't run by perfect machine logic.

I think things need to be set in and taken in context for any character, dwarves included, and since we have great leeway in constructing backgrounds for our characters, there's a whole lot of room for creating justifications for dwarven characters with respect to doing things that might not, on their surface, seem related to a given focus.

[Delusion]

For every dwarf with a remarkably dangerous focus, I bet there are three or four dwarves with more mundane, homey focuses.  They just aren't PC dwarves because "have the cleanest apartment" would be very boring to RP.

That sounds like an awesome focus. You'd have to keep your place pristinely clean, then break into, or hire someone to break into, every last dwelling place in the city to mess them up, spread sand around, that sort of thing, just to be doubly sure that nobody can surpass your apartment for sheer cleanliness.

[/derail]

As for dwarven kids, I see them being totally compatible with dwarven lifestyles. Dwarf families, perhaps less so, unless the mother and father have focuses that are closely aligned or otherwise relate to family. But even if they aren't given towards families, they can always abscond with the kids and put them to work. Long-term planning and all.

[Scarecrow]

Dwarves have a different mindset from humans, but they are still biological entities, and all biological entities have an urge to reproduce, so I'm sure dwarves are just as breedy as humans.

Also some of the funnest dwarf focuses are the weird, kooky non-combat ones. Like 'become an elf' or something.

[Kryos]

Note:  everyone's just giving their opinions, so I will to.  Based on the docs, and trying to play dwarves now and again:

my stuff

your stuff

From the dwarf docs:

Although something of a minority in population, the dwarven nature is well known among all races. Uniformly a short and stocky lot, dwarves possess heights of endurance often unattainable by other races. Physically, dwarves stand between around 50 to 58 inches in height, and are nearly as broad at the shoulders as they are tall.

Speculations on the past aside, all Zalanthan dwarves are completely hairless, with slightly pointed ears and great masses of muscle. Mentally, dwarves have a degree of stubborn single-mindedness that other races often find intolerable.

As compared to humans, dwarves are stronger and possess more endurance. Their thick-bodied frames, however, make them generally less agile; and because of the incredible singleness of purpose in the dwarven mind, they are usually somewhat less wise.

Some composition of their bodies and minds tends to make dwarves highly resistant to magick of all kinds, and their high endurance usually renders them virtually (or literally) immune to poisons.

Roleplaying:

Dwarves, whose origins are unknown, typically attempt to find one single goal (called a Focus) to which they adhere, and they will never abandon that goal for as long as they live (or until it is completed, when a dwarf feels the need to set himself or herself to a new, more difficult task than the last). Fear is generally not a lever one can employ with dwarves, for they will not be shaken from their purpose, whatever it might be at the time, even if it means their death.


There's some key phrases in here that really make me believe I can't agree with what you're saying. They are: Mentally, dwarves have a degree of stubborn single-mindedness that other races often find intolerable. . . . and because of the incredible singleness of purpose in the dwarven mind, they are usually somewhat less wise.  typically attempt to find one single goal (called a Focus) to which they adhere, and they will never abandon that goal for as long as they live, Fear is generally not a lever one can employ with dwarves, for they will not be shaken from their purpose, whatever it might be at the time, even if it means their death.

In other words, they are in so many ways not human.  Humans when faced with death will typically try to live on, if at all possible, even if it means abandoning goals or setting them back by some large measure.  A dwarf won't.  Humans will form a different goal if their others are shattered, a dwarf won't.  Humans are fickle and change attitudes with age and experiences, a dwarf won't.  This is their singular reason for being, it is what makes them do all that they do.

Your example includes the potential situation where a dwarf who 'wants to see all the known with his own eyes' meets traveling performers.  In that case, I would agree that the dwarf might take up to working with them, with the only factor being:  do they travel to places I have not been?  If they do not, they would hold 0 interest to that dwarf, and he or she would ignore them.  If they do, he or she would work with them until they show him all the places they travel to, then quickly abandon both them any any interest in performing that coincided with his affiliation to them.  And he would be off to find the next way to see more of the world.

In other words, this is no indulgence, but a clear cut decision if it helps the dwarf further their focus, or not.

Again, just my thoughts:  but if we as players allow them to come closer to human by giving leeway for human like behavior, I feel we cheapen the world.

[BleakOne]

Also remember that dwarves are not uniform in the way they go about things. Using the travelling troupe example above with the 'see all of the Known' focus, I can see different dwarves doing different things.

A tough, loner dwarf would probably not consider joining. He can travel places on his own, and he thinks he can survive.

A dwarf with concerns about dying via travelling alone or wanting to learn the paths others take might join for a while as Kyros said. However, even once they've gone everywhere he's seen, a manipulative dwarf might suggest travelling to gather stories from tribal lands. Some would be loathe to give up on what they perceive as advantages.

Although they are single minded, I think dwarfs would go for the path they consider most likely to succeed. A focus to kill a Templar might involve training up and charging one headlong in the street, but a more astute stump might spend years, even decades working for those he wants to kill, waiting for the moment when he can strike. Another might dedicate his life to honing the perfect musical performance to give himself access to the upper crust of society if only for the chance to catch them off-guard and use the knife he carries hidden coated with the deadliest poison he knows of.

[IntuitiveApathy]

Note:  everyone's just giving their opinions, so I will to.  Based on the docs, and trying to play dwarves now and again:

my stuff

your stuff

Your example includes the potential situation where a dwarf who 'wants to see all the known with his own eyes' meets traveling performers.  In that case, I would agree that the dwarf might take up to working with them, with the only factor being:  do they travel to places I have not been?  If they do not, they would hold 0 interest to that dwarf, and he or she would ignore them.  If they do, he or she would work with them until they show him all the places they travel to, then quickly abandon both them any any interest in performing that coincided with his affiliation to them.  And he would be off to find the next way to see more of the world.

In other words, this is no indulgence, but a clear cut decision if it helps the dwarf further their focus, or not.

Again, just my thoughts:  but if we as players allow them to come closer to human by giving leeway for human like behavior, I feel we cheapen the world.

I think this is really just perception and semantics now - I think we're on the same page really, but what is a "distraction" to a dwarf?  Technically nothing, not in the eyes of the dwarf including something new in their methods or using a entirely new approach to get to her focus.  But it might seem that way to another character or player observing that same dwarf - "I thought she was really focused on training with swords in the Byn, but she just picked up a flute?"  I believe the real question should be what the dwarf's character and background is which formed that character which leads them to do something different (or to not do so).  My point is that dwarves should be just as possibly flawed as any other race in the world in terms of variation in their personality.  They're not perfect and not able to make perfect decisions because they're not omniscient.  This doesn't make them human, and nobody is saying that any dwarf would give up on their focus.  It's just that we have to take their character into account when considering whether they are still perceiving themselves to be following the best route to be getting where they want to go.

Continuing the troupe example - what if the dwarf is paranoid by nature, and somehow convinced the troupe might be lying to him, that they really do travel to other places that they haven't shown him and he's so stubborn in his belief that he won't even accept when they tell him that's not the case and he still thinks they're his best bet for seeing those places?  That's just one example of a character flaw, which is perfectly justifiable in terms of what we've been discussing.  The player playing that dwarf might've just plain made that up on the spot, or shaped their dwarf that way through background or whatever - but the point is if they really wanted their dwarf to be with that troupe, there's plenty of ways to make that happen and still jive with the concept of a dwarven focus.  And that's what people have been talking about, being able to shape their dwarven characters in that way, to "jusitfy" their actions in that manner, and I'm of a similar opinion that there are many ways to do so and still be playing their dwarves "correctly".

TLDR: My two cents is that dwarves shouldn't all be a homogenous dwarven robot personality, each dwarf should have their own unique personality that affects how they go about achieving their focus, which should allow players to explore different avenues of dwarven play.

[Ouroboros]

I think most everything worth saying on dwarven foci has been stated eloquently by others in the thread already. I'll just tack on one bit of opinion, from the perspective of a dwarf's player...

It's about the journey, not the destination.

For the dwarven character, it's all about the destination. Their eyes are fixed on the prize and they'll do whatever it takes to get there. As players of such a character however, we're in a position to guide our characters through whatever path we see fit towards reaching that destination. I'd suggest players of dwarfs focus (pun intended) more on the journey itself and all the entertaining roleplay it will bring to you and other players, and less on reaching completion. This might include any number of "seemingly" unrelated traits, objectives, and hobbies thrown into the mix, which while ultimately serve the dwarf in completing its focus, will also serve the player in enjoying the role. The shortest path isn't always the most enjoyable, and even if you do complete your focus (which we all should hope to), it'll be a far more rewarding experience in itself if you've taken the long route.

You don't have to of course, the choice is yours. If your goal is to become a great warrior, you could simply spar in the Byn until your skills are high enough, call that focus complete, and move on to the next. But unless you're a very specific type of person, this alone might not satisfy you much and you might even end up being bored to death (figuratively for you, literally for your character). If you make the journey interesting though, chances are you'll end up with a character that you and others will enjoy even if their focus is never achieved.

On a related point, the simpler the focus, the more freedom of interpretation you have to play with. There's nothing wrong with complex foci of course, and I've done and enjoyed those myself. But in my experience so far, the simpler foci end up with more memorable characters in the end. And we're all playing to enjoy the game at the end of the day (except those of us who play to chop muthafuckaz up with bone swords).

[Kryos]

Your stuff

I'm not trying to be a thorn in the thread but, I sadly have to say that I disagree with what you are saying here.  In my own mind, this is why dwarves should be a 2 karma race, they're even harder for humans to grasp than a delf.  To properly portray a dwarf, you should not give in to these indulgences of the player, as it were.  They do want to move towards their focus as excellently as they can, which is why I believe the documentation says 'life long goal.'  Taking side trips for your own pleasure cheapens the portrayal you should be doing.  If you want to do that sort of thing, play a human, elf, giant, or so on.

Your stuff

We definitely don't agree.  Dwarves should be always evaluating things by the measure of their Focus.  And so most things other people do are distractions to a dwarf.  And likely the reason of dwarven scorn for other, less devoted races.

Your troupe example is including psychotic pcs, which, is viable.  They could have physiological problems leading to psychological conditions like paranoia.  However, a dwarf that isn't deficient isn't going to behave this way, especially since paranoia is akin to fear and fear has no effect on a dwarf.

Again, just my opinion, but at this point I think its time for staff to say something, if they will at all, since there is clearly a divide in thinking within the pbase.

[Ouroboros]

I'm not trying to be a thorn in the thread but, I sadly have to say that I disagree with what you are saying here.  In my own mind, this is why dwarves should be a 2 karma race, they're even harder for humans to grasp than a delf.  To properly portray a dwarf, you should not give in to these indulgences of the player, as it were.  They do want to move towards their focus as excellently as they can, which is why I believe the documentation says 'life long goal.'  Taking side trips for your own pleasure cheapens the portrayal you should be doing.  If you want to do that sort of thing, play a human, elf, giant, or so on.

We're not in disagreement actually. Including on your desire for dwarves to be a karma race, perhaps. I think you're simply assuming that to enjoy yourself as a player and to portray a realistic dwarven focus are mutually exclusive. Taking the long scenic route isn't the same as taking a flat-out detour, especially when you factor in that these are meant to be life-long goals as you quoted. Furthermore, the best way to complete a focus isn't the same as the fastest. Dwarves are detail-oriented, obsessive compulsive perfectionists in most every sense, and that inherently implies that the speed with which one achieves their goal isn't nearly as important as the perfection they achieve it with.

To clarify, I'm not suggesting that players ignore their focus in order to take part in other activities. I'm only pointing out that you can take part in other activities if you responsibly sit down and think about how they'd incorporate into your character's focus. In the end, any accurate portrayal of a dwarf rests in the hands and ability of the player behind the keys. Someone able to grasp the dwarven focus properly will be able to see both limitations and possibilities therein.

[whitt]

To clarify, I'm not suggesting that players ignore their focus in order to take part in other activities. I'm only pointing out that you can take part in other activities if you responsibly sit down and think about how they'd incorporate into your character's focus. In the end, any accurate portrayal of a dwarf rests in the hands and ability of the player behind the keys. Someone able to grasp the dwarven focus properly will be able to see both limitations and possibilities therein.

This.  Always this. 

This is a community game and only works if we all take into consideration how what we are doing creates opportunities for the other players, just as we hope they will give us something to play off of as well.  Great example?  You're character is pissed off at the world, so you go lock yourself up in your apartment and engage in some (perhaps cathartic) solo-roleplay with Barrier up so no one can find you.  Well...  no one else can find you, so they'll go about their hour of playtime without you... no opportunity for them, minimized activity for yourself.   If, instead, you take your anger to the inn, the barracks, anywhere other PCs may witness and become involved in your rant - that's ooportunity to contribute to the community while still meeting your PCs need to be anti-social.  It seems like a conflict of interest, but its really just a conflict of perspective.

Dwarf Focus the same way.  If you can find  a way for your Dwarf to be somewhere that may not be optimal, you increase the ooportunity for others to get involved in your PCs life and maybe care about helping you out as a PC.  If you constantly push other PCs away, because they're not the immediate source of progress to your PCs goal... you'll never have more thean a surface interaction .

[lordcooper]

Does the average human know that a dwarf will have a focus?

[FantasyWriter]

I think that most humans who have been around many dwarves would know that dwarves are single-minded/obsessive to an consistently high degree.
The slave houses (as well as other with access to written and/or long-held knowledge) would know this well enough to learn to take advantage of it.

I do not believe that the idea of the "dwarven focus" is as transparent or hard set as it is in Dark Sun, even to dwarves themselves.
If there is an exception to this, it would likely -only- exist among the slaving houses and the Templarate.

[Zoan]

I like to play characters, dwarf or otherwise, as largely ignorant of a 'focus'. I notice dwarfs are very FOCUSED, but not that they have a FOCUS.

My dwarfs, they don't view their focus as a focus. It's just a thing that they need to do. It's as natural as breathing.

[hyzhenhok]

Edit: This thread was fairly high up and I didn't look at the dates. Oops. Oh well, just a few months too late.

...and fear has no effect on a dwarf.

The docs don't say dwarves can't be risk averse. It doesn't say they are suicidally fanatical. It says fear cannot be used as a lever to shake them from their focus. There is a pretty big difference.

Let's say a dwarf's focus is to dig the world's deepest hole in the Salt Flats. One day, he goes out to work on digging his hole and sees a mekillot chilling on top of it. It seems like if dwarves all behaved like you think they should, this dwarf would be obligated to march into the room and attempt to continue digging as the mekillot chomped him to death because he can't be affected by fear. But it's perfectly reasonable for the dwarf to say, "Well, either I lose a day of digging or I don't do any more digging for the rest of my life. Pretty easy choice."

Because this is just an instance of risk/danger. It's not really "fear being applied as a lever." Where that comes into play is if a templar shows up while the dwarf is digging one day, and tells the dwarf to stop digging holes in the Salt Flats or else be executed. Obviously, the dwarf will never stop. Still, he is aware the templar can kill him. The dwarf is not obligated to keep digging in front of the templar and provoke his own execution simply because "fear cannot be used as a lever." So it'd be perfectly reasonable for the dwarf to pretend to go along with the Templar's demands while making plans to dig in secret, or to eliminate the templar, etc.

A dwarf should always be weighing his choices against how they help him accomplish his focus, and a rational, intelligent dwarf understands that being dead is a very big hindrance to completing their focus. As such it's perfectly fine for dwarves to be rationally weighing how much an action helps them complete their focus against how risky it is. If something likely to kill them would guarantee their focus' completion, yes, they would likely do it.

Suicidal stupid dwarves trying to complete crazy focuses is a fun part of the game, and it does make sense that some dwarves would behave like that. But not every dwarf has to.

[Kryos]

Looking at threads while the game is down and caught this, a little late myself.  And allow me to offer that I never said they are beyond measure of preservation:  death means no ability to complete the focus.

However, I remain adamantly opposed to the idea of stretching out flimsy justifications to do activities because it might be tangentially related to a focus:  that's not very dwarven.  And that dwarf that sees the mek on the hole might very well, if riding an animal that is fast, attempt to bait away the mekillot from the hole by running it clear.  Or she may attempt to hire the Byn to drive it off.  Failing a reasonable direct solution, she might then engage in activities that further her hole digging enterprise directly, such as upgrading her shovel and pick, acquiring some coins to buy a tent so she can stay out most night and days digging or perhaps a bodyguard to enable the same, and so on.  That's a dwarf.  If that dwarf decided to join some traveling band because they might know about holes but has no proof or concept of believable information on it, that's a player indulgence, and in my own perspective, a failed portrayal of a dwarf.

A story I can use involving a dwarf and a mekillot, as its been over a year, as an example including the fear.  His 'friend':  a fellow Sergeant in the Byn who took care of the more 'social' and 'round ear' management things, while he did the gritty on the sands killing work.  This allowed him to further his focus directly, and the compliance of this other Sergeant was immensely beneficial to him even though it would get that Sergeant all the credit and potential elevation up the unit rankings.  Didn't matter the dwarf, being promoted had no impact on, and was not his focus.  In fact, it might have been detrimental.

Sadly, one day, after murdering a salt worm (part of his focus, so he was rather pleased) a mekillot ran up and ambushed the group, killing a few unimportant runners and most painfully, that Sergeant.  Loosing him set this dwarf's focus back tremendously, as now the burden of handling such affairs would be foist upon him, and it was a grievous setback to his ambitions.  Filled with rage at the loss, and, killing the mekillot being part of his focus goal set, he turned and engaged the mekillot in solo combat as his stunned unit watched from afar.

He did not die, and after a minute or two of battle, he became demoralized at his ineffectiveness and withdrew, unscathed but mentally scarred.  He then modified his focus slightly to kill *that* specific mekillot as a micro goal in the macro focus, and set about doing some very shady and perhaps amoral in the eyes of many business to see to it.

I felt that this portrayal of a dwarf was rather spot on, and in my mind, is how they should roll.  But to be clear, just my opinion, and also why I think they are very difficult to play correctly.