• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

GinjaNinja1997

Corporal
97 Badges
Dec 9, 2013
43
49
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Magicka
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 - Second Wave
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Hearts of Iron Anthology
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Hearts of Iron 4: Arms Against Tyranny
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • War of the Roses
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Victoria 2
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
Hello, I hope February is off to a good start for you!

I recently did a roleplay run as a wanderer from England and ended up in India adopting Gujarati culture. I noticed that it came with vegetarianism, which seemed cool, so I was hoping for some unique interactions with it seen as it takes an entire cultural slot.

However, I got the same events and text about munching on boar, fish, hare, etc. I could still go fishing and, while hunting as a decision was banned, I still got random wanderer hunting events without any repercussions and the cultural tradition seemed to have zero impact on the character or story. It actually upset me a little that my character apparently only practiced vegetarianism in that he wouldn't be the one to click the hunt button, but he seemed very eager to participate in them and feast on flesh!

I know it is not a huge deal, but if any devs read this, it would mean a lot to me if something could be done to make this cultural tradition a bit more functional/impactful. My bias is showing I suppose, but I come from a vegetarian family myself and it's a very important value for our faith/traditions, in the same way Halal or Kosher is for Muslims and Jews. I am sincere when I say I would rather starve than eat meat, and I know there are/were millions of others in history around the world who felt the same.

Obviously Paradox know the game's situation better than me, so I don't mean to impose, though I do have a few ideas which I hope might be valuable in a small way:


1) Make vegetarian into a trait rather than a tradition – Just like we already have the option to reject inheritance or become celibate, perhaps it would be an easy solution to allow certain characters to adopt vegetarianism. Many different people from across Europe, Asia and Africa practiced vegetarianism outside of their cultural traditions, but right now it’s limited to a cultural tradition that is only present in 1 small culture in the entire game! For some examples of how widespread the practice was, many different orders of Christian monks followed vegetarian lifestyles, as did the entire followers of the Cathar and Waldensian faiths which are present in-game but without vegetarianism represented. Copts in Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia also followed the practice if they were very pious. Sufi mystics would sometimes also become vegetarian to cleanse their souls. Famously of course, Buddhists of all schools were often vegetarians, as were Jains, Taoists and Hindus. Neoplatonists in the Byzantine empire also practiced vegetarianism, as did some doctors who believed it was better for health. All of this is to show that vegetarianism was a worldwide belief that transcended religions and culture. Perhaps if following one of these mentioned religions, taking the restraint perk in the Whole of Body lifestyle, being a wise man/gardener/physician or being a member of certain cultures like Burmese, a character should be able to take a decision to embrace vegetarianism?

2) The effects of the vegetarian trait - I’m no expert at balancing, so please forgive me, but going off Paradox’s current effects of the cultural tradition version of vegetarianism, the trait could confer the current small health bonus, some minor monthly piety gain and give a little opinion buff/penalty to other characters depending on the character's faith and personality? Christians would be likely to respect a vegetarian as it showed restraint, but a gluttonous character would see it as pointless perhaps? Likewise, in faiths/cultures with no history of vegetarianism (like the Norse), then it shouldn’t give any opinion buff.

3) Allow vegetarians to host hunts and go fishing at the cost of stress and opinion loss with characters who have the vegetarian trait – Seen as compassionate people can still plot to murder, why not allow vegetarians to contradict themselves? I suppose, technically, hunting isn’t the same as eating, and hunts were an important part of medieval court politics, so banning vegetarians from hosting them is a little detrimental. Admittedly, I wouldn’t go hunting IRL, but I can see ambitious or less zealous vegetarians going hunting for the sake of prestige, good relations or to avoid antagonising their liege.

4) Change the flavour text related to eating meat – Right now it is a little silly that a vegetarian is so happy to disregard their beliefs the moment they smell some sausages cooking. While I’m not from Gujarat, I certainly wouldn’t forget my values just because I spotted a fat deer in the woods! Just as Muslims wouldn’t drink alcohol at a feast, a vegetarian character shouldn’t be eating meat. It matters more than you might think and unfortunately ruins the immersion in the same way as if a homosexual character started flirting with the wrong gender during events.

5) Change/add new options to events related to animals – This one is the least important, as we normally have one way or another of avoiding killing/eating animals in events if we have to, and I know this takes the most work so please ignore it if so, but if at all possible, it would be nice to always have the option to just… not have to hurt animals.

I’m sorry for my long wall of text, but I hope my point carried through. I love this game and I’m very thankful for all of the extremely hard work the devs have put into it, so I hope that none of what I said is read as criticism! It would just mean a lot to me and other vegetarians/vegans if we could be slightly better represented. Gujarat is an interesting place to play in CK3 but it is a shame that Paradox did the work to add vegetarianism as a cultural tradition just for it to only be used in such a small area of the map!

Anyway, thank you for reading this, whoever you may be, I really appreciate your time. Have a good day and best wishes, and have a lovely weekend tomorrow! Cheers! :D
 
  • 3Like
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
So for those who don't know (like me) can you explain what the vegetarian cultural tradition actually entails? Can you provide a screenshot?
 
So for those who don't know (like me) can you explain what the vegetarian cultural tradition actually entails? Can you provide a screenshot?

Vegetarian provides +10% development in plains, and a small health buff to characters of the culture, at the expense of losing access to Hunts.

The OP seems to be asking for a mix of
-Adjusting flavor text for vegetarians (such as feast flavor text)
-Allowing vegetarians to hunt
-Make Vegetarianism an opt-in trait like celibate rather than a culture modifier gotten from... religious tenets? Whole of Body lifestyle? It's not clear what makes it not a universal good that everyone should take.


Flavor text is for verisimilitude, the lack of hunting is the strategic tradeoff for the gains which they don't want to pay the tradeoff for, and the last just seems to want it to be more common.
 
So for those who don't know (like me) can you explain what the vegetarian cultural tradition actually entails? Can you provide a screenshot?
Thank you for the idea, I guess that would really help! Please see the image below:

20250207162554_1-jpg.1251694
 

Attachments

  • 20250207162554_1.jpg
    20250207162554_1.jpg
    583 KB · Views: 0
Instead of going on a hunt, you can go gather berries. Instead of getting killed by an elk, you could get killed by a poison berry.
 
  • 5Haha
Reactions:
the lack of hunting is the strategic tradeoff for the gains which they don't want to pay the tradeoff for
Allow vegetarians to host hunts and go fishing at the cost of stress and opinion loss with characters who have the vegetarian trait
That's still a trade off. That would be removing two out of the three reasons you would host a hunt. It should definitely remain blocked for cultures with the tradition though, or cost prestige instead, since hunting wouldn't be seen as prestigious in a vegetarian society.

If they did expand access to vegetarianism with a trait, it should probably be more difficult to obtain than the celibate trait, especially if it confers a health bonus.

I don't really see much of a benefit to adding it as a trait though, as it would mostly only effect flavor. Irl the main benefit of being vegetarian is the smug sense of moral superiority you have and the main downside is that you are frequently horrified at yet another widespread systemic atrocity. I don't know how that would be reflected in-game though...
 
Vegetarian provides +10% development in plains, and a small health buff to characters of the culture, at the expense of losing access to Hunts.

The OP seems to be asking for a mix of
-Adjusting flavor text for vegetarians (such as feast flavor text)
-Allowing vegetarians to hunt
-Make Vegetarianism an opt-in trait like celibate rather than a culture modifier gotten from... religious tenets? Whole of Body lifestyle? It's not clear what makes it not a universal good that everyone should take.


Flavor text is for verisimilitude, the lack of hunting is the strategic tradeoff for the gains which they don't want to pay the tradeoff for, and the last just seems to want it to be more common.
Thank you for your reply!

On the topic of 'why wouldn't everyone take it', not everyone would have access to it, the same as celibate. It was mostly for the religious and the educated, such as priests and doctors, so a martial character like a Norman knight would have no reason to become vegetarian so they don't need the decision. I'm sorry I didn't explain clearly, but I was trying to say that it should be an opt-in trait via decision for learning focused characters which would be balanced by stress gains from hunting, feasting and fishing and possible opinion hits, but provide minor health gains and piety.

As for how to obtain it, I was trying to express that it might perhaps be an option depending on faith itself, not tenets, as taking a whole tenet slot for it would be not very fun. Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Jains, Buddhists and Ibadi (if they're the closest to sufis?) could utilise the already established "special doctrine" mechanic at the bottom of the faith screen to enable the decision, or any character of any faith could do it if they took a perk within the Whole of Body lifestyle, as vegetarianism was closely associated with doctors regardless of religion.

At present, vegetarianism is only possible for Gujarati characters and has no flavour or real impact. With vegetarianism being found in real life among monks, physicians, mystics, merchants and scholars, it would be nice to see it represented better in-game with a wider spread. Any character can choose to become celibate, so why not vegetarian?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
That's still a trade off. That would be removing two out of the three reasons you would host a hunt. It should definitely remain blocked for cultures with the tradition though, or cost prestige instead, since hunting wouldn't be seen as prestigious in a vegetarian society.

If they did expand access to vegetarianism with a trait, it should probably be more difficult to obtain than the celibate trait, especially if it confers a health bonus.

I don't really see much of a benefit to adding it as a trait though, as it would mostly only effect flavor. Irl the main benefit of being vegetarian is the smug sense of moral superiority you have and the main downside is that you are frequently horrified at yet another widespread systemic atrocity. I don't know how that would be reflected in-game though...
I'm fine with vegetarianism potentially completely blocking hunts and feasts if needs be, I just know that usually Paradox doesn't like to outright ban player agency but prefers to offer penalties for going against the norm, i.e. a craven character can duel if you really want to do that, but you'll soon be stressed out. In the same way, I think a flexible approach would be to allow vegetarians to hunt but to hit them with stress or prestige loss (for being a hypocrite) so that players have the option to choose.

I'm sorry that you see vegetarianism as an elitist thing. In terms of mechanics, it already gives a health buff as a cultural tradition as decided by Paradox, so why not simply carry that over? Vegetarians do pretty much never get food poisoning and some medieval doctors used to recommend it. A little bit of piety too would be nice, as Christian monks in Europe certainly were more respected if vegetarian, as were monks of many faiths in Asia.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I'm sorry that you see vegetarianism as an elitist thing. In terms of mechanics, it already gives a health buff as a cultural tradition as decided by Paradox, so why not simply carry that over? Vegetarians do pretty much never get food poisoning and some medieval doctors used to recommend it. A little bit of piety too would be nice, as Christian monks in Europe certainly were more respected if vegetarian, as were monks of many faiths in Asia.
To be clear, I was referring to my own smug sense of moral superiority. I think a small health buff could be justified, but other than that and some changes in event text, what would it add to the game? Does it offer many new character interactions? Additional events, mechanics, or decisions? I'm not sure it's a deep enough well of potential content.
 
I'm confused...can't you be a vegetarian and still go on hunts? One can enjoy killing of the animals, sacrificing them for religious reasons, the sport or thrill of the hunt, the social aspect, or the sadistic immorality of big game hunting to compensate for your little man syndrom I mean ego, without actually eating the meat...thus alluding to the later most endevour. Hmm...=/

I guess it is alluding to plains being more common, thus growing more veggies as a culture, and not having hunts readily available due to terrain or geography?

I still like the idea of accidental death by poison berry or hugging the wrong tree and being ended by poisonous sap. =>
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Thank you for your reply!

On the topic of 'why wouldn't everyone take it', not everyone would have access to it, the same as celibate. It was mostly for the religious and the educated, such as priests and doctors, so a martial character like a Norman knight would have no reason to become vegetarian so they don't need the decision. I'm sorry I didn't explain clearly, but I was trying to say that it should be an opt-in trait via decision for learning focused characters which would be balanced by stress gains from hunting, feasting and fishing and possible opinion hits, but provide minor health gains and piety.

That's not an answer to 'why wouldn't everyone take it,' that's an answer to why everyone couldn't take it. If they could- such as if it's unlocked by a learning lifestyle- you are providing no particular reason why they wouldn't if they could.

At which point, unlike celibacy, it's a false dilemma. Celibacy has a relevant tradeoff- sometimes you don't want kids and sometimes you really do. As you've described, there's no actual downside to being vegan, and it just comes with buffs with drawbacks so minor they can be opted-out of before opting back into the benefits.

If the bonus just comes with buffs with no meaningfull downsides, there's no reason for it to be decision-trait. Just add it to the list of modifiers.


As for how to obtain it, I was trying to express that it might perhaps be an option depending on faith itself, not tenets, as taking a whole tenet slot for it would be not very fun. Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Jains, Buddhists and Ibadi (if they're the closest to sufis?) could utilise the already established "special doctrine" mechanic at the bottom of the faith screen to enable the decision, or any character of any faith could do it if they took a perk within the Whole of Body lifestyle, as vegetarianism was closely associated with doctors regardless of religion.

Why is vegetarianism appropriate for a doctrine?

There are certainly religious doctrines around food, but the dominant relevant religions in the game would be far more about what kinds of meat, with no historical basis for a religious-level modifiers that applies to all members of a religion in the way CK presents it. The religions that made a very big deal about no meat are also not the ones that would be meaningfully 'vegetarian' in a doctrinal context, unless you are proposing a doctrine solely for a 'is vegetarianism acceptable.'


At present, vegetarianism is only possible for Gujarati characters and has no flavour or real impact. With vegetarianism being found in real life among monks, physicians, mystics, merchants and scholars, it would be nice to see it represented better in-game with a wider spread. Any character can choose to become celibate, so why not vegetarian?

Why should it?

Vegetarianism is not unique in having a characteristic that is found more broadly. It also doesn't mean that the things a tradition modifies don't exist in cultures without the tradition. Friendship rituals are not unique to the cultures with ritualized friendship, mountain homes presumably exist in cultures without the mountain homes tradition, and there are astute diplomats even in cultures without the Astute Diplomats tradition, and so on. The existence of a tradition does not mean that all other cultures lack any examples of what that tradition highlights. It is not a deprivation of representation to not be a common highlight.

I can be sympathetic to flavor text versimilitude concerns - I am sympathetic to things like feasts with meats despite vegetarianism- but 'my tradition needs more flavor' is a boundless request. It's not unique to vegetarians, it could be endlessly claimed for countless others, and it's a open-ended never-complete 'well, my favorite things just deserve a bit more.' Given that developer attention is not free, and that anyone who's favorite tradition (Isolationists! Parochialism! Battlefield Looting!) are equally valid requests under the construct, overly-broad suggestions are going to face the issue that there's no logical end-point.

If there was a solid strategic decision to be made, or a delimma to be posed, that might still be worth it... but you haven't posed one.

You repeatedly return to Celibate, but Celibate has huge strategic implications in certain cases: the person you want to have a child will absolutely refuse. Moreover, Celibate has major restrictions- you can't even get it if you do a major activity enough times (Eager Revelers). A strategy that involves Celibacy is one where you have to give up major opportunity costs (feasts for prestige, stress loss, opinion bonuses, legitimacy) in order to prioritize an opportunity (stopping future children) that could be very beneficial (less partition) or actively detrimental (plague killed your children, now you have no heirs) down the road.

By contrast, the model you've provided is... press button for better stats. At the cost of stress, which you could negate by pressing the button to turn it off when doing meat-eating events, because that's how the Celibacy comparison works. And opinion, which the AI will never manage appropriately and which the competent player will render meaningless. And if these are bad enough, you just... opt out.

Which not only defeats the point of a distinguishing facet- 'I'm a a vegetarian unless I want to kill animals and eat meat'- but a bad strategic construct, because you're just adding clicks to micromanage optimizations.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I think maybe the cultural implication is geared more towards describing or ascribing to the general economy or economic predominace (agricultural vs hunting and gathering society) vs an actual lifestyle, character trait, or personal choice or decision like celibacy.

Which I supposse makes sense if you stop and consider the context.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm confused...can't you be a vegetarian and still go on hunts? One can enjoy killing of the animals, sacrificing them for religious reasons, the sport or thrill of the hunt, the social aspect, or the sadistic immorality of big game hunting to compensate for your little man syndrom I mean ego, without actually eating the meat...thus alluding to the later most endevour. Hmm...=/

I guess it is alluding to plains being more common, thus growing more veggies as a culture, and not having hunts readily available due to terrain or geography?

I still like the idea of accidental death by poison berry or hugging the wrong tree and being ended by poisonous sap. =>
That was part of what I wanted to request in my original message at the top. I agree with you; there are lots of reasons why a veggie might still hunt, but at the moment vegetarianism only serves to limit a player's gameplay with no real additions. I do think hunting should be slightly punished for veggies in some way, but I don't think it should outright be banned.

I'm also not sure why currently being a vegetarian means you unlock the idea of farming earlier than meat-eaters. It's not like non-vegetarians don't also enjoy fruits and vegetables, or that vegetarians are more skilled at farming. Same with vegetarianism always enabling orchards regardless of terrain; I currently live in Tunisia IRL and am a vegetarian, and I'd have a hard time summoning up a bountiful orchard just because of my dietary preferences!
 
That's not an answer to 'why wouldn't everyone take it,' that's an answer to why everyone couldn't take it. If they could- such as if it's unlocked by a learning lifestyle- you are providing no particular reason why they wouldn't if they could.

At which point, unlike celibacy, it's a false dilemma. Celibacy has a relevant tradeoff- sometimes you don't want kids and sometimes you really do. As you've described, there's no actual downside to being vegan, and it just comes with buffs with drawbacks so minor they can be opted-out of before opting back into the benefits.

If the bonus just comes with buffs with no meaningfull downsides, there's no reason for it to be decision-trait. Just add it to the list of modifiers.




Why is vegetarianism appropriate for a doctrine?

There are certainly religious doctrines around food, but the dominant relevant religions in the game would be far more about what kinds of meat, with no historical basis for a religious-level modifiers that applies to all members of a religion in the way CK presents it. The religions that made a very big deal about no meat are also not the ones that would be meaningfully 'vegetarian' in a doctrinal context, unless you are proposing a doctrine solely for a 'is vegetarianism acceptable.'




Why should it?

Vegetarianism is not unique in having a characteristic that is found more broadly. It also doesn't mean that the things a tradition modifies don't exist in cultures without the tradition. Friendship rituals are not unique to the cultures with ritualized friendship, mountain homes presumably exist in cultures without the mountain homes tradition, and there are astute diplomats even in cultures without the Astute Diplomats tradition, and so on. The existence of a tradition does not mean that all other cultures lack any examples of what that tradition highlights. It is not a deprivation of representation to not be a common highlight.

I can be sympathetic to flavor text versimilitude concerns - I am sympathetic to things like feasts with meats despite vegetarianism- but 'my tradition needs more flavor' is a boundless request. It's not unique to vegetarians, it could be endlessly claimed for countless others, and it's a open-ended never-complete 'well, my favorite things just deserve a bit more.' Given that developer attention is not free, and that anyone who's favorite tradition (Isolationists! Parochialism! Battlefield Looting!) are equally valid requests under the construct, overly-broad suggestions are going to face the issue that there's no logical end-point.

If there was a solid strategic decision to be made, or a delimma to be posed, that might still be worth it... but you haven't posed one.

You repeatedly return to Celibate, but Celibate has huge strategic implications in certain cases: the person you want to have a child will absolutely refuse. Moreover, Celibate has major restrictions- you can't even get it if you do a major activity enough times (Eager Revelers). A strategy that involves Celibacy is one where you have to give up major opportunity costs (feasts for prestige, stress loss, opinion bonuses, legitimacy) in order to prioritize an opportunity (stopping future children) that could be very beneficial (less partition) or actively detrimental (plague killed your children, now you have no heirs) down the road.

By contrast, the model you've provided is... press button for better stats. At the cost of stress, which you could negate by pressing the button to turn it off when doing meat-eating events, because that's how the Celibacy comparison works. And opinion, which the AI will never manage appropriately and which the competent player will render meaningless. And if these are bad enough, you just... opt out.

Which not only defeats the point of a distinguishing facet- 'I'm a a vegetarian unless I want to kill animals and eat meat'- but a bad strategic construct, because you're just adding clicks to micromanage optimizations.
That's not an answer to 'why wouldn't everyone take it,' that's an answer to why everyone couldn't take it. If they could- such as if it's unlocked by a learning lifestyle- you are providing no particular reason why they wouldn't if they could.

At which point, unlike celibacy, it's a false dilemma. Celibacy has a relevant tradeoff- sometimes you don't want kids and sometimes you really do. As you've described, there's no actual downside to being vegan, and it just comes with buffs with drawbacks so minor they can be opted-out of before opting back into the benefits.

If the bonus just comes with buffs with no meaningfull downsides, there's no reason for it to be decision-trait. Just add it to the list of modifiers.




Why is vegetarianism appropriate for a doctrine?

There are certainly religious doctrines around food, but the dominant relevant religions in the game would be far more about what kinds of meat, with no historical basis for a religious-level modifiers that applies to all members of a religion in the way CK presents it. The religions that made a very big deal about no meat are also not the ones that would be meaningfully 'vegetarian' in a doctrinal context, unless you are proposing a doctrine solely for a 'is vegetarianism acceptable.'




Why should it?

Vegetarianism is not unique in having a characteristic that is found more broadly. It also doesn't mean that the things a tradition modifies don't exist in cultures without the tradition. Friendship rituals are not unique to the cultures with ritualized friendship, mountain homes presumably exist in cultures without the mountain homes tradition, and there are astute diplomats even in cultures without the Astute Diplomats tradition, and so on. The existence of a tradition does not mean that all other cultures lack any examples of what that tradition highlights. It is not a deprivation of representation to not be a common highlight.

I can be sympathetic to flavor text versimilitude concerns - I am sympathetic to things like feasts with meats despite vegetarianism- but 'my tradition needs more flavor' is a boundless request. It's not unique to vegetarians, it could be endlessly claimed for countless others, and it's a open-ended never-complete 'well, my favorite things just deserve a bit more.' Given that developer attention is not free, and that anyone who's favorite tradition (Isolationists! Parochialism! Battlefield Looting!) are equally valid requests under the construct, overly-broad suggestions are going to face the issue that there's no logical end-point.

If there was a solid strategic decision to be made, or a delimma to be posed, that might still be worth it... but you haven't posed one.

You repeatedly return to Celibate, but Celibate has huge strategic implications in certain cases: the person you want to have a child will absolutely refuse. Moreover, Celibate has major restrictions- you can't even get it if you do a major activity enough times (Eager Revelers). A strategy that involves Celibacy is one where you have to give up major opportunity costs (feasts for prestige, stress loss, opinion bonuses, legitimacy) in order to prioritize an opportunity (stopping future children) that could be very beneficial (less partition) or actively detrimental (plague killed your children, now you have no heirs) down the road.

By contrast, the model you've provided is... press button for better stats. At the cost of stress, which you could negate by pressing the button to turn it off when doing meat-eating events, because that's how the Celibacy comparison works. And opinion, which the AI will never manage appropriately and which the competent player will render meaningless. And if these are bad enough, you just... opt out.

Which not only defeats the point of a distinguishing facet- 'I'm a a vegetarian unless I want to kill animals and eat meat'- but a bad strategic construct, because you're just adding clicks to micromanage optimizations.
In that case, like I said before I'm fine with it banning hunting, that way there's a significant drawback. I don't personally think this is necessary, but I see your point, and this would provide a tradeoff.

Special doctrines don't take up any slots of limit tenants or anything, so it wouldn't harm faiths in any way. Jainism has a special doctrine that forces all priests to be nude for example and it's just a nice tiny flavourful addition. On that note, there should be special doctrines for alcohol consumption really too.

If the case is that you'd prefer it to remain a cultural tradition, would you at least be in favour of expanding it across Asia further? At present it is solely found in Gujarat and it makes it effectively forgettable, especially when that culture is so small. All of the other ones you mentioned like 'ritualized friendship' are found across the map and can be taken by any culture as a development, but from my own experience I was unable to add vegetarianism into my own cultures when I was head of them?


I do think there should be drawbacks to vegetarianism as I've said, such as penalties for attending certain activities or stigma from characters who aren't aligned with it. A Tengri noble would likely be judged strangely for following vegetarianism and be openly mocked, which would create a dilemma between the small health benefits compared to opinion or prestige penalties.