Reworking sexuality.

[BelligerentDrunk]

I love the fact that I have the chance for gay colonists, and to be honest I usually use the Prepare Carefully mod to create a gay couple straight off the bat in some games. But what irks me slightly is that being Gay in itself is a trait.

Now, where I'm going with this is that for me to have a gay couple, those 2 pawns have the inability for any more than 2 traits that will actually effect them; mechanically, that is. Not only this, but by clumping the Gay trait in with the others, it also makes it a bit harder to find others with said trait, especially those of the same gender, which makes it quite hard to find a partner for your gay pawn if you only start with one of them, especially when you take into account their gender.

I think adding in a Sexuality to the pawn's Bio rather than having it as a trait would work a lot better, at least in my opinion. Of course it would still be uncommon to come across one, but I feel it would give your lonely Gay pawn a higher chance of finding a partner in the harsh rim world. Not to mention they, as previously stated, would have the opportunity of being graced with three traits over two.

(And yes, I am aware the Prepare Carefully mod allows you to add as many traits as you want, but I consider that cheating. Atleast more than using the mod is.)

[MisterVertigo]

I wasn't sure where you were gonna go with this, but this isn't a half bad idea. I'm not sure if this is something that could be modded or not, and it may take a bit of work because it may touch a lot of different systems. It makes complete sense though. Being "Straight" isn't a trait, so "Gay" colonists kind of miss out on a trait slot.

I guess a workaround way to make a mod work would be to add a "Straight" trait and add it for everyone who does not have the "Gay" trait and then add an additional possible trait for everyone.

[AileTheAlien]

Easier change: allow for more than 3 traits, if one of them is the Gay trait.

[b0rsuk]

Easier change: allow for more than 3 traits, if one of them is the Gay trait.

... and people start asking for their favorite trait to have the same special case.

[bigheadzach]

Have you checked out Rainbeau's Rational Romance? It eliminates "Gay" as a standard trait and replaces it with a dedicated trait slot for orientation. It attempts to properly distribute sexual orientation according to current scientific research indicating that humans are 50% likely to be bi if not conformed by cultural expectations, 20% gay, 20% straight, and 10% ace. (You are also able to adjust these ratios if you desire a game to be more or less diverse, to suit your preferences.)

It also fixes a number of unscientific rules regarding romance for better modeling of relationships (and also to get rid of those annoying debuff spirals caused by someone repeatedly getting rejected trying to hit on someone who clearly isn't into them).

[The Great Muffalo]

I'm not going to even ask why you are modeling gay families in a space survival game.

Currently, sexuality appears to be part of the trait system, what you are asking would require that sexuality be made into its own system. That being said, there are lots of systems I'd like to see in the game before one devoted specifically to sexual orientation. Robotics would be nice.

[BelligerentDrunk]

I'm not going to even ask why you are modeling gay families in a space survival game.

Currently, sexuality appears to be part of the trait system, what you are asking would require that sexuality be made into its own system. That being said, there are lots of systems I'd like to see in the game before one devoted specifically to sexual orientation. Robotics would be nice.

Then I'm not sure why you even had to make that statement, and what does it being a space survival game even have to do with it?

And no, currently only Homosexuality is a part of the trait system, as heterosexuals do not need their own trait to be defined as such. This is the whole point of the post. And I'm also pretty sure that an entire robotics system would be much more work to implement over removing the gay trait and adding a little tab on the pawns bio that says Sexuality: Heterosexual/Homosexual.

[Hoshi]

As long as it doesn't turn into 72 different genders and sexualities, I don't see a problem with making a sexuality category for colonists. Given that fact, "Asexual" and "Bisexual" would also be nice to add if we're going to have a separate category for it. It does seem like an element that would improve the story telling aspect of the game.

On the other hand, it does seem like a minor issue and the game is fine as it is without the changes. And I can see why people would find it unnecessary and also unnecessarily emphasizing sexuality and preferences in a game that may not be of the genre to put such things at the forefront of the experience it intends to provide.

I personally don't want it to become a product of someone's agenda to force such topics into the game, even if it is harmless and fair, the intent is very important.  As the saying goes, if you give some people an inch, they take a mile. If it ever does though, and it goes out of control, and we have a million different genders in the game, featuring blue haired lesbians with the misandrist trait. I just want the option for my colonists to identify as an attack helicopter, thank you.

[BelligerentDrunk]

In regards to intent and agenda, despite being a homosexual man myself, the point of this suggestion is to allow gay colonists access to their full 3 traits instead of always being confined to 2 or even 1 that actually add a mechanic to the gameplay.

I agree that seeing bisexual and asexual pawns would be a positive improvement story wise. But as for this post, purely about how gay colonists miss out on traits.

[Hoshi]

That is pretty unfair, yeah. I don't think it's enough to just make the other traits visible because it's obviously a disadvantage, losing a slot and all. I'm in support of any changes to improve this.

[bigheadzach]

That is pretty unfair, yeah. I don't think it's enough to just make the other traits visible because it's obviously a disadvantage, losing a slot and all. I'm in support of any changes to improve this.

Both Rainbeau's Rational Romance and Linq's Psychology address this entirely, and in a respectful and realistic way.

[The Great Muffalo]

I'm not going to even ask why you are modeling gay families in a space survival game.

Currently, sexuality appears to be part of the trait system, what you are asking would require that sexuality be made into its own system. That being said, there are lots of systems I'd like to see in the game before one devoted specifically to sexual orientation. Robotics would be nice.

Then I'm not sure why you even had to make that statement, and what does it being a space survival game even have to do with it?

And no, currently only Homosexuality is a part of the trait system, as heterosexuals do not need their own trait to be defined as such. This is the whole point of the post. And I'm also pretty sure that an entire robotics system would be much more work to implement over removing the gay trait and adding a little tab on the pawns bio that says Sexuality: Heterosexual/Homosexual.

I don't know anyone who uses Rimworld or any game for that matter to simulate gay relationships, but I can't put myself in your head and know why it would give you joy to do that. Your reply came off as hostile rather you intended for it to be or not, and there is no room for arguments on this thread, so please don't try to start one.

[BelligerentDrunk]

I'm not trying to start any arguments as I'd prefer that this entire thread stay on topic. Nor was I trying to be hostile. Cold, perhaps; but merely because I felt it was unnecessary to basically say "I don't know why you do this but I just want to make sure you know that I don't approve." Maybe that's not what they were trying to say, but to me that's how it came off.

It's pretty easy to deduce the fact that I like to have a gay couple or potential couple is because I am gay myself and it makes me feel a little more included, especially in a game where relationships are a factor, and in my opinion a pretty big one; as mechanically it can outright eradicate most pawns mental breaks, within reason.

[bigheadzach]

Tynan coded part of the simulatory experience to be about interpersonal relationships between neighbors and/or co-workers under a crisis situation, how people find hope and joy (and yes, sexual release) in the context of an isolated community free of other expectations or conforming influences. It is a part of being human that extends beyond the mere mating urge and into essential human intimacy and the need for security amongst people.

I think Rainbeau mentioned this in his description for the Rational Romance mod that barring any strong culturally-confirming influence, most humans probably rate between 2 and 4 on the Kinsey scale (bisexual/pansexual with a slight preference towards a certain gender/sex presentation), and it's only through enforcement of the family unit that we're strongly influenced to form monogamous relationships or portray ourselves as Kinsey-0/Kinsey-6. In a colony setting, that influence may not exist or be heavily ignored in favor of survival instincts and just fulfilling the basic need for intimacy or the cool wave of mood-uplifting hormones that a good O can provide.

Both Rational Romance and Psychology give you the freedom to shape your game's reality the way you feel comfortable with by adjusting how diverse sexualities are (and being a single-player experience there's no one around to disagree with you), and I think that's the best option that satisfies those who want to address realism versus those who don't want to have that in their human-hat-fabrication sim.