Families, birth, pregnancies - generations

[SekoETC]

Game-technically sex has no other function than conceiving children, unless we get a happiness-meter, or an urge to satisfy oneself sexually. People can rp sex for fun for as long as they like, but it doesn't require a technical bond.

And people could adopt newspawns (or older characters) but that wouldn't make them genetically their child. And I've never heard of someone adopting anyone straight from spawning, cause the chance is really that the person doesn't play along or turns out to be someone whose playing style you hate.

I keep wondering why people assume that kids under 20 or 15 or 13 could not be worth playing. I have memories from when I was around 4 years old, and more complex memories from ever since I was 6. And when I was 6, I understood most of things (although not what comes when you combine a square and a black object) and I was pissed sometimes that people wouldn't understand me. So don't let anyone say that a child of that age could not be RPed. Now most people might RP them too childish - I never felt childish when I was a child, I do only now - but I don't think that would be a flaw. Cantrians age far too fast, I wish mine could've started a few years early so that they wouldn't be so old.

[Missy]

I can't tell you how many times one of my characters has considered another character like a child. But we're not allowed to rp that they truly are. (Or you can and the majority of people will either say A, you're cheating, is that your own char? B Their chars will think yours are crazy.) I've seen situations where it has worked--I was actually very lucky. Some person spawned and said "Who are my parents?" lol So my char said, "I AM!" But I can't tell you how incredibly lame that was. Furthermore the arguments that existed after he did, "How can you be blank---and---blah's parent when we're spawned? We're not born." So it was explained that it happened a long time ago, before we'd arrived on this land and the people still said, "I just don't buy that."

I really dislike that people are so against babies/ability to form familes being implemented and that it should be able to be done IC, but when you do it IC'ly it's not recognized.

I have another character who has several people that he would call children and there's absolutely no way to tell them that without sounding like some kind of phony. Everyone "knows" there are no CHILDREN in Cantr. And so even the people considered children at times don't acknowledge that's how another character thinks of them. Instead you get, "you're a great friend." Society isn't society without the children and the bonds that would be if there were children.

I become half afraid to use terms "like a son," for fear that someone will say, "there's no such thing."

[Missy]

Add:

Onlookers see you giving special attention to this one character. They don't see that there is some bond, they just see that you' favor another char. Try explaining why you do to an entire town? Just not happening.

Try explaining to your chars wife why you're protective over this newspawn without saying "Because I think of her like a daughter," but still trying to imply that there's some sort of bond? And do it without making the chars wife think that yours is attracted to the newspawn. Just not happening.

[sanchez]

I actually have a char who has at times referred to another as his father, acknowledging a paternal relationship and also the older man's status in his town. But in no way does it represent a blood relation, and there certainly is no mother. What I'm against is limiting the expression of these bonds, which happens in all the proposals, and mechanising them so they are forced.

[Nakranoth]

I actually have a char who has at times referred to another as his father, acknowledging a paternal relationship and also the older man's status in his town. But in no way does it represent a blood relation, and there certainly is no mother. What I'm against is limiting the expression of these bonds, which happens in all the proposals, and mechanising them so they are forced.

I'm going to have to disagree here... IRL, I have parents... a pair of them that I was born to... however, I've become so much part of my best friend's family, that his parents are just as much parents to me as my own... having blood ties doesn't add any restrictions, only new possible social structures.

[the_antisocial_hermit]

Yea, as I said previously, having blood bonds doesn't limit having the other bonds at all. It's a new layer. It's only those that choose to go the route of children (either as parents or playing them) that will form the new ties. If it's optional, your chars won't have to change their ties nor form the new ones.

[Kreed]

Having "blood" relationships in the game can only be a good thing, especially as the dynamic naming system will always be an opt out. Its the best of both!

[sanchez]

In an attempt to avoid the minefield of issues on which most players will never agree I make the following alternative parenting proposal:

Voluntary known single parent genetics of 20yr old spawns.

The spawn system can work the same as it does now with the only change that players can opt to 1) spawn with a known parent, or 2) be a known parent.

Parenthood determines half your genetic skill/strength attributes (as well as 'race' if implemented), with the other half determined by random contribution from the local population. This can avoid the ugliness of eugenics, while similarly obviating mechanised reference to sex and gender. Couples, of course, gay and straight and polyamorous, will be free to rp the complexities of their relationships, and can each sign up as a potential known parent, though only one will have a known contribution.

This also means the the only new feature necessary would be a notice upon spawning that X made a contribution to your genetics, and X would get a similar message. The rest left to rp.

[Doug R.]

Sanchez,

That's all well and good for spawnlings, but it ignores younger children, something which I would very much like to see in the game. Two characters should be able to create a child together.

- It should be an object until it is 3 that needs to be taken care of
- At three, an experienced player can take them over (yes, limit it to experienced players.)
- Skills progress to their 20 year level over time with no training, or faster if they practice.

That's really all there should be to it.

[the_antisocial_hermit]

What would be the definition of "experienced" player? That's something that's a little ambiguous. Is a player experienced after 20 characters? 10? 5? Can't go by what someone knows of a player and their characters, because that leaves out a lot of great players out there and takes away anonymity (because not that many people choose to reveal chars or participate out of the game in any way to be able to evaluate). And why limit it from people that may be really good at it, even though they haven't played that long?

Maybe you mean something like not letting new accounts be able to create a child character for a certain amount of time, and that would be fine, but that doesn't determine whether a player is experienced or not (people that may have just started an account aren't necessarily inexperienced; we do have a lot of players that played for awhile, quit for awhile and come back).

And I think it should be an object a bit longer than 3. Five at the earliest... ehh.

[deadboy]

I think that three is the right number, as it is in the todeller years when the child at least has enough brain power to be played. I also think that experienced should be based on how long the account has been opened. From experience, I think that you should have to have played a character beyond the age of thirty to spawn a child. In 200 days of playing without losing your characters, a respectable level of experience has been gained, and this also means that for those that quit and come back they wouldn't have to wait -too- long if they wanted to play a child

[SekoETC]

Yeah, three sounds fine. Bear in mind that the parents must already go through 60 days of no human response. Some things like crying and smiling could be programmed but they couldn't keep up the illusion for very long.

I did most of my newbie screwups during my first month in the game, after that not so much. But the age of thirty does sound like a good round number, and even the slowest players must've learned the ropes if they've hung along for that long.

Edit: I think you could wait up to 5 but that would mean risking the chance that someone else "snatches" the character in front of your nose.

One thing I would find kinda cool was if you could see the status (health, hunger), age and gender of unplayed children and you could then pick one from the list, rather than being assigned randomly. (Someone might want to play a challenging/abused child.) But that might give room for exploitations, at least if it showed the exact percentage - someone might hit their child and then tell a person off-game "It's the one with 81% health" - with a small number of children available it's likely that there wouldn't be two kids with the same percentage of health.

[Arlequin]

*I bet I'm gonna repeat something said already, well, whatever*

If you and a partner travelled far away to another island and want to start a population there, you build a baby bed with some fur and hides. The baby bed is used once and it increases the chance of receiving a new spawn.

Towns can compete to receive newspawns by builing more beds. Or they can control their population by building none. They can also put them aboard a ship and drop them in the future colony for a faster population grow.

[SekoETC]

Why would a bed increase spawning? I don't see the logic in that.

[notsure]

A bed ----- an increase in spawning ------?

Nah, I don't get it, either.

notsure