Control of a character.

[Arona]

I have noticed that on some events player does not have contol of a character. And event acts as character is controlled by AI. Especialy annoying is situation where player controlled character is converted to another faith without giving him/her a choice. Also some other event like court affairs have similar effect where player have one choice and this is decided by traits or stats. I think player should have full control over his character and if he/she decided to to anything what is opposing his "nature" there should be some kind of penalty. Like lustful or hedonist refuses dalliance he got opinion penaly with subject or with other who have same trait and risk to lose that trait.

Also there is that event where Player gets robed and there is info you got robbed and he/she hadent any coice. Not a run, or fight out or offer a money.

That kind of event actually show that player is not in control.

 

[IanReSc]

To be honest, I never had a situation where I didn't have a choice. So I am not exactly sure what you are talking about.

 

[Poliut]

Well, there are the assassination attempts... (Some of which sometimes don't make sense - like falling from your castle balcony while you're leading troops 13 provinces away)

 

[jwalche]

Well, there are the assassination attempts... (Some of which sometimes don't make sense - like falling from your castle balcony while you're leading troops 13 provinces away)

There are many events that the player is just being notified for what happens. You don't get to choose to avoid pox, etc.

The assassination attempts are actually quite nice. Since you usually die with that event, it's time to sort out your affairs. It's especially nice with gavelkind. Change your heir to a random one. Give all but your capital to your actual heir. And put the actual heir back to your heir. Then meet the death.

Your intended heir still gets some of his counties stolen, but he keeps most of them.

P.S. We don't have full control on our own life choices.

 

[mrinku]

Event options are *often* limited by traits or circumstance. That's just the way it goes.

 

[Geglash]

I would like more control over child production. Now, there is only an heir ambition, which increases fertility for 16 years, and celibate. I would like an ambition "get a child" which would increase fertility (or even better, frequency of good matrimonial tumbles) but would end with pregnancy. And avaible at any time for a married character, not only for childless people.

 

[joos]

I would, in fact, argue that we should have fewer options based on our character's traits for most events. Currently, it is easy for me to resist my foul impulses and get piety for not torturing my prisoners as an evil character. Being lustful and rejecting a seduction attempt should not be allowed.

In most events, there is a 'right' option and it is so easy to choose them even if it might conflict with our traits. Choosing such options should actually result in more stress or schizophrenia. If I could play like the AI and rigidly follow my character's traits, it would be a more interesting game.

 

[Geglash]

I would, in fact, argue that we should have fewer options based on our character's traits for most events. Currently, it is easy for me to resist my foul impulses and get piety for not torturing my prisoners as an evil character. Being lustful and rejecting a seduction attempt should not be allowed.

In most events, there is a 'right' option and it is so easy to choose them even if it might conflict with our traits. Choosing such options should actually result in more stress or schizophrenia. If I could play like the AI and rigidly follow my character's traits, it would be a more interesting game.

But some out-of-character can lead to acquiring a new trait, which character development. But then there is question whether a grown up person personality can ever really change IRL.

 

[Cardolam]

I would, in fact, argue that we should have fewer options based on our character's traits for most events. Currently, it is easy for me to resist my foul impulses and get piety for not torturing my prisoners as an evil character. Being lustful and rejecting a seduction attempt should not be allowed.

In most events, there is a 'right' option and it is so easy to choose them even if it might conflict with our traits. Choosing such options should actually result in more stress or schizophrenia. If I could play like the AI and rigidly follow my character's traits, it would be a more interesting game.

Up to a point, this is also my opinion. The point being that choice is an important part of the game structure and should be kept.

Also to consider are those events that have clearly an option that is much better than the others presented in terms of modifiers/bonuses/etc. The options should represent dilemmas, not obvious choices where only one option is really valid from the point of view of benefiting the character.

 

[Thrake]

Up to a point, this is also my opinion. The point being that choice is an important part of the game structure and should be kept.

Also to consider are those events that have clearly an option that is much better than the others presented in terms of modifiers/bonuses/etc. The options should represent dilemmas, not obvious choices where only one option is really valid from the point of view of benefiting the character.

I really enjoy options based on traits. I'm on the RP board and it adds a lot to me.

I see no harm in leaving other choices for people who want the freedom. I might even not click the yellow options at times because I have issues to envision say what a kind, paranoid deceitful ruler would do and it might not always be the kindest option.

 

[Rydelfox]

I would like more control over child production. Now, there is only an heir ambition, which increases fertility for 16 years, and celibate. I would like an ambition "get a child" which would increase fertility (or even better, frequency of good matrimonial tumbles) but would end with pregnancy. And avaible at any time for a married character, not only for childless people.

There used to be ambitions to have a son/daughter, but these were replaced with the groom an heir ambitions. The devs wanted amibitions to be longer, more meaningful goals, instead of everyone taking the ambition to get married, instantly marrying, then taking the ambition to have a son for about 1 or 2 years. So, I don't think they will restore those old ambitions.

 

[Cardolam]

I really enjoy options based on traits. I'm on the RP board and it adds a lot to me.

I see no harm in leaving other choices for people who want the freedom. I might even not click the yellow options at times because I have issues to envision say what a kind, paranoid deceitful ruler would do and it might not always be the kindest option.

I abhor min max and gaming the game, so I am all for Role Play too. But I think the options available should be credible not only from a role playing perspective but also from the results given. What we see in many vanilla events is one option that is clearly the best in terms of consequences than the others. It should be more balanced.

 

[Thrake]

I don't disagree with your premise but I think it's a bit demanding. Like, I'm a violent guy, I'm going to do more stupid things than somebody who always keep control of himself. I think the event where you get a chance to torture prisoner is a good exemple: for the guy behind the computer it makes no sense to torture the prisonner (you either want him alive, or if you want to get rid of him there are better ways to do that), but RP wise it makes a lot of sense. Vices won't be vices if they let you do good things and a ruler full of bad traits should be bad. Like, you're slothful. What good outcome should it bring? Or do you mean that if you're slothful you should get two equally bad picks?

 

[Cardolam]

I don't disagree with your premise but I think it's a bit demanding. [...]Or do you mean that if you're slothful you should get two equally bad picks?

Yup. Implementing devil forks (choice from several bad picks) in events is a good sign of game design and balance as it gives an alternative to the snowballing effect of always giving more to the players and generating an unbalanced system.

 

[Thrake]

Yup. Implementing devil forks (choice from several bad picks) in events is a good sign of game design and balance as it gives an alternative to the snowballing effect of always giving more to the players and generating an unbalanced system.

Tbh if you don't roleplay it's never going to happen. It would take an entire rework of all events and game mechanics. Like, you go with a christian monastic society, amass the free virtues and then teach them to your heir. Then you have high stats, tons of positive opinion modifiers from vassals and only get events with good options.

 

[Cardolam]

Tbh if you don't roleplay it's never going to happen. It would take an entire rework of all events and game mechanics. Like, you go with a christian monastic society, amass the free virtues and then teach them to your heir. Then you have high stats, tons of positive opinion modifiers from vassals and only get events with good options.

I am not saying sins would give bad options and virtues would only give good options. Both should give different options that can compete for the rational player choice in themselves. So, in a single event if an option gives bad consequences, all options should give bad consequences. I design my mod (Dark Ages) giving many times a mix of good and bad consequences for each event option. Sometimes the player knows immediately what are the consequences, other times he/she is confronted with the consequences later on. I try to explain everything in depth with detailed tooltips.

 

[Thrake]

I am not saying sins would give bad options and virtues would only give good options. Both should give different options that can compete for the rational player choice in themselves. So, in a single event if an option gives bad consequences, all options should give bad consequences. I design my mod (Dark Ages) giving many times a mix of good and bad consequences for each event option. Sometimes the player knows immediately what are the consequences, other times he/she is confronted with the consequences later on. I try to explain everything in depth with detailed tooltips.

Neither am I. I'm saying all (hundreds? thousands?) events should be rewritten as everything as been done giving maybe naively the choice beetween a good and bad outcome typically. Some would probably need to be scrapped too. Then for a single ruler most events won't have outcomes for their traits (maybe 30% of the time you get one non generic option), so the number of outcomes should be greatly increased, or the whole system should be rewritten to trigger events based on your traits rather than add options based on your traits.

I'm also saying that even outside of events the game offers the same naive choices, ie. satan society will give some good outcomes and some bad outcomes (random negative traits) while just about every other society look like it gives freebies only (lodge will make you brave, ambitious, give you lots of friends,...). Focus aren't balanced either. Neither are religions and cultures (altaic!). Redoing everything at this point is not something I would expect to happen.

 

[Arona]

My be there should be happiness modifier! Like if you are cruel and you going to torture someone you piss of alot of people you might even lose important prisoner, but you get happiness boost and that could lead you to have positive trait oposite to stressed or depressed. But if you constantly go against your nature meaning you fight your nature. you get negative happiness modifier what could lead to stressed and depressed, but also if you constantly go against your nature, nature might change. But point is player should have choice in every case.

 

[joos]

I think traits should not be so black and white (or red and green in this case). If an option gives you Patient while the other gives you Sloth, you're obviously going to pick the former. But if Patience came with a diplo penalty (waiting too long to ask someone out) and Sloth came with a Learning boost (sitting on your butt and reading books, maybe), things could get interesting.

 

[Poliut]

I think traits should not be so black and white (or red and green in this case). If an option gives you Patient while the other gives you Sloth, you're obviously going to pick the former. But if Patience came with a diplo penalty (waiting too long to ask someone out) and Sloth came with a Learning boost (sitting on your butt and reading books, maybe), things could get interesting.

Some of the virtues and vices have that type of tradeoff.