Fat vs Glutton - not the same thing, so why no "fat trait"?

[Spartanlemur]

Fat is not the same as a glutton. Glutton is an excessively greedy eater while fat refers to someone's waistline.

I would regard myself a glutton but most certainly not fat. Yes, I eat an awful lot of food, but as I am also a keen sportsman, my waistline remains trim. A medieval king who enjoyed sport and often travelled with troops to battle would probably remain trim, as would people who are simply genetically inclined not to be fat.

So what would I like to see?

- A "fat" trait implemented into the game in some way or form, possibly linked to glutton.

I currently see gluttonous characters as fat when I know this may not be the case, so it would be nice to see a trait confirming it. The trait could even be linked to the "fat" genetic chins/cheeks.

Thoughts on this?

 

[Losthief]

Fat is not the same as a glutton. Glutton is an excessively greedy eater while fat refers to someone's waistline.

I would regard myself a glutton but most certainly not fat. Yes, I eat an awful lot of food, but as I am also a keen sportsman, my waistline remains trim. A medieval king who enjoyed sport and often travelled with troops to battle would probably remain trim, as would people who are simply genetically inclined not to be fat.

So what would I like to see?

- A "fat" trait implemented into the game in some way or form, possibly linked to glutton.

I currently see gluttonous characters as fat when I know this may not be the case, so it would be nice to see a trait confirming it. The trait could even be linked to the "fat" genetic chins/cheeks.

Thoughts on this?

being 'fat' in medieval times meant something different than it does today. Most people weren't fat then not because of exercise/proper diet/genes, but lack of sustenance and food. Being portly was a sign of wealth and could even be 'attractive' in the opposite sex.

Being a glutton is a universal sign of being over-indulgent. I take it to mean in this game as 'taking away from the needy' in order to pleasure yourself (either wealth, food, entertainment, etc etc) not just a relation to body weight.

 

[tuareg109]

I like it! Could sometimes be in the form of a temporary modifier.

Fat trait/modifier:
-1 diplomacy
-3 martial
+2 stewardship
+3 learning
-0.02 prestige/month
-5 to opinion of all non-"Chubby Chasers"
-10% leader army movement
Increased chance of related "accidents" (falling of the balcony, etc.)
Less of a health malus in dungeons and oubliettes

"Fat Hater" trait/modifier:
-25 opinion of all Fat characters

"Chubby Chaser" trait/modifier:
+25 opinion of all Fat characters of attractive gender (female if male heterosexual, male if male homosexual, etc.)
+15% fertility if married to Fat character

 

[tuareg109]

Oh!
And Fat Hater and Chubby Chaser could be tied in with that event..."But, my dear lady, you ARE fat!"
Perhaps upbringing and obviously other traits (slothful, gluttonous, content, craven, depressed [maybe to all, of course]) determine chance of all three traits/modifiers above.

 

[Spartanlemur]

being 'fat' in medieval times meant something different than it does today. Most people weren't fat then not because of exercise/proper diet/genes, but lack of sustenance and food. Being portly was a sign of wealth and could even be 'attractive' in the opposite sex.
Indeed waistline is very important, as regardless of "weak" or "strong", it can have an impact on health and day to day performance (King Robert in Game of Thrones, for example).
Being a glutton is a universal sign of being over-indulgent. I take it to mean in this game as 'taking away from the needy' in order to pleasure yourself (either wealth, food, entertainment, etc etc) not just a relation to body weight.

Yes, but we're referring to kings and queens here, and not merchants and peasants. Most kings and queens had access to enough food to make them fat, and as they came from wealthy backgrounds, I think they'd find someone at a normal size preferable to someone who was frail or fat. Both are less healthy than a normal waistline and as a result, we are genetically programmed to prefer those who are fit over those who are over or under weight.

Oh!
And Fat Hater and Chubby Chaser could be tied in with that event..."But, my dear lady, you ARE fat!"
Perhaps upbringing and obviously other traits (slothful, gluttonous, content, craven, depressed [maybe to all, of course]) determine chance of all three traits/modifiers above.

I love this and the previous idea. The trait would be a great basis for some humorous events.

 

[tuareg109]

I love this and the previous idea. The trait would be a great basis for some humorous events.

Imagine an event chain:
I caught my grandson Conn staring at the scullion maid's bosom for quite some time yesterday.
"Conn," I said loudly, nearly in his ear, "Control yourself."
The boy stuttered something about his brothers and stalked off, muttering.

The next week the boy had the audacity to pinch her bottom!
"You knave!" I scold him. "What got you to do that?"
"Grandfather," he pleads, looking into my eyes, "I like big butts and I cannot lie."


Further mechanics to the whole Fat situation are the gaining/losing of certain traits affecting whether a character will become/stop being Fat.
Long military campaigns, short campaigns with high attrition, and being on the starving side of a siege should make your character fit again.

 

[Spartanlemur]

Imagine an event chain:
I caught my grandson Conn staring at the scullion maid's bosom for quite some time yesterday.
"Conn," I said loudly, nearly in his ear, "Control yourself."
The boy stuttered something about his brothers and stalked off, muttering.

The next week the boy had the audacity to pinch her bottom!
"You knave!" I scold him. "What got you to do that?"
"Grandfather," he pleads, looking into my eyes, "I like big butts and I cannot lie."


Further mechanics to the whole Fat situation are the gaining/losing of certain traits affecting whether a character will become/stop being Fat.
Long military campaigns, short campaigns with high attrition, and being on the starving side of a siege should make your character fit again.

40% chance of honesty trait
Conn gains "chubby chaser" trait XD

This made me laugh.

 

[Lord Finnish]

Just my two cents but I think you should use "obese" instead of "fat". Wouldn't sound so vulgar.

 

[cybrxkhan]

The reason a difference isn't made is probably because the devs didn't want too many similar traits. For instance, we could have an "honorable" trait - but that would overlap with just, honest, kind, brave, and others. So I think "gluttonous" in-game is just a vague catch-all trait for both food-lovers and actual obese people who got obese because they eat a lot.

That said, a fat trait would be interesting, particularly as a health trait.

 

[Vindahl]

There are already Fat people, but not as a trait, it is part of their genetic... They are visually fat, and others are thin...
Though I would say that it would be nice that some traits influenced that certain genetic code, that made you look fat or thin...

Same thing, I see no reason for a trait like "ugly" or "attractive", when it is clearly to look if they are ugly or not visually... It annoys me that when I have a standard goodlooking person with the trait Ugly! Or a fat crosseyed person who hold the trait attractive... Those should not be traits in my eyes...

 

[unmerged(527492)]

How reactive are portraits to traits? I think that slothful gluttons should be more likely to have fat portraits.

 

[Vindahl]

How reactive are portraits to traits? I think that slothful gluttons should be more likely to have fat portraits.

Thats the point! I dont think they have ANY influence what so ever... The portrait is defined from birth, so if you gain traits later, they will not change anything...

 

[WankoStankins]

Just thinking of the fat faces in ck2 made me laugh. I've never seen triple chins like that in real life...

 

[Spartanlemur]

Thats the point! I dont think they have ANY influence what so ever... The portrait is defined from birth, so if you gain traits later, they will not change anything...

So perhaps fat could be a genetic trait? There is evidence that a high tendency towards obesity is hereditary after all.

 

[tuareg109]

Just my two cents but I think you should use "obese" instead of "fat". Wouldn't sound so vulgar.

The term "obese" IMHO is too scientific to be used as a trait. We could use maybe "corpulent".

Just thinking of the fat faces in ck2 made me laugh. I've never seen triple chins like that in real life...

In your sig: "Nationality: Yankee"
Yeah, I think you have....
You might've seen this very sad picture before (though admittedly it COULD be somewhere else in the world):
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7BMt80EDwyE/UDei0J-W9lI/AAAAAAAAAOw/g68E8NzXuoo/s1600/Fat+kids.jpg

I'm not being America-phobic or anything, I am American; I'm just saying.

 

[Lord Finnish]

We could use maybe "corpulent".

To be honest that's the first time I ever hear that word.

 

[Arko]

Thats the point! I dont think they have ANY influence what so ever... The portrait is defined from birth, so if you gain traits later, they will not change anything...

how about the blinded trait ? maybe an hardcoded thing but it definetely changes the portrait. maybe an hope there ?

glutton : a now pretty unused definition is : person who eats all without distinction.
No distinction both in the nature of what is eaten and the quantity eaten. to understand litteraly here : a swine.
I don't know if this meaning is as ancient as medieval but it is defenitly less gentle than today's definition. and probably not a sign of prestige

 

[Lwantssugar]

So if a characters weight is tied to military campaigns then Iberians, Greeks and Turkish Muslims should be perpetually fit unless one side wins out. It could reflect in your reign: if a king has had a peaceful reign chances are he's going to gain some weight, if he's out with the army all the time it will go down. Also maybe strong character would be universally fit unless they picked up sloth or something. Final idea is being overweight could give an opinion and fertility bonus with your spouse. Because up untill 100 years ago of so, fat was sexy, it meant you had money and power, you weren't just some lowly peasant plowing a field, or a blue collar worker. You were important, you were somebody. This concept continued on as late as the early 20th century: look at pictures of Marylin Monroe, she looks obese compared to modern underwear models.
So while being strong and fit in game could give a boost of stats (health, martial, possibly more difficult to assassinate) being overweight while not gluttonus could give boosts to opinion and fertility

 

[tuareg109]

So if a characters weight is tied to military campaigns then Iberians, Greeks and Turkish Muslims should be perpetually fit unless one side wins out. It could reflect in your reign: if a king has had a peaceful reign chances are he's going to gain some weight, if he's out with the army all the time it will go down. Also maybe strong character would be universally fit unless they picked up sloth or something. Final idea is being overweight could give an opinion and fertility bonus with your spouse. Because up untill 100 years ago of so, fat was sexy, it meant you had money and power, you weren't just some lowly peasant plowing a field, or a blue collar worker. You were important, you were somebody. This concept continued on as late as the early 20th century: look at pictures of Marylin Monroe, she looks obese compared to modern underwear models.
So while being strong and fit in game could give a boost of stats (health, martial, possibly more difficult to assassinate) being overweight while not gluttonus could give boosts to opinion and fertility

No, you misunderstood me. Weight isn't tied to campaigns per se, but a ruler with high Martial and who constantly leads his own armies will have a higher chance of losing weight if he IS fat than a fat ruler who just sits on his throne all the time. Thus there could be an Iberian or Turkish count or duke who is fat, and never leads his own armies; he has a smaller chance of losing the fat trait.
As to the "100 years ago, fat was sexy" thing, you're mixing up "fat" and "plump". By fat I mean literally unhealthy, damaging to one's health and detrimental to any attempted physical activity. I don't know where you got the idea that Marilyn Monroe could ever be considered "obese". By your definition, professional female volleyball players are obese; yet, they are fitter than most people in the world.
Understand what I mean now, about "fat" being disgustingly, detrimentally fat (as Wyman Manderly is depicted in A Song of Ice and Fire, for example), and a person who is plump but could still be considered some sort of sportsman (like Henry VIII, just look at the guy's calves)?

 

[Spartanlemur]

Up untill 100 years ago of so, fat was sexy, it meant you had money and power, you weren't just some lowly peasant plowing a field, or a blue collar worker. You were important, you were somebody

As I said before, this is true for the lower classes (peasants and merchants), but was not necessarily true for the nobility, who were all rich. They were two different worlds with two different visions of attractiveness. Look at the waistline of Aphrodite in the 1486 painting "the birth of Venus": she is not fat, nor skinny, but is instead very slightly curvy, so normal weight. Look also at the judgement of Paris (1528) by Lucas Cranach the elder to see yet more women of normal (if slightly skinny) weight.
As for men, most seem to be muscly or unfit at normal weight in Renaissance paintings. Look at Jesus in essentially every piece of Medieval art (the pinnacle of male medieval beauty) and you'll see that he is ALWAYS portrayed with a normal waistline, and never fat.
Yes, for the starving peasant a fat person would imply wealth, but beauty is

a). subjective (some people find fatness attractive, as others find old age, extreme height and extreme shortness also attractive) and

b). has not really changed since we were jumping around as apes. The muscly and fit are better survivors than the fat or anorexic and so they have always been viewed as more beautiful (don't even get me started on ancient Roman/Greek art).

So fat people were only as beautiful as 80 year old billionaires seem to young women from poor backgrounds today, as it often was associated with wealth.

Fat is a negative trait in the eyes of the opposite sex, and it harms health, fertility and martial ability, without a doubt.