owo

[Toggle]

I'm sorry but are you trolling us Vagabond... It's been mentioned plenty before. Rimworld isn't a game of ethics, it's survival. There's stranger stuff then using your own babies skin to make a comfy armchair.

[Vagabond]

I'm sorry but are you trolling us Vagabond... It's been mentioned plenty before. Rimworld isn't a game of ethics, it's survival. There's stranger stuff then using your own babies skin to make a comfy armchair.

Trolling?

I'm afraid not. Dwarf fortress was much to primitive looking to appeal to me - I've heard many good things about it in regards to actual mechanics, but never anything like what the other user posted.

Ethics have little to do with what I was talking about. I was speaking on the mental health of people whom might consider using their's, or other's children as bait or materials for a project. Even more so, how it would affect the mental health of the friends and family who've garnered a relationship with the child.

It's a statistical fact that children make people do crazy things. The closer the relationship between the person and the child, the more apt that person is to perform difficult, dangerous and or abhorrent acts for the sake of the child's welfare.

Children bring a feeling of ease and validation to your actions when you have a quiet moment to sit and simply watch them snuffle their blanket or give out a little belly-laugh over some silly and inconsequential thing. This feeling extends to other non-relatives as well. Children mark progress and provide motivation to press on.

Now, I see four possible reasons you stated "There's stranger stuff then using your own babies skin to make a comfy armchair."

1) You are harmlessly trolling.
2) You are a child.
3) You are a childless adult or a young adult raised as an only child.
4) You are a sociopath.

This isn't multiple choice - you don't have a pick one. However, I would also like to note one last thing on the matter: Instinct. Empathy. There are some who truly lack it, but attributing that to a majority?

Cheers,
Michael

[Toggle]

It's a video game, so neither of those four. Well actually, I am childless, but I do indeed have siblings. That has nothing to do with it though. Being ready to butcher some babies that are mere xml and C# code doesn't make me a sociopath. You need to rethink life.

[Vagabond]

It's a video game, so neither of those four. Well actually, I am childless, but I do indeed have siblings. That has nothing to do with it though. Being ready to butcher some babies that are mere xml and C# code doesn't make me a sociopath. You need to rethink life.

Trolling, indeed. How would you categorize such behavior, if not within one of those four I listed? How would we, hypothetically, affect the mood and personality of colonists and NPCs? A colonist who is okay with having a baby skin arm chair, and a baby meat dinner, is a socio/psychopathic cannibal in my mind. Such an individual would, in my opinion, cause negative mood effects such as anger or another form of stress. In addition, I would wager that someone who isn't okay with it, but is "forced" to do so, wouldn't have their personal feelings about it assuaged by nice decorations and a pleasant ambiance. Furthermore, if they were tricked into eating it somehow, and found out later what it was, I wager there would be serious problems.

And this is just for a stranger or friend. A parent or sibling would, I wager, react much worse.

A fun fact. Why are children so very often absent from video games, or made invincible? It is because of how it would be received by mainstream media if clips of people dismembering infants were to appear. Especially if it was so that the mother was able to get a new sofa and a nice stir-fry. People would recoil at the very notion of such things.

I'm being realistic from both a gameplay perspective and a real-life perspective. The latter being life, in case you were unaware. I'm well grounded in reality, life withstanding, you should at least consider the former.

Recap.

Sane pawn no like insane stuff. No matter if survival or condo living.

Things most people don't like:
Sociopaths
psychopaths
cannibalism
incest
necrophilia
infanticide
patricide
bestiality
pedophilia

These are bad things - survival situation or not. How would you react if you were on an island with some guy and hes doing inappropriate things with goats while he thought you weren't looking? Or you cut yourself and he elects to lick up all the blood droplets before he helps you out?

You are in a survival situation so it's okay.... Perfectly logical. Hell, that native woman's child is easier to steal than trying to hunt that boar. Lets just nab that and grill it up. Bet it'll taste just like the pork. Puuuurrrrfectly sane.

Cheers,
Michael

[Toggle]

I'm a modder. I'm not gonna feel anything for that baby gorilla I'm grilling up to feed to my starving colonists after I spend half an hour coding it in.

[Shurp]

So I was browsing through the xml files, and I came across this in LifeStages.xml:

<LifeStageDef>
   <defName>HumanlikeBaby</defName>
   <label>baby</label>
  ...


Human babies are coming to Rimworld at some point.

[Toggle]

So I was browsing through the xml files, and I came across this in LifeStages.xml:

<LifeStageDef>
   <defName>HumanlikeBaby</defName>
   <label>baby</label>
  ...


Human babies are coming to Rimworld at some point.

They likely aren't. Just because it has the ability in the code doesn't mean they are coming. There's nothing else anywhere in the code to support colonist pregnancy or the game adding babies. The lowest age you can get is like 16 I think and then there's the 'adult backstory' because there's no coding for kids. It's there because every animal in the game has it, and it would be silly to not add all human lifestages when he's adding them.

[A Friend]

I don't think players making chairs out of baby skin would be that much of a problem with the upcoming relationship feature. Players don't have to feel empathy for pixelated babies, they'll just be forced to protect them or risk having various colony members gain serious mood issues.

I think babies and children could work being in the vanilla game. Just make them... somewhat uncommon or rare. To make them less like expendable warg bait. So children and babies would be more like that little fragile thing that you have to protect. But if it's just a mod, well then hey... feel free to make expendable baby baits.

Aside from that, I have no other ideas to contribute. I'm still pretty neutral about this baby thing. Many people seem to want it for instant labour though. Huh.

[NuclearStudent]

I don't want babies that do instant labor, but I like the idea of white elephant babies.

[TheWhiz]

I am unsure how to feel about little baby humans walking around my colony, but I am 100% in support of being able to produce our own colonists through relationships developed by previously existing colonists.

I suppose that whether or not Tynan decides to let us have baby humans walking around our colonies is irrelevant to me as long as we no longer have to resort to hoping that an escape pod will land or a raider attack will happen so that we can take prisoners and hopefully recruit them.

Of course many have mentioned the logistics of children in terms of time it would take for them to grow up, yet I would prefer a colonist who grows slowly over time as opposed to having to wait for a random event that may or may not occur.

[TLHeart]

I am unsure how to feel about little baby humans walking around my colony, but I am 100% in support of being able to produce our own colonists through relationships developed by previously existing colonists.

I suppose that whether or not Tynan decides to let us have baby humans walking around our colonies is irrelevant to me as long as we no longer have to resort to hoping that an escape pod will land or a raider attack will happen so that we can take prisoners and hopefully recruit them.

Of course many have mentioned the logistics of children in terms of time it would take for them to grow up, yet I would prefer a colonist who grows slowly over time as opposed to having to wait for a random event that may or may not occur.

What, you don't think pregnancy is a random event?

[A Friend]

What, you don't think pregnancy is a random event?

I'm a random event it seems. its a joke ok

[Chaotic Skies]

I would just like to note that while there are certain implications to having children - such as a redefining of relationships, several new skills (parenting anyone?) and the (possibly permanent) moodlet most likely gained from losing a parent/child, there are several good things as well - a moodlet from "having some fun", a moodlet of actually having a child (cancelled out during labor by pain, of course), a mood let for watching a child walk for the first time, or speak their first word, etc. - the lis goes on. But we, as a community, would have to agree on a couple of things- such as NO PEDOPHILIA MODS, first and foremost, among other things that we could iron out later, assuming this was added. And we wouldn'thave to edit the time scale either - just allow children to age faster, or increase the general age rate, or anything else we choose. Seriously, we could just say strange gravity effects speed up or slow down time, or make this an event which is much more common while a child is growing into an adult, so that we don't have to wait forever.

In fact, I might figure out how to mod in time-speed events right after this

[TheWhiz]

I am unsure how to feel about little baby humans walking around my colony, but I am 100% in support of being able to produce our own colonists through relationships developed by previously existing colonists.

I suppose that whether or not Tynan decides to let us have baby humans walking around our colonies is irrelevant to me as long as we no longer have to resort to hoping that an escape pod will land or a raider attack will happen so that we can take prisoners and hopefully recruit them.

Of course many have mentioned the logistics of children in terms of time it would take for them to grow up, yet I would prefer a colonist who grows slowly over time as opposed to having to wait for a random event that may or may not occur.

What, you don't think pregnancy is a random event?

You bring up a good point, yet it all falls onto how the mechanics would handle the event. Whether it would be completely random or something we can command pawns to do is unknown at the moment.

Are you asking if I feel that pregnancy (in real life) is a random event?

[LittleGreenStone]

If Rimworld had babies and children, they'd probably get treated the same way as babies in Dwarf fortress - mostly expendable. A baby gets captured/killed and the mother goes insane? Retain order with a hammering to the head. Some players would set traps using unwanted children as bait. You'd get players churning out babies for cannibal meals and leather chairs. It would be like the DF's mermaid baby farm all over again. As long as you can keep the pawn's mood positive, they'd be sad their children died but the room and meal is quite lovely.

Ethics and morality quickly go out the window when we become overseers. Even more so when players get bored and think of new ways to "have fun".

And that's bad because...?

Murder is murder, yet most games feature the idea of taking the life of another, in one way or another.
And you don't have a problem with that, or what?
In this game I've ordered my pawns to kill hundreds of thousands of enemies, and in poor times, I even butchered and fed a few to my colonists.

As for children? Most likely won't be in vanilla, but then again it's a mod request (I'm a 100% behind).

Children aren't a quick fix on declining population count. It's like keeping squirrels for pets -pretty pointless aside from a little mood boost maybe.
Children would be pretty much the same. Wastes food, wastes the time of colonists, for some mood boost. At least at first.

Raiders slaughtering children, colonists butchering children, kid-skin sofas;
It's a game. Not only it's not real, it's pretty much up to the developer how it will be -it's not reality, it can be played with.
For one, nobody said children should be slaughtered by raiders. Raiders could simply kidnap them.
Also, nobody said children should be allowed to be butchered. It can be disallowed, so even the psychopath cannibals won't be able to do it.
No kid-skin sofas then, see 2nd point.
Even if Tynan himself were to implement something like this, the "backlash" could be minimized.

As for aging... 15 years (the minimum age in vanilla) to have a finally useful colonist is a lot, I agree.
I think that is the number one reason why there isn't such a mod yet, but I think it could be balanced. But even if not...: There is such a thing as "Phoebe Friendly" game mode, and there is such a thing as "Base builder" difficulty. Having a colony survive 20 years isn't hard by default, just time consuming.

But kids aren't incompetent, they could do stuff like hauling, cleaning, plant-cutting or growing, if not as efficiently.
Child labor?  Well damn, I should've said that when my mother asked me to wash the dishes. Missed my opportunity.
Out-of-the-world idea, an underage doing anything productive, right?...
No. It would be their home, it'd be "housework", and it's pretty common all around the world. Anyone who disagrees with that is either a spoiled kid, or is spoiling his/her kid.
If anything, not teaching kids how to do at least basic chores to prepare them for adulthood should be unethical.

Besides, 15 is the number. That's still considered to be underage in many countries, yet such colonists can kill, butcher and eat raiders, without the need of mods; and you all are playing with that kind of game, you sick F***ers...! 
But really, just looking at the backstories; this game is pretty dark. Failed test subjects, sex slaves, actual child laborers just to name a few, it sure isn't an utopia, if anything child labor would be a vanilla-friendly feature.

"Ethics and morality", huh? Well, those things went out the window when the idea of Rimworld was born. Go and pester Tynan how heartless he is, I'm sure he'll be delighted.

Even with the restrictions to make the aging of children more realistic, it can be very, very useful in some time. Aside from giving mood boosts, something kids tend to do.
For one, about 70-80% of any of my "late"-game colonies' daily work consists of cleaning and hauling.
A 6 years old can clean and haul -you do the math.

I've 11 colonist I could feed with human meat -I have more than enough positive mood sources to negate the side effects my colonists eating human flesh.
It would save me plenty of work also, as I have over 50 corpses going to waste outside, and I just finished cleaning up the previous group.

But I don't do that.

Why do you think that is?

In my opinion it's pretty pointless whining about the *possible* unethical side of this idea.
Especially when it comes to a video game.
Especially when it comes to a game such as Rimworld.
Especially under a mod-request thread.