*voice of marlin the clownfish* of course it is -_-
Ehh... If Fen doesn't beat you too bad about it, you might want to try and approach the subject again, because I'm also a bit curious as to why it's not allowed right out of the gate. There's functionally no difference between accelerated pregnancies and time-skipping, except for the fact that one points out a glaringly obvious aspect of the stagnant game world and the other doesn't.
I mean... I suppose being forced to wait would age up the children currently in the Nursery, preventing a player from flooding it with infants over the course of an in-game week, but people are still going to be able to flood it with toddlers over the course of an hour or two real-time. And in doing so can have a 1,000+ day save that isn't even off Mhen'ga. >_>
Having both options would be ideal, because I personally wouldn't want use anything but mild pregnancy accelerants from a thematic standpoint, but it's pretty obvious that a lot of people would prefer super-speedy-swelling to waiting. And there's the fact that it's already canon because of that one starting perk... If we're going to allow people to completely bypass timers altogether, might as well do it in a way that isn't plot-breaking.
Making it a late-game unlock doesn't really make any sense either, because it's something that's only for one specific fetish and would be absolutely useless to people not into pregnancy, and even then it wouldn't be universally useful. It'd be hard to justify making the player do anything out of the ordinary to obtain something so limited in scope.
We should have just made 9 month Terran pregnancies long outliers, at least when compared to other races.
I have some pretty strong personal biases against vat/artificial wombs for otherwise natural and healthy pregnancies, but I can't say it's not a viable option from an objective standpoint. I don't know if the mechanic is even planned, though.
The problem I see with that is that Terran pregnancies would still sort of be the elephant in the room, and they'd just have this cloud around them despite being an obvious flagship race.
Ehh... If Fen doesn't beat you too bad about it, you might want to try and approach the subject again, because I'm also a bit curious as to why it's not allowed right out of the gate. There's functionally no difference between accelerated pregnancies and time-skipping, except for the fact that one points out a glaringly obvious aspect of the stagnant game world and the other doesn't.
I mean... I suppose being forced to wait would age up the children currently in the Nursery, preventing a player from flooding it with infants over the course of an in-game week, but people are still going to be able to flood it with toddlers over the course of an hour or two real-time. And in doing so can have a 1,000+ day save that isn't even off Mhen'ga. >_>
Having both options would be ideal, because I personally wouldn't want use anything but mild pregnancy accelerants from a thematic standpoint, but it's pretty obvious that a lot of people would prefer super-speedy-swelling to waiting. And there's the fact that it's already canon because of that one starting perk... If we're going to allow people to completely bypass timers altogether, might as well do it in a way that isn't plot-breaking.
Making it a late-game unlock doesn't really make any sense either, because it's something that's only for one specific fetish and would be absolutely useless to people not into pregnancy, and even then it wouldn't be universally useful. It'd be hard to justify making the player do anything out of the ordinary to obtain something so limited in scope.
We should have just made 9 month Terran pregnancies long outliers, at least when compared to other races.
The problem I see with that is that Terran pregnancies would still sort of be the elephant in the room, and they'd just have this cloud around them despite being an obvious flagship race.
Probably more often than you'd think.
If we're running with the idea that gene mods don't cause genetic "damage" and aren't passed on to the offspring, there's going to be more human babies than you think. @Nonesuch, are the Seraspawn going to humans?
In TiTS we have plenty of races with quick gestation times either in the game or already being worked on...what if Steele (at least the female and herm Steeles) was able to save up for the option to alter her genes to allow for faster gestation times? It's no more out there than any of the TF items and what they change/add/remove/w/e to Steele's body to begin with. This would be a menu change screen with different options like the dong machine...only in reverse really, either changing the womb and ovaries or offering options to alter/speedup/tweek Steele's pregnancies based on races met ingame.
I think it's a crucial part of the process that prospective mothers should try to experience if at all possible.
Full props for being a fan of 3 books I almost never see referenced anymore. You're actually the first that I've met that's read the Master of the Five Magics. Very well done adventure story with a strong element of "hero's journey of self-discovery."
Would you recommend the Master of the Five Magics? Whats it about (without spoiling the plot)
Really, relative to many other mammals, humans gestate at an upper-medium speed but mature quite slowly. I wouldn't be surprised if maturation length directly correlates with intelligence levels in mammals, while gestation length has a weaker but similar correlation. But I'm no biologist. Are there any out there what want to weigh in and prove me totally wrong?
If we're running with the idea that gene mods don't cause genetic "damage" and aren't passed on to the offspring, there's going to be more human babies than you think. @Nonesuch, are the Seraspawn going to humans?
As for the vanae... the scenes don't consider Sterilex because I don't think it existed when JimT wrote the vanae. Or if it did, he just ignored it because his pregboner was too strong.
Call it "Matronal" or something.
As for the vanae... the scenes don't consider Sterilex because I don't think it existed when JimT wrote the vanae. Or if it did, he just ignored it because his pregboner was too strong.
The overarching problem I see with surrogates, and this may just be me, is that not carrying a child means the mother inherently loses several aspects of motherhood I consider very important. And this is not just the "symbolism" of carrying a child, but the actual biological changes a woman goes through during a pregnancy.
Pregnancy brings about both mental and physical changes to a woman, and the process triggers several very powerful lizard brain-tier instincts. Encouraging and inducing lactation is probably the most obvious change, but there are subtle emotional changes and shifts in thought patterns as a woman's body prepares for motherhood. What makes a woman "happy" can change dramatically during and after pregnancy, changes to personal priorities and values that sometimes last forever.
Growing the child in an artificial womb means the mother goes through none of that. Maybe it's not seen as important by many people, but I personally value the "journey" of pregnancy as much as the "destination," so to speak. I think it's a crucial part of the process that prospective mothers should try to experience if at all possible.
Also, what do you mean when you say she was "supposed" to be infertile? Are you sure? Did you OD on Sterilex to make infertility permanent? If you did and you still got pregnant, you should definitely post a bug report, because that shouldn't ever be happening.
There's also the fact that the woman passes many things onto the developing child during pregnancy, including some of her own genetic traits beyond simply the genetic structure of the ovum itself, so determining the "true mother" of a human-to-human surrogacy becomes very muddy indeed
Gonna have to argue on this and ask for sources as this seems sketch and after reading seems sketchier, being relatively new and what seems only one test case of 20 or so individuals. I'm not too keenly knowledgeable about human genetics and anatomy but uterine fluid doesn't count as child's actual DNA to me. But what I do know is that once a zygote forms it's pretty much set in stone and is basically mitosis and differentiation from there on. Sure, nutrition and stuff factor into the actual development and linked to genetic abnormalities of misfiring genes, but actual transferring of genes like that on a scale larger than contamination just wouldn't work like that.
That's more what I was referencing, and I can absolutely agree that my phrasing was improper, as "genetic traits" implies hereditary aspects of biology like hair/eye color. I did not mean that uterine fluid or the placenta change the genetic structure of an individual, but that the nutrient intake and overall health of the mother can have serious implications on the health and development of the fetus (which is probably obvious).
But, for example, severe physical birth defects can develop after the zygote is formed. One relevant example is the effects the Zika virus can have on a fetus, which is spread via the mother. Also other obvious things like Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. I'm sure there's also some positive developmental things that can be attributed to regimented nutrient intake and the genetic predisposition of the mother that are not strictly hereditary traits, but I don't have any examples on hand.
I mean, this is a debate that steps into some very controversial territory, but in the instance of a healthy woman arranging a surrogacy for no objective medical reason and simply not desiring to give birth to her own child, I'd consider the surrogate to be more of a mother. Genetics alone don't allow a person to claim "ownership" of someone else, which is the reason children given up for adoption can only be returned to the custody of their biological parents in extraordinary circumstances.
Obviously there are mitigating factors like medical issues and risks that make surrogacy a perfectly valid choice for women desiring to have a child but are unable to carry one with confidence or security, but outside of those instances it's something that strikes me as difficult to justify and rather selfish.
There's also the fact that the woman passes many things onto the developing child during pregnancy, including some of her own genetic traits beyond simply the genetic structure of the ovum itself, so determining the "true mother" of a human-to-human surrogacy becomes very muddy indeed. Barring the one constant that one of the women carried and birthed the child while the other did not, of course, which I assume is where such legal precedent and sense of "default" is derived. The simple donation of an ovum is nowhere near the same level of investment as a complete pregnancy.
Artificial wombs have none of those problems, though, and I consider them significantly more viable and less questionable than human-to-human surrogates, but the technology is not quite there yet. When we do have reliable and consistent artificial wombs and synthetic uteri, I would hope to see a dramatic decrease in human-to-human surrogates, maybe even stopping them entirely.
harpy princess ur a huge nerd but dnt evr chng
harpy princess ur a huge nerd but dnt evr chng
The Meek shall inherit the earth...the rest of us are going into space
Bullshit I say! Without nerds we wouldn't have gone into space to begin with!
Discuss shit / ask questions related to the (currently immediately upcoming) Tavros Station nursery here.
INTENDED FEATURES
- A new deck on Tavros Station, complete with a player appartment, a bio-science lab, and a milking station.
- A gynoid head of the Nursery, who acts as wetnurse/teacher/surrogate mother to your spawn while you're away.
- Semi-detailed breakdown of all your offspring via computers.
- Ability to send certain crew / hirelings to the Nursery to work, and to upgrade existing functions
- Ability to Wait Until Birth while pregnant.
- Special interactions with unique offspring. Generic offspring (like Raskvel, Sydians, etc.) will not have any special interactions.