Religion.

[Mad_House]

Atheists, Cassandrians, Phobites, and Randalists.

We need it for so many reasons. A place of worship for religious colonists should grant additional joy and social benefits, while a conflict factor between each religious group would add negative opinion of those with/without the same religion, with some "traits" making it more or less extreme, like "Zealot" or "Lukewarm".

Atheists, naturally, will be the easiest to please without religion in place, leaving the game entirely the same. However, they won't have the joy boost that the three faiths would have.

Cassandrians, Phobites, and Randalists, while opposing religions, will be slightly unhappy if they don't have a place for worship.

So who else would like to see this in the game? I for one would love a holy war between colonists.

[Tomdroid]

It could be interesting as long as none of the religions were similar to actual religions. Random generation, like the art would suffice and also be hilarious.

[AlexMBrennan]

Yeah, and how it gives utterly crappy people reason to do something better with their lives, provides hope and meaning to people who have none... so useless!

You are correct, if you assume that all humans are like little children who can't handle the truth about what happened to their goldfish.

Also, you conveniently gloss over the cost - following all these rules comes at the obvious cost of people having to live in fear of eternal punishment (e.g. thought crimes), and people possibly losing their lives (e.g. refusing blood transfusions).
I would argue that people would be better off not throwing their lives away.

[Atwood]

Originally posted by lospeceslocos:

-snipped for brevity-

Pretty much. You don't need religion to be evil. It's just an easy excuse. An idea that, until touched by human hands and warped by human minds, can do nothing and change nothing. Humanity is inherently evil and will seek to hate, to kill, and to destroy as it sees fit regardless of the reasons or circumstances.

On topic, I like the idea mentioned earlier in the thread of religions based around the AI Storytellers. Maybe in addition to some other, randomly generated religions. No need to go into the real world on this one, here.

[NixBoxDone]

"Inherently evil". Yeah, sure. That's why we have a stable society built around cooperation and the common good - because everybody is actually a spree killer just waiting to be given a reason.

o.o

And yeah, real religions is just asking to be flamed at this point in time.

[🥇 Xaxoon 🥇]

Religion sux, in any ways, no matter which one. All over the world people get killed since the early beginning of the mankind because of religion. So, i hate that Mumbo Jumbo in reallife, i dont need it in a game.

Everybody should believe in what ever he want, but in my personal opinion, i think people believing in a good believe in santa clause too...

[OriginalFireup]

Originally posted by Xaxoon:

Religion sux, in any ways, no matter which one. All over the world people get killed since the early beginning of the mankind because of religion. So, i hate that Mumbo Jumbo in reallife, i dont need it in a game.

Everybody should believe in what ever he want, but in my personal opinion, i think people believing in a good believe in santa clause too...

Erm, have you people forgotten we're talking about a game not real life?

Theres alot of people who think slavery/organ harvesting/cannibalism are bad in real life, but ingame its fine.

[Atwood]

Originally posted by NixBoxDone:

"Inherently evil". Yeah, sure. That's why we have a stable society built around cooperation and the common good - because everybody is actually a spree killer just waiting to be given a reason.

o.o

And yeah, real religions is just asking to be flamed at this point in time.

It'd take forever to explain my viewpoint for sufficient understanding to be attained, but suffice to say they don't have to be a mass murderer for me to consider someone evil. They just have to consider themselves, their heritage, their ideas, or anything else about themselves as superior to someone else. This the truest, most perfect evil that dwells within the heart of humanity. It is what leads humanity down all of its worst paths.

[Knight9910]

Originally posted by AlexMBrennan:

Yeah, and how it gives utterly crappy people reason to do something better with their lives, provides hope and meaning to people who have none... so useless!

You are correct, if you assume that all humans are like little children who can't handle the truth about what happened to their goldfish.

Also, you conveniently gloss over the cost - following all these rules comes at the obvious cost of people having to live in fear of eternal punishment (e.g. thought crimes), and people possibly losing their lives (e.g. refusing blood transfusions).
I would argue that people would be better off not throwing their lives away.

The sad fact is that most human beings basically ARE like little children. They're not inherently evil, no, but they are selfish and simple-minded. You say that nobody has ever found a reason to be good in religion, but I can name you actual people that I have known personally who were complete scum before they found religion and turned it around.

As for this so-called cost...

Well, I'd be remiss if I didn't point out first that the majority of religious people in the world do NOT believe in Hell, nor do they believe in denying blood transfusions... but aside from that...

I also believe that people shouldn't throw their lives away needlessly. When I hear my Jehovah's Witness aunt tell me about how she refuses to take an active role in politics or even to vote because the Bible says "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" that upsets me. It's such a waste, because she's honest and moral and should be taking a role in politics and it sucks that she's letting herself be silenced because of some out-of-context quote that never meant what her church says it means.

It also upset me when my cousin stole $3,000 dollars from our grandmother to buy cocaine, totalled two of her cars, almost got her house burned down by drug dealers, was sent to prison, was given a second chance by being given over to my mother's custody, then broke parole and went into hiding because he didn't want to follow the (frankly ecxtremely lenient) 10 PM curfew she gave him.

It also upsets me that he's like that because of his own mother (not the same aunt from before, a different aunt) who let him do whatever he wanted and fed him booze every night as a child to put him to sleep.

And it upsets me when they both whine about how everyone is being judgmental and how they're totally fine and should be allowed to destroy their own lives and the lives of everyone around them because "freedom!"

The laws of morality exist for a reason. It's not because some guy wrote some stuff down 2,000 years ago and people read it today and are like "that sounds cool, let's do it!" It's definitely not about proving how wonderful you are. No. The laws of morality exist because - and I shouldn't need to explain this to you - EVIL HURTS PEOPLE.

Don't get me wrong. I agree that freedom is a great thing, and everyone should have the chance to be free. But freedom isn't a right or a privilege... it's a responsibility. If you prove yourself unable to handle that responsibility, then it's taken away from you, no matter how much you whine.

So to answer your question, what is the cost of obeying the laws of morality? The cost is that you have to stop doing the evil ♥♥♥♥ you shouldn't have been doing in the first place.

You could argue that an individual rule is wrong and should be changed or done away with and depending on the rule in question, I might agree with you. And yes, the major problem of religion is that you don't get to choose which rules to follow, you have to obey all of them because the church's word is absolute.

But a life without SOME moral code is not a life of fun and freedom... it's a life of fear, pain, and hopelessness.

Originally posted by Kajin:

It'd take forever to explain my viewpoint for sufficient understanding to be attained, but suffice to say they don't have to be a mass murderer for me to consider someone evil. They just have to consider themselves, their heritage, their ideas, or anything else about themselves as superior to someone else. This the truest, most perfect evil that dwells within the heart of humanity. It is what leads humanity down all of its worst paths.

What you're talking about is pride. You might recognize that as one of the seven deadly sins, so named because they motivate people to perform further sins, so that 1 sin can become 1000 sins. You see, you're not talking about religion here, you're talking about one of the big things religion is against.

But furthermore... what about the other sins? Lust? Gluttony? Heck, what about GREED? I would argue that far more evil has been committed in the name of making a dollar than has ever been done in the name of chauvinism.

[Atwood]

Originally posted by lospeceslocos:

Originally posted by Kajin:

It'd take forever to explain my viewpoint for sufficient understanding to be attained, but suffice to say they don't have to be a mass murderer for me to consider someone evil. They just have to consider themselves, their heritage, their ideas, or anything else about themselves as superior to someone else. This the truest, most perfect evil that dwells within the heart of humanity. It is what leads humanity down all of its worst paths.

What you're talking about is pride. You might recognize that as one of the seven deadly sins, so named because they motivate people to perform further sins, so that 1 sin can become 1000 sins. You see, you're not talking about religion here, you're talking about one of the big things religion is against.

But furthermore... what about the other sins? Lust? Gluttony? Heck, what about GREED? I would argue that far more evil has been committed in the name of making a dollar than has ever been done in the name of chauvinism.

Lust and Gluttony are non issues these days. Our healthcare and food production is at a level where the problems our ancestors were trying to mitigate by naming these as sins aren't so much problems anymore (though you should still be careful). I'd also say that pride is a necessity, tempered by humility, because without pride in oneself and one's work how can one be motivated to do anything or keep oneself from being taken advantage of?

If I were to label a sin to my belief of humanity's evil, it would have to be wraith. When one organizes around a belief, an idea, or a border, it is wraith that brings us to hate those that believe different, who think different, who live different. Anger is the single most seductive emotion one can experience. People go out of their way to be angry and they rally around their chosen excuse and use it to fuel the fires of their anger. When people rally around their chosen excuse, wraith is at its most potent and tragedy is not far behind.

Greed is also pretty devastating, but I consider that more of a side issue.

[OriginalFireup]

Originally posted by William Walrus:

-snipped-

Atheists, naturally, will be the easiest to please without religion in place, leaving the game entirely the same. However, they won't have the joy boost that the three faiths would have.

Remeber when the op said that?
Remeber how we're having a huge discussion about why religion would/wouldnt taint this game?

[Knight9910]

Gluttony is less significant these days, yeah, since (at least in first world countries) we have enough food for everyone. But between STDs - some of which are incurable by modern medicine - plus unwanted pregnancy, rape, and let's not forget cheating... lust is still very much a problem. Not as much as, say, wrath, but it's up there.

(EDIT: Well, since Steam censors the word "rape", let's say... "forced sexual intercourse.")

Wrath is, as you say, a seductive one to fall into because it never feels like a sin when you're doing it. It usually feels just at the time, and only feels bad after the fact. It's also the second easiest for Joe Average to fall into. (The first easiest is, of course, sloth since all you have to do to be guilty of sloth is nothing at all.)

However, if you think greed is a side issue, then I'd argue you haven't been paying attention to current events. Wrath didn't wreck our economy. Wrath didn't give 80% of the wealth to 1% of the population. The thing is... wrath is flashy, but it's short term. Greed stretches it out, plays the long con. Wrath can destroy one life in an instant, while greed can destroy billions... but greed takes longer, which is why it might look like "just a side issue" if you're not looking at the big picture.

On the other hand... you could also argue that a greedy or prideful person is at least easier to deal with. You can reason with a greedy person; as long as they're getting what they want they don't care about you. You can't reason with a person who's just pissed off and ready to make someone suffer.

Still... point is, I'd not call greed a "side issue" at all.

[ministrog]

I'll pass on the religious and political debate for another time. Mainly because I've read or heard them all debated before. Nothing new here so far.

Wanted to put my thoughts out that I'd like to see religion (generated ones) in Rimworld. My real question is whether they should affect create new game mechanics. Skyrim/Oblivion has it's religious "side-quests" like the dark brotherhood or mage guild. I especially liked fallout 3's Child of Atom priest rant though it never had a faction you could join. There was something so quirky, rediculous but ultimately charming about the way EOS and Fallout series handled religion.

When I read the art pieces in Rimworld, I get the same feeling. I hope religion could follow the same thought process, if the dev decides to put it in.

[Atwood]

Originally posted by lospeceslocos:

Gluttony is less significant these days, yeah, since (at least in first world countries) we have enough food for everyone. But between STDs - some of which are incurable by modern medicine - plus unwanted pregnancy, rape, and let's not forget cheating... lust is still very much a problem. Not as much as, say, wrath, but it's up there.

(EDIT: Well, since Steam censors the word "rape", let's say... "forced sexual intercourse.")

Wrath is, as you say, a seductive one to fall into because it never feels like a sin when you're doing it. It usually feels just at the time, and only feels bad after the fact. It's also the second easiest for Joe Average to fall into. (The first easiest is, of course, sloth since all you have to do to be guilty of sloth is nothing at all.)

However, if you think greed is a side issue, then I'd argue you haven't been paying attention to current events. Wrath didn't wreck our economy. Wrath didn't give 80% of the wealth to 1% of the population. The thing is... wrath is flashy, but it's short term. Greed stretches it out, plays the long con. Wrath can destroy one life in an instant, while greed can destroy billions... but greed takes longer, which is why it might look like "just a side issue" if you're not looking at the big picture.

On the other hand... you could also argue that a greedy or prideful person is at least easier to deal with. You can reason with a greedy person; as long as they're getting what they want they don't care about you. You can't reason with a person who's just pissed off and ready to make someone suffer.

Still... point is, I'd not call greed a "side issue" at all.

Wrath is what's keeping us from fixing the issues caused by greed, though. Both political parties in the U.S. hate each other so much that they absolutely refuse to cooperate on any matter, regardless of what that matter might be or how much they might secretly agree with each other about what needs to be done. This tribalism makes all other problems worse. If everyone could sit down and spend five minutes talking with each other about what to do and how to do it, the people fueld by greed wouldn't be half as effective as they could be.

There will always be people who are greedy, but the wrath that binds us all and keeps us from cooperating with each other makes all other problems far worse than they should be.

[Knight9910]

In the case of political infighting, it's hard to tell where the wrath angle ("♥♥♥♥ that guy, I won't work with him!") and the pride angle ("I know better than everyone and won't listen to any of them!") and the greed angle ("This special interest is paying me to vote against this urgently important bill, so that's what I'll do!") all separate from one another. In the end they're all to blame for keeping us from progressing.

Originally posted by Schrödinger:

There was something so quirky, rediculous but ultimately charming about the way EOS and Fallout series handled religion

I feel like Skyrim actually did a pretty good job of showing what a religious schism is like. The reason being that, ultimately, the issue at hand had far less to do with the religion itself than it had to do with mortal interests and prejudices.

The elves said Talos wasn't a god solely on the grounds that they view humans as worthless and incapable of ascension.

The humans said Talos was a god mostly on the grounds of it being a part of their heritage.

In the end it was less a religious issue and more an issue of racism.

[Dodsmania]

Religion has no place in the world, and not in rimworld