Swords are sharp and dangerous..

[gdj]

Its amazing how traits are sometimes randomly atributed to rulers.

I had a ruler some time ago who became "chaste" by event ehile being in the middle of a seduction spree. I also had rulers who randomly lost the "kind"-trait after releasing 22 prisoners without ransom.

But this one tops everything: my ruler, a brilliant strategist with 24 martial, leads his army (center flank) and is in the middle of a tough - but well going - battle when he suddenly realizes that swords are sharp and dangerous.

And he becomes craven in the middle of a large battle he is winning with an army he leads personally.

Pdx, please, i know you cant tweak everything, but absurd situations like these are really annoying, the actions of your rulers should have at least some influence which traits you can get and which are absurd.

 

[valvegas1]

Traits really should be completely dependent upon your actions...and there are still tons of cases where someone has two traits that don't make sense...like having ambitious and slothful at the same time

 

[Rags17]

I disagree completely. Why can't you just roleplay the whole thing.

1) After his 33rd uneventful conquest, the lustful cad gazed upon the slumbering form of his latest conquest and thought to himself "Was that really worth it ? What was the point of it all ? There is no challenge here, maybe I should see how long I could go WITHOUT having sex . . ."

2) "I let 22 people go and how do they repay me ? With nothing. Nothing ! Not one word of thanks or token of gratitude. No one cares what I do. Am I that useless and that much of a pushover that I let people walk all over me for no return ? Well wait until they see what I'm going to do to the NEXT lot of prisoners . . . !"

3) At the height of the battle an arrow suddenly flashed out of nowhere, striking Lord Braveheart square on the nasal. Stopped dead in its tracks, the arrow broke in two and fell uselessly to his feet. Picking up the pieces of the broken shaft, Lord Braveheart suddenly realized just how close he came to death this day. "It could all end in an instant" he said to himself, "unless I put an end to the madness now."

Too easy.

 

[Summercat]

Traits really should be completely dependent upon your actions...and there are still tons of cases where someone has two traits that don't make sense...like having ambitious and slothful at the same time

As someone who is both Ambitious and Slothful, yes. Yes it does.

/Also Depressed.

 

[Will Steel]

Traits depending on actions would be really nice. It often makes me wonder why my ruler is still 'kind' after having assassinated my way to throne and just ended up executing 9 people at once including innocent ones, and two infants.

 

[Rags17]

Traits depending on actions would be really nice. It often makes me wonder why my ruler is still 'kind' after having assassinated my way to throne and just ended up executing 9 people at once including innocent ones, and two infants.

Still one of my favourites ! -

 

[klopkr]

Everyone here seems to want traits that depend on actions but i'd prefer actions based on traits.

 

[Blindsorcerer]

Everyone here seems to want traits that depend on actions but i'd prefer actions based on traits.

You'd get that result by traits depending on actions. No more would the rule of complete and utter tyranny actually be the greatest strategy because people wouldn't want to play someone who is that much of a butt hole. No would their vassals want to live under them either since their traits would properly reflect their actions.

 

[klopkr]

You'd get that result by traits depending on actions. No more would the rule of complete and utter tyranny actually be the greatest strategy because people wouldn't want to play someone who is that much of a butt hole. No would their vassals want to live under them either since their traits would properly reflect their actions.

but turn on seduction as a chaste monk and suddenly you have a lusty sex god. Making it dependant on player action allows players to choose the good traits.

 

[gdj]

Everyone here seems to want traits that depend on actions but i'd prefer actions based on traits.

Either suits me. The only thing that bothers me is the total randomness involved here. Even if my ruler had died in battle i wouldnt have said nothing, its always a risk to have your ruler leading armies, but becoming craven in the middle of a winning battle, after winning many battles before is just silly...

 

[Blindsorcerer]

but turn on seduction as a chaste monk and suddenly you have a lusty sex god. Making it dependant on player action allows players to choose the good traits.

Except in choosing seduction that chaste monk would no longer be chaste and lose that trait. Which would make sense. And yes it would allow players to actually craft "good" people but at the cost of not being able to do anything tyrannical ever again. And I think you grossly underestimate how much tyranny people playing this game incur over their hours lol. So the idea we'd all have good characters forever seems implausible, we'd be forced to be not the most perfect people quite often to solve crises.

 

[klopkr]

Except in choosing seduction that chaste monk would no longer be chaste and lose that trait. Which would make sense. And yes it would allow players to actually craft "good" people but at the cost of not being able to do anything tyrannical ever again. And I think you grossly underestimate how much tyranny people playing this game incur over their hours lol. So the idea we'd all have good characters forever seems implausible, we'd be forced to be not the most perfect people quite often to solve crises.

But why would a chaste monk choose to become a sex god 50 years into his life? I think you're missing the main issue here though and it's that when you give players the ability to pick traits you end up creating the 'right' choice. Many players like I have stopped educating our own kids for this reason because otherwise the game becomes too easy. Plus you'll have fewer gameplay modes to explore. Either be the saint on earth or the massive bastard that keeps your inner borders looking alright. By forcing the player to roleplay their traits a bit more it makes you experience more radically different gameplay between rulers.

 

[Will Steel]

Still one of my favourites ! -

Ahahahaha this was absolutely hilarious.

I didn't know much about Team Fortress 2, but now I think I'll learn more about it.

Man I am still laughing...

 

[Knotz]

Excellent opportunities to RP, these.

 

[DorlasAnther]

I gained Craven in battle, where I was outnumbering my enemy aproximately 10 to 1 and they were running from previous battle, which I won. But apparently, you don´t become craven in huge battle against Hungary, but you become afraid of them when you are chasing their remnants.
Also, being Craven, I got interesting stuff on hunts and feasts. Apparently, when you realize that you can die in battle and are afraid, you also become afraid of stags and boars. Yes, I didn´t have option to face the boar and when I got that message about stag being in woods, only option that I had was to lose 10 prestige and flee, because I was afraid of idea of stag. Awesome!
And when feast came, suddenly, options where I joined singers or something (those that also give you 10 or 15 prestige) didn´t pop up for many years. When I lost Craven, I suddenly had them.
And also, apparently when you are Temperate, you can´t spend 20 gold for food on feast. It is beautiful, when you organize feast for all your vassals, but because you don´t like eating a lot, you don´t get lots of food for everyone else.

I don´t know, if all of those were bugs or intended stuff, but it showed me pretty well, how would it look like when you are forced to do stuff as your character would do...and it was terrible. You should definitely be able to work for your traits, not to be forced to roleplay those, which have been randomly given to you (this is partially done with hunting and feasting, where you can get Diligent and Just and I really like it...shame this isn´t present here more, because it would give you something to do in peace time).

 

[Robert II]

I disagree completely. Why can't you just roleplay the whole thing.

1) After his 33rd uneventful conquest, the lustful cad gazed upon the slumbering form of his latest conquest and thought to himself "Was that really worth it ? What was the point of it all ? There is no challenge here, maybe I should see how long I could go WITHOUT having sex . . ."

2) "I let 22 people go and how do they repay me ? With nothing. Nothing ! Not one word of thanks or token of gratitude. No one cares what I do. Am I that useless and that much of a pushover that I let people walk all over me for no return ? Well wait until they see what I'm going to do to the NEXT lot of prisoners . . . !"

3) At the height of the battle an arrow suddenly flashed out of nowhere, striking Lord Braveheart square on the nasal. Stopped dead in its tracks, the arrow broke in two and fell uselessly to his feet. Picking up the pieces of the broken shaft, Lord Braveheart suddenly realized just how close he came to death this day. "It could all end in an instant" he said to himself, "unless I put an end to the madness now."

Too easy.

Aye but that's fanwank. Those aren't events that pop up when you lose the traits. The game just decided arbitrarily that one of your traits had to go as you had 6.

 

[Rags17]

Aye but that's fanwank. Those aren't events that pop up when you lose the traits. The game just decided arbitrarily that one of your traits had to go as you had 6.

True, but let's face it - everything is possible, the more plausible should just be more heavily weighted. Which it is - nearly every event has modifiers based on traits and attributes that affect the outcome. Naturally there will be gaps or mis-assignments, in those cases I just say "oh well, it could have happened because of this . . ." and move on.

I have no issue with most events or their outcomes.

 

[Korashy]

Honestly, every commander will end up craven after enough battles, which is the annoying part about it. Certain life style traits and/or educations should prevent certain traits. A duelist Brilliant Strategist should have a decent chance at gaining brave, and no chance of gaining craven. Alternatively i've advertised levels before so it's not huge extreme like fearless normal coward, but something like extremely fearless, fearless, somewhat fearless, normal, somewhat craven, craven, extremely craven.

 

[Robert II]

Honestly, every commander will end up craven after enough battles, which is the annoying part about it. Certain life style traits and/or educations should prevent certain traits. A duelist Brilliant Strategist should have a decent chance at gaining brave, and no chance of gaining craven. Alternatively i've advertised levels before so it's not huge extreme like fearless normal coward, but something like extremely fearless, fearless, somewhat fearless, normal, somewhat craven, craven, extremely craven.

Eveeybody should be able to gain craven but brilliant strategist duelist should have a very very low chance. Too many levels take out the 2 somewhats and it's good.

 

[Rags17]

Honestly, every commander will end up craven after enough battles, which is the annoying part about it. Certain life style traits and/or educations should prevent certain traits. A duelist Brilliant Strategist should have a decent chance at gaining brave, and no chance of gaining craven. Alternatively i've advertised levels before so it's not huge extreme like fearless normal coward, but something like extremely fearless, fearless, somewhat fearless, normal, somewhat craven, craven, extremely craven.

"Something was wrong. They put on civilian clothes again and looked to their mothers and wives very much like the young men who had gone to business in the peaceful days before August 1914. But they had not come back the same men. Something had altered in them. They were subject to sudden moods, and queer tempers, fits of profound depression alternating with a restless desire for pleasure. Many were easily moved to passion where they lost control of themselves, many were bitter in their speech, violent in opinion, frightening."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_stress_reaction