forced prostitution

[A Friend]

Simply having the title as "*personal slave *" would be fine that you can occasionally see going to the slave masters room and seeing some love hearts.

Actually, I think this could sort of work. Somewhat "subtle" enough to stop it from being jarring. Just add a mood debuff for the slave and other colonists and it could possibly be alright.

maybe.

[CodeRen]

To be honest, I really don't see the problem with this. I've wanted to make an 'evil town' since alpha 3 when the game decided to veer away from that.
Just because it's in the game doesn't mean everyone has to play with the feature. I mean as has been said before. You can literally capture a *friendly* ally, imprison him, beat him, forcefully cut off his legs and then proceed to harvest him of his vital organs until death. Going further than that, you can then burn him alive, cut him up into slabs of meat and make furniture from his skin... Then there's also drugs.

Is this suggestion *really* going too far? The game doesn't need to be blunt about it. Simply having the title as "*personal slave *" would be fine that you can occasionally see going to the slave masters room and seeing some love hearts.


The only reason people see this as bad is the taboo of it. But we have become so normallised to the type of content I've just mentioned that really on the moral scale this doesn't come close.

I know I for one would enjoy this feature. I want to play the bad raider town in Rimworld, let me be the pirate. Let me raid, cannibalise and enslave the outlander towns. I want to make a tribal village that is to be feared in all manners.

There's torture, there's murder, there's cannibalism, there's drugs, there's harvesting, there is cheating, there is awful sickness's like dementia.

"Personal slave" wowie. Big deal.

Basically this. Rape happens (Wish it didnt) and sexual urges happen as well. People talk about survival like sex isnt warranted here, but after a while by yourself or others for years you would want to have sex. And if not add rape why not what he is suggesting?

[Elixiar]

I would say calling 'forced prostitution' a 'taboo' is a bit lenient. Less 'taboo' and more 'we don't like talking about it because of how psychologically damaging it is to the victims and how you have to be pretty fucked up to commit such an act in the first place' sort of ordeal.

Anything that happens in that first paragraph is the result of the player taking a broader system and using its features to enact those events. Unlike this suggested feature that exists solely for the one purpose, the limb/health system wasn't exactly planned with those options as main features, so comparing the two is pretty dumb.

My apologies, I'm not trying to take away how bad it is. I'm merely reinforcing how all these things whether by design intention or not, are possible in the game and many people enjoy those features of the game. By now, if harvesting prisoners wasn't considered a fairly core part of the game there wouldn't be a huge negative impact for harvesting.

This is a storytelling and role playing game, and I just think the premise of what this suggestion is, is much more intense than what would actually be in the game.
What exactly defines defines cannibalism and murder as okay but this a no-go? Where is the line?

If babies were in the game I am putting money on the fact you would be able to chop them up for human meat and have the parent pawn eat them. I mean lol that's just what Rimworld can do.

[keylocke]

well from a storytelling perspective.. rape is a powerful and dark storyline.

victims would have ptsd and stuff, but at the same time there's a recovery curve. they see some horrible shit happening, and then you see these victims survive and become stronger as a result.

heck, in my previous post i suggested that raiders could have some prisoners in their camp which they occasionally subject to rape and torture, which the players can then set free.

---

then there's also the possibility of a "dark storyline", like a "factions" thing.

ie : are you a tribal? are you a spacer? are you a pirate?

so if players decide to play as a "pirate" faction. everyone is forever hostile against the player, including other pirates. however, you also have all the options to kidnap, rape, torture, and pillage the other factions. just like other pirates.

also, you won't get negative mood buffs for butchering people, selling people as slaves, harvesting their organs, etc..

choosing a pirate raider faction should let you play dark storylines that might be considered as taboo by other factions. heck, that option should probably have a disclaimer that says : warning. playing this faction unlocks some morally questionable actions. your trigger will intensify.

[Yoso]

I understand that Rimworld lets you do awful things but the problem with forced prostitution as it's been suggested is that pawns fucking hate those things. They hate them to hell. When a raider shoots a pawn in the leg then collapses in a hail of bullets, if you capture that raider and fail to stop the bleeding your shot pawn is all "we have a responsibility to keep our prisoners safe." If that guy got up and then raped a prisoner for a mood buff it would be wildly inconsistent.

Some of the other suggestions make sense, I don't think there should be any extensive mechanics because ultimately it doesn't add much. If there were slaves in pirate camps you could liberate that would actually be a neat mechanic, if they had to share beds with raiders and little black hearts sometimes appeared I don't that would be particularly egregious. If psychopathic pawns or pawns on a severe mental break sometimes slept with prisoners to the disgust and outrage of other pawns that would probably also be fine.

A darker storyline where you're a band of pirates running a slave camp and doing terrible things sounds interesting but it also seems far enough beyond the scope of vanilla to warrant being a mod.

[mumblemumble]

Wow, this is a helluva thread... Glad someone else isn't afraid of speaking on taboo things.

I've spoken on this before, and really, tynan HIMSELF has said a rimworld is NOT full of healthy, moral, perfect people, its full of damaged, imperfect, flawed folks. Morally speaking, I see no reason why it doesn't exist, because morals and law are not a thing in the rimworld outside the extent of the individual "factions" law, and in an out of game context, hurt feelings have no place in morality of a consensual arrangement which is informed (ie, you know the game has rape, play it anyway) in ADULT CONTENT, which IIRC, rimworld is classified as, what with drugs, sex, murder, ect... .... I wouldn't call it a kids game.

Infact, if you think about it, its a LITTLE immersion breaking if you deal with the extreme nastyness of raiders. Back WAAAAY back when fear was a stat, you could have gibbit cages, torture prisoners, and leave corpses by someones bed as a MECHANIC to control through terror.  granted this is gone now, but it made me think : if we can become THAT kind of pure evil raider, why is the line arbitrarily drawn at sexual stuff?...it was at least ignorable before sex / romance was a thing, but now, more and more, its rather weird.. a person may break over and over from drug withdrawal / having his crush rejected, but rape is never a possibility, even if a psychopath. It seems... a little odd. Reminds me of a quote. "We will beat you, feed you your mother, let someone use you as a test dummy for medical training, stab you for fun, take your organs out for spare parts, glue on peg legs as part of an art project, butcher you and make meals and hats out of you.... ...but dont worry, we wont put anything in your ass, because you know, that's just WRONG."

I personally think it could add to the raid idea, and create serious contempt towards raider factions, to say, have someone captured, then returned in a week, bruised up, mentally fucked up, and violated... you would technically get the colonist back, but there would be so much damage there. YES, it would be triggering, YES, it would hit hard at home for some, but lets face it, rimworld isn't a kids game, and its not even an immature game. So I think, even if the idea is extremely uncomfortable, it would be interesting to add. Besides, wasn't the design of rimworld based on making EXPERIENCES? Having a colonist raped, and then vowing to burn an enemies base to the ground would CERTAINLY be an experience.. as would perhaps jaded colonists torturing / killing raider prisoners of their own volition as a reaction to the outrage, but thats a much deeper suggestion.

Anything that happens in that first paragraph is the result of the player taking a broader system and using its features to enact those events. Unlike this suggested feature that exists solely for the one purpose, the limb/health system wasn't exactly planned with those options as main features, so comparing the two is pretty dumb.

Your judging based on INTENT.... And this is a very silly concept, saying its ok if its not intended. Heres a question for you, had tynan "unintentionally" added in rape as a thing, would you then be ok with it?... Would that then meet your approval?

Really, thats a weak, almost fallacious argument, to say that INTENT shapes if something is right or wrong. It seems like your grasping at straws, the real thing is, it seems, you feel uncomfortable with rape ingame, and don't want it because of that. This is fine, I guess, but just be honest if this is the case.  Really, there should be a clear, and concise argument why it shouldn't be added, which I don't see...and no, I don't count people being triggered. Because ANYTHING will trigger SOMEBODY. So long as its not causing physical harm OR being forced on others in an indecent manner (such as flashing someone), I don't see the point...I mean, the game isn't graphic anyway, its not like hotline Miami 2s "rape scene", which, while penetration was never achieved, was very violent.

To be frank, YES, if it was added, it would offend a LOT of people, maybe even make people cry...but isn't this what really good books / movies / games do? Hit nerves? Isnt that the idea of rimworld, to go on a rollercoaster of trials, defeats, victories, failures, tests, punishments, rewards, and be overwhelmed by it all? This certainly SEEMS to be part of it, for some. But I suppose cannibalism, murder, and other stuff is easier to emotionally detach from. But this is part of the reason I like it, even as a rare event, it would strike a nerve, a soft spot in people, which many people dont seem to have happen.

Now I will be honest.... I KNOW this will not get added main game very soon, simply because PR. Regardless of if it is ok, or not, or if you THINK its ok or not, it would go against the grain  VERY HARD in society, particularly with the SJW stranglehold of political correctness. We already saw the RPS article on gender roles, and the BS that caused, could you imagine what might happen if the a23 changelog had "rape added : Colonists now have a possibility of raping others during a mental break, based on attraction"? It would be an astounding shitstorm, and people would absolutely lose their shit, regardless if its said that rape is rare as a thing, that its as a mental break, and it is preventable / punishable. Hell, even for MODDERS, I could see a modder getting doxed, death threats, hate messages, ect, just over a mod....

... Because certain parts of reality, people aren't brave enough to face, even a fictitious version... This is a real weakness in society, not being able to just examine it, for what it is. And until that as a thing is fixed, I don't see this changing. And honestly, I dont see the issue of rape improving unless people can honestly examine it / understand the causes either.

well from a storytelling perspective.. rape is a powerful and dark storyline.

Pretty much this... Like it or not, rape would be one of THE most powerful storyline events you could create. If its powerful enough to make people SCARED of the idea of it being added, its powerful enough to get someone seriously emotionally into a game.

@yaso : yeah, good point, but this is a design limitation, I think. Tbh, I wish there was a complex system which multiplied events by many factors, like current stress, faction its done to, personality type, culture of the colony, ect, but THAT would be an update in and of itself. I would still love if feelings was made subjective for many things, like being rejected, seeing bodies,  eating bad food, ect...and can be changed over time through circumstance...for instance, are you desperate and eating raw food for a season because you cannot spare the resources to cook? Your colonists would slowly have the idea become ok, or perhaps even become an acquired taste, in rare cases. (like a person handling bodies so much and seeing too much blood becoming psychotic.)

... ...damnit, did I just suggest a psychology framework again?...damnit.

Oh and sorry for text wall. But I needed to get my points out there.

[Goldenpotatoes]

Anything that happens in that first paragraph is the result of the player taking a broader system and using its features to enact those events. Unlike this suggested feature that exists solely for the one purpose, the limb/health system wasn't exactly planned with those options as main features, so comparing the two is pretty dumb.

Your judging based on INTENT.... And this is a very silly concept, saying its ok if its not intended. Heres a question for you, had tynan "unintentionally" added in rape as a thing, would you then be ok with it?... Would that then meet your approval?

Did you miss my point entirely? Intent is part of it, yes, but the main factor is that in comparison to what is currently being suggested, the health/limb system is a broad framework. I can chop off a colonist's infected limb to keep him from dying to infection just as much as I can replace a raider's legs with peglegs. Doesn't mean the system is designed in mind with the sole concept of 'this is for chopping up raiders'.

I'm not quite sure how you can "unintentionally" make rape a mechanic in the game, either.

Really, thats a weak, almost fallacious argument, to say that INTENT shapes if something is right or wrong. It seems like your grasping at straws, the real thing is, it seems, you feel uncomfortable with rape ingame, and don't want it because of that. This is fine, I guess, but just be honest if this is the case.  Really, there should be a clear, and concise argument why it shouldn't be added, which I don't see...and no, I don't count people being triggered. Because ANYTHING will trigger SOMEBODY. So long as its not causing physical harm OR being forced on others in an indecent manner (such as flashing someone), I don't see the point...I mean, the game isn't graphic anyway, its not like hotline Miami 2s "rape scene", which, while penetration was never achieved, was very violent.

You're right, I am uncomfortable with it being added. I don't like the concept being pushed into the game because I genuinely don't see how it'd do more good than harm if actually added. Maybe come back in another 50-100 years, depending on how much social boundaries change to make the concept a little less abhorred when it comes to talking about it bluntly. There's a reason you don't see many games, let alone AAA titles, tackle the concept: because how you handle it can easily make or break it when selling.

Essentially, either you downplay it to a point where its practically a niche feature with no real gameplay relevancy that just barely hints at whats currently happening, or you go in and actually the system for it and then the media vultures swoop down and push their own bias into their stories. Rock Paper Shotgun's Claudia Lo already attempted this with the game's unfinished relationship system, which as easily defended seeing how it wasn't a complete system and wasn't meant to fully represent the concept. Can you imagine the fucking field day they'd have if rape was intentionally added? Nah, no thanks.

If you want it as a feature, get someone to mod it in for you. Whether you see being 'triggered' as a valid reasoning or not to keep it out, bad publicity is usually a good reason.

[ArguedPiano]

EDIT: Goldenpotatoes beat me to the post above  ^  but here is my original post as I put some time into typing it out:



I think Goldenpotatoes put this perfectly earlier:

Just with majority of these suggestions, take a moment to look at the feature you're currently suggesting, and go: "Would this enhance gameplay enough to be worth adding?"

I can't think of any circumstance where what is essentially rape would actively enhance the game past the shock factor of 'wow they actually put that in the game?'

If its powerful enough to make people SCARED of the idea of it being added, its powerful enough to get someone seriously emotionally into a game.

It would also be powerful enough to make someone seriously disgusted at the fact that it is, or would be a feature.

I am willing to bet you would loose much more potential sale than you would gain by adding this feature.

After all, is that not what you want when you build a game? To make it as fun and enjoyable to as many people as possible?

And as fans of the game, do we not want to help grow a large, healthy community to encourage the growth of well asked for features such as personal caravans and the ability to raid other factions?

Sure it may be fun for some people to play out these events. Most may never even use the mechanic. But the public backlash would be IMMENSE, both from inside the community and much larger from out.

I can see no circumstances where rape would be beneficial to Tynan as a developer, or the community as a whole.

[Elixiar]

Seems the final verdict is - it's okay as a mod.

The world isn't ready tackle this yet, without having a social breakdown.

Much like how all real world violence was the result of all and games with shooting or killing in them 10 years ago. (Which some still like to try and push as anything but absurd.)

[carpediembr]

Seems the final verdict is - it's okay as a mod.

Until we get "RimKids" in and some crazy ass player cut the wives legs only so they can create a farm of babies...

[OmG_PotatoeZ]

Some topics hit a little too close to home for some people.

This, is probably one of those topics.

We're playing a Science Fiction GAME afterall. I see no place for rape in Rimworld.

if there is cannibalism, murder, slavery, organ harvesting, why say no to rape?
But in real life, if you aren't a psychopath, chances are you won't be able to have enjoyable sex with a person who doesn't want it. As long as you remember that majority people can't commit rape, as well as can't kill another person, or can't eat another person  without extremely strong motivator, I think it's a pretty solid ground to stand on. Only psychopaths and morally despicable individuals will engage, and only as a spontaneous mechanic over which you have no control, then it would make sense. But to create a sex slave you would need the whole colony of psychopaths, otherwise it might as well be just a slave since, well, people usually do not enjoy raping or being raped so the slave would be left alone.

TL;DR: I only see "forcelovin' slaves" activity as a spontaneous by-product of a psychopath trait.

Because rape may hit too close to home for several people including devs, players, and families of those. If you ever have a child, or significant other and they are raped or molested, or even if you are, feel free to reply with how you feel with rape being in this game.

[RemingtonRyder]

The game has enough dark side gameplay.

[mega_newblar]

Instead of the weird rape stuff. Why not use the pirate faction along with A16 features?   

For example, if you become friendly with a pirate faction then you can visit their brothels. Not every pirate town will have one. The fact that you have to maintain a relationship with the pirates will help balance it out. Psychopaths and non-psychopaths alike love prostitutes.   

There. Ugly pawns can get laid, and no rape involved. The brothels can even help alleviate travel related negative mood buffs.   

[deslona]

EDIT: Goldenpotatoes beat me to the post above  ^  but here is my original post as I put some time into typing it out:



I think Goldenpotatoes put this perfectly earlier:

Just with majority of these suggestions, take a moment to look at the feature you're currently suggesting, and go: "Would this enhance gameplay enough to be worth adding?"

I can't think of any circumstance where what is essentially rape would actively enhance the game past the shock factor of 'wow they actually put that in the game?'

If its powerful enough to make people SCARED of the idea of it being added, its powerful enough to get someone seriously emotionally into a game.

It would also be powerful enough to make someone seriously disgusted at the fact that it is, or would be a feature.

I am willing to bet you would loose much more potential sale than you would gain by adding this feature.

After all, is that not what you want when you build a game? To make it as fun and enjoyable to as many people as possible?

And as fans of the game, do we not want to help grow a large, healthy community to encourage the growth of well asked for features such as personal caravans and the ability to raid other factions?

Sure it may be fun for some people to play out these events. Most may never even use the mechanic. But the public backlash would be IMMENSE, both from inside the community and much larger from out.

I can see no circumstances where rape would be beneficial to Tynan as a developer, or the community as a whole.

Quoted for truth

Seems the final verdict is - it's okay as a mod.

The world isn't ready tackle this yet, without having a social breakdown.

Much like how all real world violence was the result of all and games with shooting or killing in them 10 years ago. (Which some still like to try and push as anything but absurd.)

I agree, if a modder wants to work on a full on complete system that would introduce this element. Good luck to them and I hope they add enough depth to make it 'interesting'. However that modder should also be aware they are drawing a target on their back (and by extension the developers). There are a lot of anti-gaming groups out there and the word "rape" generally evokes the imagery of abuse to women. I would like to state now I know it goes both ways and one of the great things about Rimword is it IS fairly unbiased in its' traits. I am also confident that the modder wouldn't do it as such either (against women). But outside groups wont see it that way. It may result in Tynan scolding the modder (I do not know). It is unfair, but a possibility.

In short, I would prefer Tynan to work on other stuff. Leave "rape" to a modder.

[Plymouth]

It's a matter of time before the taboo will be lifted, same as it was for cannibalism(the last most terrible thing that everyone was hush-hush about), murder, torture and so on.

But yes, to avoid outlash it would be most fitting if someone made a mod.