Why no option for single sex empires?

[Zoomun]

It's annoying that my feudal society that has allowed only one gender to inherit for hundreds or thousands of years suddenly decides that the other gender can inherit. They wouldn't just change their succession because they made it to space. It also annoys me that while playing imperial humans my heir can be white while my leader is black or the other way around. They are clearly not closely related. I have no problem with having leaders of other races but having heirs just makes it hard to roleplay.

 

[Xshu]

Well in the case of the Asari they can reproduce with themselves. It just became more desirable in their culture to reproduce with aliens because it's seen as incorporating desirable traits from other species into their own. As much as I adore Mass Effect it is one of the sillier aspects of its lore, because how many Asari are there? And you're telling me the majority of them choose to reproduce with aliens? On the idea of supply and demand alone for potential partners that seems dubious. It's like no one knowing what Quarians look like. Did no one have cameras of any kind before humans showed up?

I'm pretty sure in the lore it's entirely possible to just look up what Quarians look like on the extranet. It's only the player that's kept from ever actually seeing them until the third game. As for the Asari, remember that their lifespans are ridiculous. Since their numbers are consistent with the other races, the demand for partners actually makes sense: they can't be having as many children as the other races or they would have run into major overpopulation problems as their people all have a bunch of kids and then just continue not dying for another 800 years.

 

[Stars_and_Bars]

It seems like a glaring oversight, in a science fiction simulator, that there is no option for female or male only empires. Not even an option for matrilineal or patrilineal rulers, which seems like an even bigger omission!

Does anyone know if there is a specific reason for this, or is it just an oversight from the devs?

And yes, in case anyone leaps to mention it, single-sex civs are a pretty standard trope in sci fi, the most obvious to my mind being the Tleilaxu from the Dune series. There are many examples. And I really want to be able to make a Stellaris empire of despotic slaving Dominatrixes!

Maybe because most species portraits don't even have gender dimorphism and male/female differences have zero gameplay differences?

 

[bmt17]

For just single sex empires a toggle to disable one gender or the other would be nice. Along those same lines I've also been asking for the ability to toggle on and off entire species portraits.

As far as only allowing leaders of one gender or the other this is something that I'm hoping will come in the upcoming internal politics patch that I'm also hoping exists. There are so many roleplaying possibilities and it's a bit tedious to keep console assassinating the heirs of my RP'ed monarchies until it finally rolls a female.

It would be nice but they don't necessarily have to nor do I expect them to rework the entire new pop system around genders when it comes to rights or living conditions, it could also be emulated by traits with certain bonuses and maluses for gender stratified societies.

 

[Shadowryche]

And yes, in case anyone leaps to mention it, single-sex civs are a pretty standard trope in sci fi, the most obvious to my mind being the Tleilaxu from the Dune series. There are many examples. And I really want to be able to make a Stellaris empire of despotic slaving Dominatrixes!

Not sure if you read through the whole series. The Tleilaxu's Axotl tanks were what they did to their females. A tank started to become non-functional or to old/reliable they'd grow another girl. Raise her to puberty, and turn her into another Axotl tank. Tleilaxu we just heavily genetically modified human beings.

 

[FleetingRain]

Tbh something I've always wanted was the ability to determine the amount of genders in the species/society (none-one-two-multiple) and sexual differentiation being a set of traits.

EDIT-- huh actually one gender wouldn't make sense lmao, so none-two-three-multiple I guess.

 

[stumason]

And I really want to be able to make a Stellaris empire of despotic slaving Dominatrixes!

Because you're a dirty, dirty man.... I like it

 

[Harlot]

I'm like 90% sure that, between the lines, that's what the Dev Clash "Church of Chains" is.

 

[InvisibleBison]

It also annoys me that while playing imperial humans my heir can be white while my leader is black or the other way around. They are clearly not closely related. I have no problem with having leaders of other races but having heirs just makes it hard to roleplay.

Mixed-race marriages are a thing, you know. As are adoptions.

 

[Duuk]

Mixed-race marriages are a thing, you know. As are adoptions.

Ok, but once the Emperor is black... the next Emperor suddenly being Chinese and the one after that being White and then suddenly back to black...

Worst... dynasty... ever.

 

[Bearjuden]

Ok, but once the Emperor is black... the next Emperor suddenly being Chinese and the one after that being White and then suddenly back to black...

Worst... dynasty... ever.

Could still be adoptions, as was cited. It could also be noble politicking. If one branch of the noble house out-maneuvres the others to get themselves lined up as successor, they may look nothing like the current ruler even if they are nominally the same dynasty.

Edit: not to say that the nobility system shouldn't be fleshed out, when characters get the overhaul they deserve I want to see noble houses and proper dynasties as well, and all of this can be looked at again. But in the interim, there are abstractions that resolve the issue.

 

[Zoomun]

Mixed-race marriages are a thing, you know. As are adoptions.

I know mixed race marriages are a thing but the difference between them makes them look unrelated. It is possible for them to look that different but unlikely. I personally think that by 2200 these families would have hundreds of members and adoptions probably wouldn't go over well with them.

 

[bmt17]

I know mixed race marriages are a thing but the difference between them makes them look unrelated. It is possible for them to look that different but unlikely. I personally think that by 2200 these families would have hundreds of members and adoptions probably wouldn't go over well with them.

Well after sufficient generations in a society where mixed race marriages are as common as they seem to be in the game(at least for the royal families) there really shouldn't be any white humans as we see it today or those who have really dark skin, traits like that would approach the median. There's always the possibility that the right genes could be rolled to make that happen but those cases would be outliers. If the game starts in 2200 and that does translate directly to our calendar then there might not have been enough time for that to occur but over time all humans would look more and more alike. That kind of bothers me from a roleplaying perspective but not enough to split hairs over.

All of that does assume however that monarchies are hereditary when it comes to succession, there are a number of RPing possibilities that could give your empire an heir not related closely or not at all to the current monarch.

Ultimately I doubt this is something that Paradox will mess with politically, or want to spend the time developing a complex system to manage. If it does bother you you might just want to use the console to kill the heir off until it rolls one that fits your story better.

I suppose that if you really wanted an explanation you can just go with designer babies, assume that parents sat down with geneticists and picked what racial traits they wanted their children to have. Cram that into your head cannon.

 

[Duuk]

Could still be adoptions, as was cited. It could also be noble politicking. If one branch of the noble house out-maneuvres the others to get themselves lined up as successor, they may look nothing like the current ruler even if they are nominally the same dynasty.

Edit: not to say that the nobility system shouldn't be fleshed out, when characters get the overhaul they deserve I want to see noble houses and proper dynasties as well, and all of this can be looked at again. But in the interim, there are abstractions that resolve the issue.

You're talking about an oligarchy or dictatorship, not an imperial authority (per the most common goverment forms). Especially if you have some form of noble aristocracy, it's going to be a hereditary empire.

#WeNeedLockedPhenotypes

 

[Foefaller]

You're talking about an oligarchy or dictatorship, not an imperial authority (per the most common goverment forms). Especially if you have some form of noble aristocracy, it's going to be a hereditary empire.

#WeNeedLockedPhenotypes

Maybe they keep a harem?

 

[Archon87]

It doesn't actually say anywhere that imperial governments are hereditary, you know. People just seem to assume that, for whatever reason. The emperor can totally choose his successor before his death (no, this isn't the same as a dictatorship, where the choice is made after death of the previous ruler), and that person could be someone unrelated to them by blood. A protege, an adopted child, or even a close friend could be viable candidates if the emperor says that they're the heir. Roman emperors often chose the heir to be someone they thought would be good for the job, it only became hereditary later.

 

[Danny Pockets]

Maybe because most species portraits don't even have gender dimorphism and male/female differences have zero gameplay differences?

This really badly misses the point. The same is true of all the different species types. Any race portrait you use has absolutely no impact on game play. Do you think the game would be better if there was just a single race in the game? Going by the logic of your reply, its just a waste for the devs to include anything in the game that doesn't mechanically impact play. But obviously this would make for a very dull game.

 

[Secret Master]

They are clearly not closely related.

 

[Chthon]

It doesn't actually say anywhere that imperial governments are hereditary, you know. People just seem to assume that, for whatever reason. The emperor can totally choose his successor before his death (no, this isn't the same as a dictatorship, where the choice is made after death of the previous ruler), and that person could be someone unrelated to them by blood. A protege, an adopted child, or even a close friend could be viable candidates if the emperor says that they're the heir. Roman emperors often chose the heir to be someone they thought would be good for the job, it only became hereditary later.

What about the first emperor/king/ruler fails to produce an heir, and the leading heir to the throne does not have the same mixed lineage.

 

[Stars_and_Bars]

This really badly misses the point. The same is true of all the different species types. Any race portrait you use has absolutely no impact on game play. Do you think the game would be better if there was just a single race in the game? Going by the logic of your reply, its just a waste for the devs to include anything in the game that doesn't mechanically impact play. But obviously this would make for a very dull game.

If the point is for RP purposes, that's fine I suppose, but in order for it to make any sense RP wise every species portrait would have to have gender dimorphism. Which they don't and I think they actually removed some of the dimorphism that USED TO EXIST for the mammalians. Anyways there's no way a single gender empire whose primary species actually needs multiple gender sexual reproduction would survive without cloning, which you probably won't get until 30 years in at the earliest. Plus if we're being honest, gender doesn't exist if there's no sexual reproduction.