Please make it so cannibals dont get sad when you harvest organs

[Jackal]

Its super annoying because my colonists get depressed everytime I harvest anyones organs. They are all cannibals so if they are fine with killing people for their meat why would killing them for their organs be any different?

[Bozobub]

Even though I eat meat, I'd be pretty horrified, to find out you were taking a cow apart slowly and piecemeal while it was still alive. That's very sadistic.

Also, just because you eat people, doesn't necessarily mean you have no morals at all, nor that you are a psychopath. Context matters ^^' .

[Chap]

Originally posted by Bozobub:

Even though I eat meat, I'd be pretty horrified, to find out you were taking a cow apart slowly and piecemeal while it was still alive. That's very sadistic.

Also, just because you eat people, doesn't necessarily mean you have no morals at all, nor that you are a psychopath. Context matters ^^' .

can back up bozobub's statement, am a cannibal and i get very upset when i cut off peoples limbs

[Wizard]

What seems silly to me is that the colonist getting that new harvested lung is depressed too. You'd think they'd get a positive modifier, regardless of the source.

[gimmethegepgun]

Originally posted by Wizard:

What seems silly to me is that the colonist getting that new harvested lung is depressed too. You'd think they'd get a positive modifier, regardless of the source.

A lot of people would be pretty upset if they had an organ implanted into them that was taken from someone against their will.

[Kittenpox]

Perhaps something like the Optional setting of this might be of use, as a workaround? https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2010799801

Butchering a corpse with any harvestable natural organs will also yield that organs, like heart and liver.
You can configure this in the mod settings.

It is a little cheat-y, because of the value of organs you can accumulate, but used sparingly I don't see this being unreasonable if you need a spare lung or two. :-)

[Jackal]

Originally posted by Bozobub:

Even though I eat meat, I'd be pretty horrified, to find out you were taking a cow apart slowly and piecemeal while it was still alive. That's very sadistic.

Also, just because you eat people, doesn't necessarily mean you have no morals at all, nor that you are a psychopath. Context matters ^^' .

But my colonists literally slaughter people and eat them and love it, but when putting more use to the corpses instead of dumping perfectly good organs they suddenly have morals like they havent slaughtered entire families just for some meat. And yeah if you kill someone to eat them and you dont have to that means that you dont have morals. People IRL use animal organs as transplants as well and its fine so that point is invalid. They should care even less because these are the people that are trying to kill them.

[gimmethegepgun]

Originally posted by Unholy:

And yeah if you kill someone to eat them and you dont have to that means that you dont have morals.

You aren't killing them to eat them, you're killing them to protect yourself, and then eating them, which has a pragmatic, non-amoral basis for the reasons you already stated:

They should care even less because these are the people that are trying to kill them.

but when putting more use to the corpses instead of dumping perfectly good [meat]

("organs" changed to "meat")

People IRL use animal organs as transplants as well and its fine so that point is invalid.

Animals aren't people.
Are you okay with killing and butchering a person for meat the way we do with animals?

[Kittenpox]

Originally posted by gimmethegepgun:

Are you okay with killing and butchering a person for meat the way we do with animals?

Of *all* the places to ask this, it was the Rimworld forums. :-p
(Yeah, the playerbase worries me too sometimes.)

[Wizard]

Originally posted by gimmethegepgun:

Originally posted by Wizard:

What seems silly to me is that the colonist getting that new harvested lung is depressed too. You'd think they'd get a positive modifier, regardless of the source.

A lot of people would be pretty upset if they had an organ implanted into them that was taken from someone against their will.

Yet no one seems to mind when all of the prisoners have their legs removed.

[gimmethegepgun]

Originally posted by Wizard:

Yet no one seems to mind when all of the prisoners have their legs removed.

Yes, that part is definitely a problem.
It's probably mainly just that there are legitimate reasons to replace someones non-destroyed leg with a peg leg and it would be too complicated to try to figure out when that is or isn't appropriate and give a debuff accordingly.

[Wizard]

Originally posted by gimmethegepgun:

Originally posted by Wizard:

Yet no one seems to mind when all of the prisoners have their legs removed.

Yes, that part is definitely a problem.
It's probably mainly just that there are legitimate reasons to replace someones non-destroyed leg with a peg leg and it would be too complicated to try to figure out when that is or isn't appropriate and give a debuff accordingly.

There are legitimate reasons to harvest a lung too. Specifically, if your colonist needs one.

These are cannibals we are talking about after all. It seems logical to rationalize that once these folks have began to view raiders as resources, specifically meat, something like an organ transplant to heal one of their own as a byproduct to making dinner would be completely acceptable.

Many cultures attempt to use all parts of a hunted animal. I'm not sure how our cannibals would be any different. Utilizing all products of the enemy's body would seem to be the rule as opposed to the exception.

[gimmethegepgun]

Originally posted by Wizard:

There are legitimate reasons to harvest a lung too. Specifically, if your colonist needs one.

A typical, moral person sees someone in constant pain with a mangled leg and thinks "yeah, swapping this for a piece of wood is probably an improvement to this persons' life".
A typical, moral person sees an unwilling person have a lung removed from them to put it in someone else and thinks "this is ♥♥♥♥♥♥ up".

These are cannibals we are talking about after all. It seems logical to rationalize that once these folks have began to view raiders as resources, specifically meat, something like an organ transplant to heal one of their own as a byproduct to making dinner would be completely acceptable.

That would be reasonable, if they are a psychopath. Being a cannibal doesn't mean that you don't empathize with the suffering of others. It means you think they taste delicious.
For instance, it's not uncommon for a person to have some empathy for cows and don't want them to suffer when being slaughtered (like, say, being disassembled piece by piece while still alive) while also thinking that steak is delicious.

Many cultures attempt to use all parts of a hunted animal. I'm not sure how our cannibals would be any different. Utilizing all products of the enemy's body would seem to be the rule as opposed to the exception.

They are still ALIVE when you take it out. You are disassembling/killing a helpless person while they are still alive.

[Wizard]

Originally posted by gimmethegepgun:

Originally posted by Wizard:

There are legitimate reasons to harvest a lung too. Specifically, if your colonist needs one.

A typical, moral person sees someone in constant pain with a mangled leg and thinks "yeah, swapping this for a piece of wood is probably an improvement to this persons' life".
A typical, moral person sees an unwilling person have a lung removed from them to put it in someone else and thinks "this is ♥♥♥♥♥♥ up".

More times then not, in Rimworld, a prisoner's legs aren't removed because they're in agonizing pain, they're removed to make them easier to deal with, or a lesser skilled doctor needs the practice.

When the prisoner wakes up, they might notice stitches on their abdomen, but it's unrealistic for them to know an organ's been removed if their body is functioning normally. Proper removal doesn't even leave a scar.

On the other hand, it should be easy for them to notice, when they wake up, that their legs have been removed. Anyone else who sees them would certainly notice this also. Yet there's no penalty, even though it should be visually horrific. This could be compared to conflict areas where people's hands are cut off to prevent voting or other forms of rebellion.

I'm not sure your cow analogy holds weight. The vast majority of folks enjoying that steak aren't slaughtering the cow themselves. I also think once you cross the line of eating human flash, your moral empathy becomes blurred. Many cultures that practiced cannibalism also ate organs for various reasons, like consuming an enemy's heart to gain his strength.

In a game where amputating limbs for convienience is commonplace, and we're focused on a band of cannibals, where the idea that consuming their enemies is all good, keeping in mind that human leather is also harvested in the process, but harvesting an organ is a no no, well, we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Jackal]

Originally posted by gimmethegepgun:

Originally posted by Unholy:

And yeah if you kill someone to eat them and you dont have to that means that you dont have morals.

You aren't killing them to eat them, you're killing them to protect yourself, and then eating them, which has a pragmatic, non-amoral basis for the reasons you already stated:

They should care even less because these are the people that are trying to kill them.

but when putting more use to the corpses instead of dumping perfectly good [meat]

("organs" changed to "meat")

People IRL use animal organs as transplants as well and its fine so that point is invalid.

Animals aren't people.
Are you okay with killing and butchering a person for meat the way we do with animals?

no but I’m not a cannibal am I lol. And I meant why kill people to eat them and not take their organs too, may as well make the most out of a corpse

[Jackal]

Originally posted by Wizard:

Originally posted by gimmethegepgun:

Yes, that part is definitely a problem.
It's probably mainly just that there are legitimate reasons to replace someones non-destroyed leg with a peg leg and it would be too complicated to try to figure out when that is or isn't appropriate and give a debuff accordingly.

There are legitimate reasons to harvest a lung too. Specifically, if your colonist needs one.

These are cannibals we are talking about after all. It seems logical to rationalize that once these folks have began to view raiders as resources, specifically meat, something like an organ transplant to heal one of their own as a byproduct to making dinner would be completely acceptable.

Many cultures attempt to use all parts of a hunted animal. I'm not sure how our cannibals would be any different. Utilizing all products of the enemy's body would seem to be the rule as opposed to the exception.

Exactly the point I’m trying to make