"Gay" as a trait

[Zombra]

Yeah ... make sexuality a basic descriptor; it shouldn't take up a Trait slot.  That would imply that gays are fundamentally less interesting than straight people, which makes no sense.

I like the idea of throwing Asexual/Bisexual in there as well.  Would be really simple to tease out the metrics:
-----
Heterosexual: can make romantic advances towards opposite gender / can accept advances from opposite gender.  Mood penalty for rejection, Mood bonus for acceptance/sleeping with them/etc.

Homosexual: can make romantic advances towards same gender / can accept advances from same gender.  Mood penalty for rejection, Mood bonus for acceptance/sleeping with them/etc.

Bisexual: can make romantic advances towards or accept them from either gender.  Mood penalty for rejection, Mood bonus for acceptance/sleeping with them/etc.

Asexual: cannot make romantic advances and must always reject romantic advances.  No Mood bonuses or penalties, but social penalties for unfavorable interactions may still apply.
-----

Stuff like Transexual wouldn't have any obvious gameplay implications and should be left out.  If the player wants to role-play that a female character was born a man but is really a woman and made that transformation, nothing's stopping them.

Bonus points for the devs if sexual orientation is a hidden trait.  Let it emerge during gameplay.  That guy hits on both men and women.  That girl rejects all advances from either gender.  Those two seem to be a typical hetero couple.  I honestly don't see it as a big enough thing that it needs to be listed on the character sheet at all.

...  But I have to admit I like the idea of a homophobic player losing his shit when his two favorite tough guy soldiers become lovers. 

[rexx1888]

i aint reading this thread. i cant imagine the hellish cesspool of nonsense that has probably been spewed forth, an i have no intention of adding to that.

instead, my only point is this. its daft to have sexual orientation or relationship preference as a trait. yeah yeah crusader kings did it, but its daft. drop it as a trait an instead make preference be another field in the stats box, like work speed. an follow on, throw in three options, straight gay an other. Why, because why do it any other way. its not about political correctness or sjw stuff or anything, its just a specific thing that every single person has. a preference. Everyone has it. By making gay a trait what you are really saying is that its a very special thing about those people. an sexual preference does not make a person special.

an since we are here, having this nonsense discussion, itd be nice to see alternative relationships to monogamy be a thing. theres a whole giant load of them out there, an itd add some spicy drama to the colonies. Once again, not a trait, just a stat.

Oh, final point, would it really be so bad to have an "other" category for gender too. like, we dont have showers or toilets or any of that stuff, so how terrible-charged could that addition be :\ hell, even if showers an personal hygiene was a thing id still argue its stupid not to have an "other" option :\

[NuclearStudent]

In Rimworld, attraction already exists separately from the "Gay" trait (ie. it's possible for two pawns without the gay trait to have high attractiveness and/or compatibility scores towards each other.)

I like having Gay as a trait. You can see it easily, which makes it easier to plan your colony. The ideal case would be to make more room for it the UI and include sexual preference separately, but I think it's not worth the time.

[rexx1888]

thats even more absurd than just having it as a trait... when did Gay become a personality quirk :\

[cultist]

The argument that gay "takes up a slot" is pure nonsense. Pawns have 1-3 traits, assigned by (as far as I can tell) pure RnG. If you removed the gay trait from the game, that does not guarantee pawns get a helpful trait instead. They might get nothing.

In every prison in every part of the world there are "straight" people participating in "gay" relationships.

More nonsense. This behavior is basically unheard of outside American prisons and American prison movies. I'll leave it to you to figure out why.

[rexx1888]

The argument that gay "takes up a slot" is pure nonsense. Pawns have 1-3 traits, assigned by (as far as I can tell) pure RnG. If you removed the gay trait from the game, that does not guarantee pawns get a helpful trait instead. They might get nothing.

*other stuff i dont want to touch with a giant stick*

thing is, its not nonsense to be mad that it takes up a slot. Lets assume what you said about 1-3 is correct an ignore statistical liklihood of traits and numbers of traits for a second. What you just said is that with gay as a trait, there is the potential that at a minimum (as in assuming every colonist got 1 trait) that a portion of those would still get gay as a trait(basically, the math is that 1 in *how ever many traits there are* of colonists would get that trait on average) and in that situation, yes gay took up a slot that a different possibly more useful trait could have taken.

Now, thats minimum math, an i think theres something like 30ish traits, so one in 30ish colonists potentially lose a slot to 'gayness', at a minimum. Now, if gay does something more than just making pawns like other similar pawns, then yay its not specifically a useless trait(so, if it turns out gay pawns are more attractive to other gay pawns or whatever) but still, its taking a slot.

Even then, its still a daft thing to have as a trait.... especially if pawns can like other like gendered/sexually oriented pawns without it, as youre saying that sexual preference is somehow a defining trait for a character(its actually worse because youre saying this particular preference is somehow defining a character as gay is the only one) :\ its a thing that everyone everywhere has. if the trait does a thing, change its name to something else, like peacock or flamboyant or whatever, its still a daft trait to have :\

[MAKAIROSI]

I'm not against it and i'm not for it either. Before we come to this matter we have to agree if we want this to ultimately become a sims game (as long as relationships are concerned). For example, if "gay" and "straight" is added, why not "bisexual" or "asexual" or any other label.

Also, if we start adding such labels, then maybe we should add colonists' reactions to such labels. Someone doesn't like gay people / someone doesn't like straight people / a gay person falls in love with a straight person of the same sex / a straight person falls in love with a gay person of the opposite sex.

What i'm saying is that this would take a ton of work in order for it to be realistic. Also, especially if we add Rimkids - generations of colonists - which means the player would feel like having a gay person in his starting team would be a liability since he/she won't produce any offspring (which you would want for your colony to grow) which would be treated as if the game was designed to make you hate gay people.

Obviously in such a year we are above labels and sexualities and hatred towards the different sexuality than your own. However, to solve this realism problem, we could say that in such a year every human has been genetically engineered to be straight from birth. I'm not obviously saying that this would be moral or correct, i'm just saying that since that could be the case then the problem is solved in a second.

Also, think about this. A gay person plays the game and wants an all-gay colony and decides to sell straight people as prisoners. How will this colony survive? Gay women and gay men would be "forced against their nature" to have a sexual relationship for the sole purpose of growing the colony. That would be really "unfair" towards gay people. So then we should start thinking about alternate routes that would lead to offspring like making a lab that would have the sperm fertilize the egg without the need of the sexual activity between a gay male and a gay female.

The sole reason i'm saying all of these is to point out how much more work it would be even if you just wanted a gay/straight label show, without it meaning anything in the colony. Maybe, in ten years of alphas and betas that include generations, alien worlds, cybertech, guards, expeditions and in general, all the things everyone is longing for, they could also include different sexualities.

But again, think about what would that mean for the players. For a colony to survive it would be easier if everyone is straight (again, i'm saying this because of the offspring "availability") so the gay trait would be seen as a negative, and that would be wrong.

[Idlemind79]

While we're at it let's make "Triggered" a character trait. The person does nothing to contribute to the colony and has a mental break whenever socialized with.

[Zombra]

What i'm saying is that this would take a ton of work in order for it to be realistic.

No, it wouldn't.  I already outlined the four possibilities.  Really it's just two more on/off switches.

Character can interact romantically with men Y/N
Character can interact romantically with women Y/N

in addition to the existing

Character is M/F

That's it.  That's all that's needed.  And these switches are already in the game, they're just framed as a Special Trait for gay characters instead of just being something that everyone has, and only locked into two combinations at present instead of four.

YYM = Bisexual Man
YYF = Bisexual Woman
YNM = Gay Man
YNF = Straight Woman
NYM = Straight Man
NYF = Gay Woman
NNM = Asexual Man
NNF = Asexual Woman

[charkesd]

if you enact any of this pc bullshit im guna leave this game forever

96% of the us population (1st world country!) does not fit the label bisexual asexual transgendered or gay

i dont care how many people on tumblr tell you otherwise this is a non issue and if the author lowers himself to this level he simply open the floodgates and be kicking himself later

i dont give a flying FK what you think SHOULD or SHOULDNT be in this game or what you think is appropriate

its whatever he wants. when it comes to NONSENSE like this thread you have no fuckin right to try and guilt trip sjw him into changing HIS fuckin game

eat a big fat cis dick


Moderator: User has been warned for this post.  This is a clear violation of Rule #2, and a less clear violation of Rule #1 as well.  In hopes of avoiding further problems, here's an excerpt of the forum rules:

We want the forums to be enjoyable, informative, and inviting to all, while also supporting spirited debate and respectful disagreement. To that end, we've got some guidelines/rules here that everyone can refer to.

Unless otherwise noted, all rules apply both in the forums and in PMs. Violating any rule can lead to a perma-ban or a warning, depending on the specifics of the situation. Once warned, further violations will almost always lead to a perma-ban.


1. No personal attacks: No personal attacks or insults - especially angry, inflammatory ones. Feel free to criticize a game, mod, or idea - but take care never to allow that to become a personal attack on an individual. Even oblique or implied personal attacks are disallowed.

2. Sustained hostility or anger venting: Do not post streams of unconstructive, unnecessary negativity or hostility, and do not vent anger here. It just makes the community feel hostile for no reason. This doesn't mean everyone has to be happy or have good opinions of everything and everyone all the time - it means that phrasing complaints in constructive ways leads to much better results all around, and we don't want a community where anger and hostility are behavioral norms.

Let's keep ourselves calm and maintain the forums as a constructive and welcoming community.

[Zombra]

if you enact any of this pc bullshit im guna leave this game forever

Um, gay characters are already in the game.  I guess you'll be quitting then.  We'll all be sad to see you go.   

[charkesd]

yea everyone knows since its the title of the thread

nice job on that one

[Andurhil]

Also, if we start adding such labels, then maybe we should add colonists' reactions to such labels. Someone doesn't like gay people / someone doesn't like straight people

That would actually be interesting from a gameplay perspective. Homophobe/Heterophobe as traits. Though that might be a bit more risque than Tynan wants.

a gay person falls in love with a straight person of the same sex / a straight person falls in love with a gay person of the opposite sex.

If you read some of the earlier posts in this thread, and especially mine, that can already take place and I gave my take on how I think it works. It doesn't have to take any work, really.

which means the player would feel like having a gay person in his starting team would be a liability since he/she won't produce any offspring (which you would want for your colony to grow) which would be treated as if the game was designed to make you hate gay people.

That's just part of emergent gameplay though. If your goal is to make a self-propagating colony under harsh conditions, then yes, having a gay character would be a liability at first. That's not the same as saying it's designed to make you hate gay people, that's kinda absurd. The game doesn't encourage anyone to hate characters with any of the other negative traits, such as lazy.

Also, think about this. A gay person plays the game and wants an all-gay colony and decides to sell straight people as prisoners. How will this colony survive? Gay women and gay men would be "forced against their nature" to have a sexual relationship for the sole purpose of growing the colony. That would be really "unfair" towards gay people. So then we should start thinking about alternate routes that would lead to offspring like making a lab that would have the sperm fertilize the egg without the need of the sexual activity between a gay male and a gay female.

That's still part of the game and player decisions as to how to run the colony. Someone else could also play the game and have an all straight colony and sell off gay characters. That's equally possible within the game. The game doesn't dictate morals. If it did there wouldn't be cannibalism in the game.

Maybe, in ten years of alphas and betas that include generations, alien worlds, cybertech, guards, expeditions and in general, all the things everyone is longing for, they could also include different sexualities.

But it's this latest alpha which introduced social interactions and relationships, so of course people are going to bring up these subjects. They weren't issues before this alpha exactly because people knew there were other priorities. But now that relationships are in the game you think it's unreasonable to discuss the subject of sexuality? I don't really understand that thinking.

Besides, the subject of this thread was whether gay should be a trait from a gameplay mechanics perspective, not a social one.

But again, think about what would that mean for the players. For a colony to survive it would be easier if everyone is straight (again, i'm saying this because of the offspring "availability") so the gay trait would be seen as a negative, and that would be wrong.

I mean, it would also be easier if everyone had the hard worker trait or if nobody had the lazy trait. It's still a valid gameplay scenario. Rimworld isn't "easy".

[Zombra]

As far as the whole reproduction/liability argument, it's moot since human pregnancy is not part of the game and as far as I know (and hope) it never will be.  That is simply not a relevant plot line in a story about a colony trying to survive for just a few years.

Homophobic as a Trait on the Trait list ... eh, I feel it would be too limited in scope to be worth a place on the list.  Assuming that gay/bisexual/etc. characters are statistically rare (2-5%?), it would be almost meaningless next to "meaty" traits like Lazy or Psychopath that have frequent, sweeping effects.

However, I think it might be a nice hook for social fights.  Right now social fights only start because "I don't like your face".  I could see "Your sexual orientation is different from mine" being a good reason for social fights to start (though most colonists hopefully wouldn't feel this way   Off topic, I also think that romantic rivalry is a very good reason for social fights to happen.  ("John starts a social fight with Bill - fighting over Suzie.")

[Boston]

As far as the whole reproduction/liability argument, it's moot since human pregnancy is not part of the game and as far as I know (and hope) it never will be.  That is simply not a relevant plot line in a story about a colony trying to survive for just a few years.

Homophobic as a Trait on the Trait list ... eh, I feel it would be too limited in scope to be worth a place on the list.  Assuming that gay/bisexual/etc. characters are statistically rare (2-5%?), it would be almost meaningless next to "meaty" traits like Lazy or Psychopath.

However, I think it might be a nice hook for social fights.  Right now social fights only start because "I don't like your face".  I could see "Your sexual orientation is different from mine" being a good reason for social fights to start (though most colonists hopefully wouldn't feel this way   Off topic, I also think that romantic rivalry is a very good reason for social fights to happen.  ("John starts a social fight with Bill - fighting over Suzie.")

-ahem-

Actually, human pregnancy will eventually be part of the game. The designer has said as much, and has already stated that the systems for it is already in place. He just wants to make sure it "gets done right".

Considering how I think some members of this forum would be raising human children for slaughter, for kicks and for resources, by all means, take your time, Tynan.