1- Actually, no. If you kill to a lord, there is a lord less on game.
2- yes.
3- yes.
2- yes.
3- yes.
I can't kill captured lords
- Thread starter mefaba
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Thorgil
Squire
Howitzer said:
which sucks.
why should the whole island hate you because of killing one lord (kind of "normal" in that times, ha?)? why do villages not related to thsi lord care at all?
i think it would be much better if you kill a lord and only the other lords of his faction hate you - which makes it easier to also kill them faster!
in generall i think it would be nice if the option to kill a lord could be used more - without these consequences.
Snuggydoodle
Sergeant at Arms
Because all people from Britannia and Hibernia grown up with the fact that lords are "untouchable" guys
Yeah, that's true. But as Idibil has said previously, the big game-balancing issue is that the player is the only person that can kill a lord. If the repercussions weren't so big, it would make it incredibly easier to take over the world.
Since there is a fixed amount of lords in the game, whenever you kill a guy of the opposing factions, they're being horribly crippled.
But still, I'd love a few options for this feature. Maybe an option to have it like it is now, one option that nearly abolishes the repercussions and one option that takes the middle road.
(Very nice feature btw Idibil!)
Since there is a fixed amount of lords in the game, whenever you kill a guy of the opposing factions, they're being horribly crippled.
But still, I'd love a few options for this feature. Maybe an option to have it like it is now, one option that nearly abolishes the repercussions and one option that takes the middle road.
(Very nice feature btw Idibil!)
Cool feature and all, but I personally find letting them go a better idea. Not only to increase relations, but just to keep the game fun and challenging, whats the fun in playing Mount and Blade when you control massive lands, with very little opposition, and all you're left to do is micro your immense empire? I find it more fun to keep the game challenging, nearly stagnant, so when victory finally occurs I'm satisfied I had to haul ass the entire game to get to the end.
How about an option to duel a captured lord to the death? If he wins you take an honor hit and he gets to leave. If you win he dies and you keep your honor and maybe just the lords faction hates you instead of the whole world.
To suggestions plz
Temujin
Banned
A warning about everyone hating you would have been nice when I picked the option "you have committed treason" I thought claiming high treason and punishing a traitor would grant me more right to rule.
Also the guy insulted me instead of pleading he was just insulting me saying I should be on my knees begging HIM!
How can I let him live after that, and now I'm at war against everyone!
I guess my only option now, is to retreat to my capital, fight off the hordes, capture as many lords I can and then re conquer my kingdom Which will fall mostly (aside from the capital where my elite shieldwall will be)
Maybe my companions turned lords can fight of 1 or 2 enemies but that's it, My kingdom wasn't that big
Also the guy insulted me instead of pleading he was just insulting me saying I should be on my knees begging HIM!
How can I let him live after that, and now I'm at war against everyone!
I guess my only option now, is to retreat to my capital, fight off the hordes, capture as many lords I can and then re conquer my kingdom Which will fall mostly (aside from the capital where my elite shieldwall will be)
Maybe my companions turned lords can fight of 1 or 2 enemies but that's it, My kingdom wasn't that big
Temujin said:
Bold part makes me laugh out loud, thanks!
Well, actually one poster already wrote it, why do you guys wanna kill the lords etc., makes the game poorer.
Okay, in the reality of the Brytenwalda time (history), multiple nobles and overlords and also the kings died in battles.
If catched alive, they normally wouldn't have been killed aka executed, unless the one was a bandit/rebel or sth. like that, just everybody declared outlawed, which of course wasn't impossible for a lord or king if he not only fought in all honor on the battlefield but also had his army allowed to plunder/raid/pillage/rape/murder civilans etc..
In-game, we have of course all that, if you want so, when the lords erase a village or kill any villagers/commoners/merchants.
On the other side, as Britain at the time was a chaotic only-on-paper partly christian population and rude noble-class which couldn't read, a barbarian's land like all other ones at the time, it was indeed so (afaik, what literature etc. reports).
While the plunder/pillage/rape was "war-right" of the winner or also simply "the right of the strong ones", but more important, it was the pay for the army because the mass of the guys weren't paid soldiers, but the peasants of the realm and some mercs, and they had to be "paid" with the loot (the nobles and also kings couldn't afford an army aka pay them with money).
That was completely different though in piece times as all these old barbarian "societies" had their rules/laws, and crimes were actually defined and very hard punished (for example something like a germanic tribes right, the "Ting" or "Thing", was certainly intact in nearly all these dark age societies).
Morrowind Mod Man
Sergeant at Arms
I believe you need to be at -100 relationship with the faction as well. It never worked for me otherwise. As far as people hating you, at the very least your own faction shouldn't attack you. It's possible from killing lords to have your own lord to raid their own towns and villages. The script should probably be tweaked for that.
