[PERSONAL_MATTER] seems to be a incomplete feature as no affected cultural member unit (sourced within the civ) will act differently to a positive value like [ACCEPTABLE] because they dont have the capacity to have a different opinion which is relevant to the open ended nature of the ethic.
So the solution i am suggesting is that each individual unit has as part of their mind screen their personal opinion and standing on the cultural values (which aren't already covered by normal values) defined in their entity with the same options to gauge them to have largely static or flexible opinions on what they think in regards to cannibals, or killing animals etc.- Goblins are automatically assigned [PERSONAL_MATTER] for a majority of default raws & [REQUIRED] for killing interactions with neutrals & 'enemies' as a example where this issue is turning up & affecting gameplay in a questionable way
> Humans have variable values, so it would be good for flavor if they could have slightly variable personal values too (the entity base values remains the same, but the personal values influences the site leader into commiting certain actions or decreeing adjustments to laws). They are very ambitious, and it would keep dwarf players on their toes between the very variable line of honorable & dishonourable monarchs the humans have with differing reactionary relations to dwarves,
a bad monarch might aggressively covet dwarf lands or do something foolish like steal a artifact- Ethics could be conveyed to influence people over books much like what people thought of the new mind system prior to the tavern update, necromancer books could be full of dangerous ideas if it falls into the wrong hands of a person who is liable to be interested in it, directly turning them to foreign gods and bizarre practices slowly besides the magical secret it contains.
There are only few set circumstances where this feature is actually working as intended> Personal relations with other entity members (not simulated in worldgen law and punishment) can affect the outcome, as personal matters of entity killing means when combat is enaged between two enemies, it will escalate to a lethal fight purely because they are mutual enemies or one of the participants hates the other enough.
> Based on terrible scholarship values, goblins who want to become dancers or writers have to learn the craft by taking up apprenticeships with individuals willing to teach them often in different civs meaning they move about in worldgen or begin a very slow journey making terribly written books/performances by themselves.
> Lying is the only defined value relevant to the ethic [ETHIC:LYING:PERSONAL_MATTER], and many wars will be triggered about truthfulness when they disagree spurred on by the leader of the civilisation, telling us this feature isn't working in the full capacity.
Now wars do erupt over ethic values, but that is largely defined by the entity level status of how one civ views another to find a cause in the difference between the two. Lying on the other hand is decided by what the monarch thinks of it, and adding more ethic values might balance the reasons & judgement of civs before they go to war and properly moderate "foreign policy" as well as cultural imperialism on others after successive wars defining the evolution of ages as civilizations rise & fall then get promptly forgotten about.
Situations this new bugfix/change would allow> Putting a new head of state/site in charge of the local [RULES_FROM_SITE] noble with ethics they are happy with as a peace deal or puppeting the ruler altogether to end the wars and settle the dispute.
Read below for the potential to put some really bad eggs on the throne.> People pursuing their own conflicts of interests (power = conspiracies against others and above them) with others or avenging grudges by maliciously sending competitors and enemies to be punished (or murdering/torturing them). Leaves the door open to murderous monarchs securing their own power by having challengers and heirs imprisoned or killed based off the power value & [POWER] creatures having it innate.
> For being against your own cultural ethics will bring a negative opinion of the leader, and additionally committing *public* acts that violate ethics based off personal power and juristiction, the site leader can be branded a tyrant even if they see themselves as a saviour of the realm and the rightful ruler of the land.
- A good example is Alan Rickman's portrayal of the Sheriff of Nottingham, a heretic corrupt & murderous individual who is dispised by the public but non the less tries to keep up appearances to stop causing public outrage and uprising (all the while plotting while only as a lowly land owner baron, to usurp his brother the king)
See example: Calling off festivities because they don't like it (making merriment populace unhappy), and making threats to their nemesis (which can be the player by own intuition to free the peasants or contracted via a quest) to use their own seated power to torture & kill them.
> A dwarf that kills another dwarf in a fight because they have the ethics values of a potential murderer (agrees with killing own race & assault) after a very heated arguement with a grudge will be put to the hammerer in a dwarven civilisation, though the local authority may end up pardoning that particularly important person to self interest or put a punishment exempt noble (overriding acceptable guidelines much to horror of the rest of populace) to death because they are jaded and view the accused as a enemy/nemesis.
The additional factor of values (law, honor, tradition etc.) make flying against your ethics harder but also greater respect and reputation for being consistent, people will trust dwarves to uphold oaths the law and other things to upmost levels.
> Personal_Matter doesn't necessarily legitimize certain activities but it does make changes in policy a lot less incremental unless it conflicts heavily with the personal ethic/general values. Forcefully disallowing a acceptable action or allowing a unacceptable/unthinkable action would cause much more public uproar.
- Only if sanctioned like in the [Kill_Neutral] tags for dwarves would be that based on importance (noble precedence) the highest ranking person on site (unless the monarch was informed and got a say and then retroactively punished the person who did it) has the undisputed authority to commit the action in the place of [PERSONAL_MATTER] without major public objection.
Phew, thats more than i wanted to write, originally i had this idea from a issue report i was going to write for mantis then retracted, i hope it was a enjoyable read.
Author
Topic: [Bugfix/Incomplete feature fix] Ethic values to complete [PERSONAL_MATTER]'s (Read 1162 times)