Separate sexuality from the trait system.

[b0rsuk]

Let's not get so extreme. I call homosexuality "not normal" in the same sense as being left handed is not normal. About 10% of humans are homosexual, it doesn't bother me. It becomes a deviancy when you have a gay person forcibly hitting on another against his/her will, but heterosexuals also do that. Really, the world and society have MUCH bigger issues than homosexuality. I'd rather be friends with a homosexual than someone who's very religious.

[keylocke]

Personally, it would be nice to see a split on traits - move some of them into a different category, physical based and personality based. For example, sanguine - don't get me wrong I love having pawns with it, but that is a personality trait while you have physical traits like too smart, which suggests having a better learning ability or jogger which amplifies movement. Not only would this improve the variety of characters (more traits = more complexity) but it could open up the possibility of some interesting personality and skill combinations as a result of it.

agreed. which is why i mentioned about dynamic traits earlier, since i also believe that traits can be divided into several categories.

ie :
-sexual preference
-physical traits
-intellectual traits
-psychological traits
-etc..

some traits are permanent, some traits are dynamic, and i also don't think there should be a 3 trait limit to each pawn.

i don't think it's a complicated solution, since it actually solves a lot of issues.

[Goldenpotatoes]

You have to remember that while separating traits into different categories might be for the better, it'll also cause quite the headache when updating characters given by backers. I imagine most people who spent the extra cash on getting their own character into generation wouldn't be too thrilled to find out a new trait system fucked with the set up preferences. Specifically those who went as far as the Pirate King pack ($120 value).

[Ramsis]

To be fair it's not just the average player who thinks the sexuality system should be separate from traits, there are a few moderators who think the same thing but it's a very basic thing that should be pushed to a later update unless Tynan gets a wild hair.

[Cibi]

Thats my logic, instead of having gay take up a coveted trait slot, and for the sake of better simulation, make it so everyone has a sexuality and maybe other personality traits asside from the more buff oriented traits like industrious

I fail to see how it would make a "better simulation" for everyone. The change would just add an extra trait for people who prefer having only gay pawns.

Its a better simulation because my idea actually logs every pawns sexuality, and they get a separate roll on it to see whether or not they are gay. The current system is a little stupid, Gay has to compete with every other trait, making it both rare, and undesirable. Simply put, I'd rather have Sanguine than gay, and gay already is in a sea of traits, so getting it in the first place is just hard.

I feel to better represent reality, as a simulation, you see, that the system should be moved entirely to the new social system, and that every pawn makes a secondary sexuality role alongside their already present traits. Everyone has a sexuality, and LGBT is a bit more common than portrayed

[Cibi]

I don't think we need a LGBT debate here in order to post in support of, or in opposition of this suggestion.

Personally, it would be nice to see a split on traits - move some of them into a different category, physical based and personality based. For example, sanguine - don't get me wrong I love having pawns with it, but that is a personality trait while you have physical traits like too smart, which suggests having a better learning ability or jogger which amplifies movement. Not only would this improve the variety of characters (more traits = more complexity) but it could open up the possibility of some interesting personality and skill combinations as a result of it.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be a balancing nightmare, nor am I saying it would be as fun as it seems to me. But maybe worth a prototype effort?

Yea, I almost made the same suggestion, but I figured that'd both get a lot of backlash, and probably no dev support. I like the idea of splitting physical and personality traits, maybe in a 2 and 2 format. Reduce the overall amount of traits in a single category, but giving the possibility for more traits, I think it'd be balanced.

[Cibi]

To be fair it's not just the average player who thinks the sexuality system should be separate from traits, there are a few moderators who think the same thing but it's a very basic thing that should be pushed to a later update unless Tynan gets a wild hair.

Good, I mean, I am not saying this is an urgent issue, but I do want to see it happen. I'd love for the character I have in game to be gay, because, well, I am in that sort of relationship right now..., but alas, I see bloodlust and cannibal in the same random, and I can't not select that.

[Vagabond]

Its a better simulation because my idea actually logs every pawns sexuality, and they get a separate roll on it to see whether or not they are gay. The current system is a little stupid, Gay has to compete with every other trait, making it both rare, and undesirable. Simply put, I'd rather have Sanguine than gay, and gay already is in a sea of traits, so getting it in the first place is just hard.

I feel to better represent reality, as a simulation, you see, that the system should be moved entirely to the new social system, and that every pawn makes a secondary sexuality role alongside their already present traits. Everyone has a sexuality, and LGBT is a bit more common than portrayed

Would it not be better, to represent reality, as a simulation, that it compete with the other traits rather than there be a one in four chance? Unless you are for stacking the percentage to still make it rare?

Just looking at wikipedia's article on it, that takes in to account the world population as well as a break down of individual countries, most places are sitting at 1-7%. The average population per state in the USA is 3.8%. For the sake of argument, we could just knuckle down and accept a 10% as the world population being LGBT (which according to the data, is more than fair). So characters could have a 90% chance to be "straight", and you could split the 10% up between the L, G, B, and T. I think you'd have more LGBT's with the current system. . .

I made this suggestion in the past, regarding expanding the trait system. I wouldn't be opposed to having a sexuality category for traits, that allows people to unify or fray based on sexual orientation along with the rest of the the web. https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=17605.msg191901#msg191901

[rexx1888]

i think they should also include bestiality and necrophilia.

yes. i'm serious. haha.

edit : oh wait, in case people don't get sarcasm.

no i'm not.

i was going to pop in here an make jokes about how this is a dangerous discussion that will lead to the worst kind of internet trolls.. an has done before.

then i saw this quote an i just had to point out.. as fucked up as i think necrophilia an beastiality are, we already have cannibals. we have players that make cannibal only colonies.. we have players that making psychically dull cannibal colonies no less. I feel like Rimworld's stories benefit by making players confront these things. I know id let the beastiality guy die horrible to a man eater pack... but not everyone knows that instinctively....

[rexx1888]

Its a better simulation because my idea actually logs every pawns sexuality, and they get a separate roll on it to see whether or not they are gay. The current system is a little stupid, Gay has to compete with every other trait, making it both rare, and undesirable. Simply put, I'd rather have Sanguine than gay, and gay already is in a sea of traits, so getting it in the first place is just hard.

I feel to better represent reality, as a simulation, you see, that the system should be moved entirely to the new social system, and that every pawn makes a secondary sexuality role alongside their already present traits. Everyone has a sexuality, and LGBT is a bit more common than portrayed

Would it not be better, to represent reality, as a simulation, that it compete with the other traits rather than there be a one in four chance? Unless you are for stacking the percentage to still make it rare?

Just looking at wikipedia's article on it, that takes in to account the world population as well as a break down of individual countries, most places are sitting at 1-7%. The average population per state in the USA is 3.8%. For the sake of argument, we could just knuckle down and accept a 10% as the world population being LGBT (which according to the data, is more than fair). So characters could have a 90% chance to be "straight", and you could split the 10% up between the L, G, B, and T. I think you'd have more LGBT's with the current system. . .

I made this suggestion in the past, regarding expanding the trait system. I wouldn't be opposed to having a sexuality category for traits, that allows people to unify or fray based on sexual orientation along with the rest of the the web. https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=17605.msg191901#msg191901

to continue the quote line an because in for a penny in for a pound. I counter your counter by pointing out its really easy to weight the percentages in a random roll so you get a close approximation to your version of reality. I dont think they should though, they should pick a different weight, because this IS THE FUTURE AN ITS NOT THE NOW WHERE WE KILL LGBT PEOPLE FOR BEING DIFFERENT!!!!

sometimes, reality is not a good definer of sensible or good design :\ im probably not coming back to this thread, but i like the sound of divvying up traits into categories, and definately we need to put sexuality as its own stat, because everyone has one an there are lots of flavours of it.

[Roadie]

It would make sense to me for sexual orientation to be something other than trait-defined. As already mentioned, as long as it's part of the pool of starting traits people will be selecting against it because other traits have more mechanically valuable effects.

[keylocke]

i think they should also include bestiality and necrophilia.

yes. i'm serious. haha.

edit : oh wait, in case people don't get sarcasm.

no i'm not.

i was going to pop in here an make jokes about how this is a dangerous discussion that will lead to the worst kind of internet trolls.. an has done before.

then i saw this quote an i just had to point out.. as fucked up as i think necrophilia an beastiality are, we already have cannibals. we have players that make cannibal only colonies.. we have players that making psychically dull cannibal colonies no less. I feel like Rimworld's stories benefit by making players confront these things. I know id let the beastiality guy die horrible to a man eater pack... but not everyone knows that instinctively....

interesting point. now i wanna add moar suggestions.

how about S&M? let's bring back those torture cages from the previous alphas. 

[PocketNerd]

I love that Rimworld includes explicitly gay (and trans!) characters, but I agree that decoupling it from the Trait system would be a nice idea, assuming it's not too much of a headache from an implementation point of view. It might even be nice if it could be something along the lines of the Kinsey scale — after all, some people are totally gay, some are totally straight, and a lot of folks fall somewhere in between.

[Kashipoi]

I think, for now having it as a trait while interpawn relations aren't really super fleshed out is okay. From the standpoint of having random traits and skills that can be all over the place.

Later on though, I'd imagine stuff like sexuality or hostility might be integrated in some sort of expansion on pawn personalities. They could easily become something like a sliding scale so people can run from all sorts of things on a lot of personality traits, which would free up traits to give more unique benefits or problems in the future.

At least that's how I see it, right now pawns are dice rolls on conversations and piles of skills no matter how much you dress it up. Later on that might change.

[MsMeiriona]

As an asexual individual, I would like to see sexuality removed from the traits and given it's own value. Any pawn would have a set kind of attraction limits. Attraction to same gender, different gender, both same and different gender, neither same nor different gender. The chances might be weighted, with Different Gender being most common, Same and Both less common, and Neither relatively rare.