Ideology DLC: are roles worth it?

[BlackCat]

I have 3 pawns, each with a role and an impressive bedroom, but they have -12 for supreme expectations because they have roles. I had more pawns, but they died. I think it is -15 if I remove a role...thus, not sure I want to remove roles at this point. Is using roles worth it, the role benefits seem tiny compared to the downside of assigning roles. Seems unbalanced even for a large colony.

[failsafe]

If you dont have roles your pawns will expect you to have them. I think if you dont need roles (added functionality) just skip this. But I'm not an expert.

[se05239]

It's often cheaper to let them be upset that roles are unfulfilled until you can accomidate for the increased expectations Pawn get from being in roles.
The only role I'd make sure to fill is the Moral Guide one, cause they'll help you convert Pawns from other factions and keep your own Pawns believing.

[Joejin]

Usually only picking the moral leader role is better until you have a large colony. I think of it more for roleplay than gameplay

[Astasia]

Only Morale Guide and Leader come with expectation increases, if you don't have a moral guide after a fairly early point then everyone in your colony has -5 mood. It's fairly essential to have a Moral Guide as soon as you can for mood reasons, they also significantly increase the rate you can convert other pawns to your ideology. Leader is more optional, but work drive and combat command are very powerful tools.

All the other roles do not have expectation increases, and most of them are incredibly powerful.

[BlackCat]

The game is wrong. Realistically, assigning a role should be a positive number -- unless it it toilet cleaning duty. I agree that it should be negative when unassuming them -- unless it is toilet duty.

[BlackCat]

The developers didn't account for the possibility of adding negative roles. How can you add horrible negative roles for pawns to perform when all roles are negative.

[se05239]

Originally posted by BlackCat:

The developers didn't account for the possibility of adding negative roles. How can you add horrible negative roles for pawns to perform when all roles are negative.

It's not that the roles are negative, it's that Pawns become so full of themselves with entitlement from being in roles that they become more needy than the damn Imperial Stellarch.

[Astasia]

It's meant as a partial offset for all the various mood bonuses the ideology system can add. Your leader and moral guide might have -12 mood from their roles, but they also probably have +15-20 or more extra mood from ideology precepts by that point, not even counting temporary bonus mood from rituals or role abilities. Ideology on the whole makes the mood management system in RimWorld much easier, though also more complex and engaging.

[BlackCat]

The entitlement logic from the Royalty DLC should not be applied to the Ideology DLC. A positive role should always give a positive mood. Using a negative mood to somehow balance things is unnecessary. Roles are already being balanced in better ways via job and clothing restrictions. Having a positive role is not going to make someone have an entitled attitude; where as, with royalty, entitlement is everything. Royalty distance themselves from the lesser people (social and physical walls), where as, the ideology roles should NOT be about entitlement. For example, priests don't distance themselves from non-believers, they seek them out, live among them, and try to convert them.

[VoiD]

I suppose it would make sense for the game to have a Humble trait that prevents the rise in expectations, similar to ascetic and how it counters the noble requirements.

[Astasia]

Originally posted by BlackCat:

Roles are already being balanced in better ways via job and clothing restrictions.

There are no job restrictions for leader and moral guide, which again are the only two roles with higher expectations. Clothing wants for roles are optional, and fundamentally leads to the same thing, as the clothes requirements you can give them are not protective and they will just end up wearing armor with an extra mood penalty anyway.

The penalties are required for the expansion mechanics to make sense, otherwise it would mostly just feel like cheating.

Originally posted by BlackCat:

Having a positive role is not going to make someone have an entitled attitude

History has shown putting people in a position of power leads to excess in the majority of cases. This is more so with the ideology leadership and moral guide roles than Royalty titles. A title is just a title with some benefits, while being an ideology leader is an actual position of power. A moral guide isn't some "priest" it's more like the pope, it is the "spiritual" head of a global ideology. The pope is living it up in a private country full of gilded cathedrals and vast collections of wealth "borrowed" from around the world over centuries. Where do you think that puts their expectations?