Slavers upset by selling people

[Blastoderm]

Is there a way to prevent colonists from being upset from selling prisoners?
Even if my entire colony butchers travellers left and right, even if they are slavers, raiders, mercs, ex-lords etc. they are still upset when someone got sold or organ harvested.
I take it in A13 there's no such thing as tracking some kind of "morality" or "ethics" but maybe I am missing something and there is a way to make my raiding settlement work?

[b0rsuk]

I think only colonists with Psychopath trait don't care. Unfortunately colonist backgrounds have no effect beyond skills, disabled work, gender and appearance.

[cultist]

It's a balance thing. Selling slaves is very profitable. The mood debuff is there to keep your economy in check, essentially. You don't get to trade in slaves regularly unless you have some way of balancing it out, i.e. very beautiful/interesting enviroments and bedrooms, lots of joy time, lavish meals etc.

[RazorHed]

The answer is yes . You could alter several of the ThoughtDef XML files and remove the mood penalties for things like selling prisoners.

[Justas love]

The backround must do something i mean let's be honest An organ farmer gets mad by removing a kidney.

[Vaporisor]

As to a simple thing as why former pirates/lords/etc. get upset by it?  Just cause they did it in the past doesn't mean they liked it back then too or had their eyes opened once living in a 3x3 wood shack was their new life.

Is a story engine, so if there doesn't seem to be a reason, then make one up ^.^

[Justas love]

I'm pretty sure when you're a lord you don't give a f about slavers, but when you are a slaver yourself i'm pretty sure you wouldn't even dare to sell or be a slaver for the rest of your life

[Vaporisor]

Are and were are different things.  Was a lord, spoiled and isolated from your peasants and serfs vs being stranded on rustic world.

But that is why I kinda would like traits to be dynamic.  Starting traits lend bias, but continued exposure leading to new traits over the years.  Still have to deal with negatives for years, but if your guys are living off cannibalism, eventually grow to like it or be psychopaths.  Versa for good people.

[cultist]

The backround must do something i mean let's be honest An organ farmer gets mad by removing a kidney.

Uh that's organ farm, not organ farmer. As in someone who was only kept alive to provide organs for sale. So yeah, they'd probably have a problem with it. The only backgrounds I could see being okay with this are the vatgrown people, since they are more or less organic machines the way I see it.

And yeah, medieval/tribal people would probably be more lax about slavery. But there's a difference between serfdom and outright slavery. Pirate slavers probably get up to some nasty business, i.e. organ farming :p

[Blastoderm]

Well, if you are keeping a bunch of prisoners as a organ farms for a long time then it's strange for entire colony to be surprised and disgusted by such behaviour. I doubt it will be possible to implement a mechanic for "ethics\morality" in RimWorld but at least removing certain maluses due to traits would be logical.

[Shabazza]

This point has been discussed really often now.
The best explanation for the current system is probably this one:
From a morale point of view, if you decide to capture and treat a prisoners wounds in the first place instead of letting him die in the mud
or setting him free, you basicly took responsibility for him.
So your people will get a debuff if you treat those prisoners with cruelty, which makes some sense to me.

I for myself also would like to be able to make profit or get some organs by those guys. Maybe without killing them.
They chose to attack and kill my colonists relentlessly. Now I chose to treat them like I desire.
But that's not like Tynan judges this situation. And if it was not a game, I'd also find it ok to be punished hard for that.
That's why we have a "Geneva Convention" that regulates what you can and cannot do to prisoners of war.
As a game mechanic, I nontheless find the penalties too harsh for selling prisoners or ... taking some less needed organs from them
to ... well ... keep them in safe custody ... you know. 

[Blastoderm]

Well, people were breeding slaves for generations and we do not kill cattle before animals mature. You can't harvest from a corpse but a living prisoner could be harvested, then helaed, then harvested again and so on. You benefit more from keeping him alive than killing outright, which is the main purpose.

[cultist]

I think perhaps the best argument against removing these mood penalties is the following:

Pawns are more than simply an extension of the player's will.

A big part of Rimworld's challenge comes from the fact that your pawns are not just mindless drones. Player interest and pawn interest will often collide. I believe this is intentional. You could view player interest as the interests of the colony as a whole. But people basically never just do as they're told. At least not without complaining.
The arguments that colonists should "buck up" and stuff any moral or ethical complaints they may have against the colony's (player's) decision seem pretty hollow when you compare them to actual humans (which is what they are supposed to simulate). There will always be someone who disagrees with your point of view, no matter how perfect you think it is. Drama is the heart of Rimworld. Without internal strife, drama is mostly reduced to "good guys vs. bad guys", no matter which side the colony takes. Grey areas are always more interesting than black or white ones.