do governor perks work on player? (can the player be governor of a town or castle?)?

[RodLimitless]

do governor perks work on player? (can the player be governor of a town or castle?)?

or only NPCs can be assigned?

(really asking if the player gets any of the Governor perks to work or that's just for NPCs ??

thx

 

[AJAJP_Juan]

Player cant be governor, only NPCs.

 

[Lord Grindelvald]

Does our presence in a town or castle functions as "governing"?

 

[Oakenlix]

Does our presence in a town or castle functions as "governing"?

No, but wouldn't it be great if a player could just stay in a city and do their job as a governor, what an exciting gameplay would that be!

 

[RodLimitless]

Player cant be governor, only NPCs.

awesome thx!

 

[Sidhwen_Khorest]

No, but wouldn't it be great if a player could just stay in a city and do their job as a governor, what an exciting gameplay would that be!

Sarcasm aside, it would at least give you a reason to have the governer perks, and there are a few reasons to be waiting in towns anyway. Like healing or smithing.

 

[blackfalcon]

You can not be a governor, you also can not be a captain/formation leader

 

[madnessario]

You can not be a governor, you also can not be a captain/formation leader

You can be a captain when you are part of an AI army. When you choose the formation to lead (archers, etc.) you become the captain of that formation, giving the appropriate bonuses

 

[Gandamula]

I wonder if some perks works in companions, If my companion elect to be a Trader have a hord, perk he/she will have this e bonus? Is that I didn't noticed any suplementar speed or carrying more goods.

 

[kreamy]

Player cant be governor, only NPCs.

wait wait wait...
do you mean that all governor perks are useless for the player?

Hmm... How Bou' Da'..

 

[Highest of all Landers]

First change I made... If the settlement has no governor, then the owner is selected as the governor when checking for perks and bonuses. I wouldn't really count it as a cheat as the changes I made applied to the AI as well.

Feels like a waste to have so many governor perks that you are never going to use. Same for captain perks, made sure to add the player as a candidate when choosing formation captains.

 

[madnessario]

If the settlement has no governor, then the owner is selected as the governor when checking for perks and bonuses.

For a player, you would never appoint anyone then, especially if you build your character with this in mind. The only thing that would make the player choose a different governor would be the foreign culture penalty.

I think a better alternative should be found here. Perhaps, the owner should supersede the appointed governor when close (or something like this). This way the player can choose to boost one of his cities with his own perks by patrolling nearby, waiting in the city smithing, etc. (Although, I am not sure how beneficial this would be in practice.)

Same for captain perks, made sure to add the player as a candidate when choosing formation captains.

This is a similar problem I think, the perks are applied situationally (captain in AI army in this case). I like your solution, even if a party may get double bonuses (leader perks and captain perks).

 

[Highest of all Landers]

Well, I made those changes as a personal mod and I don't think they have place in the base game.

I don't build my main character with governor bonuses in mind, and since companions die all the time because of ****ty gameplay decisions and never get anywhere in terms of skill levels because of more ****ty gameplay decisions, it was better to make use of the few perks I had than get nothing at all.

Sucks having to spend so much time to get anywhere with skills and half the **** you unlock is unusable.

 

[Ananda_The_Destroyer]

For a player, you would never appoint anyone then

How about the player can set themselves as governor of 1 fief at a time, that seems fair to me.

This is a similar problem I think, the perks are applied situationally (captain in AI army in this case). I like your solution, even if a party may get double bonuses (leader perks and captain perks).

It should be fine to have a way to set player as a captain. You're going to want multiple groups so you'll still want companions.

Sucks having to spend so much time to get anywhere with skills and half the **** you unlock is unusable.

Yeah this is the bottom line for me, there's way too much garbage in the skills and perks. Something needs to give so that everything can benefit the player and ALSO so that companions can raise whatever skill the player wants them to in a timely useful manner. As it is the games over and normal NPCs barely improve at all.

I mean really they should overhaul most stuff and make them better and get rid of absurd things like "+50% damage when you hit someone in the head with a glaive" TW come on nobody lives through that anyway, wtf.

 

[Highest of all Landers]

Yeah this is the bottom line for me, there's way too much garbage in the skills and perks. Something needs to give so that everything can benefit the player and ALSO so that companions can raise whatever skill the player wants them to in a timely useful manner. As it is the games over and normal NPCs barely improve at all.

I mean really they should overhaul most stuff and make them better and get rid of absurd things like "+50% damage when you hit someone in the head with a glaive" TW come on nobody lives through that anyway, wtf.

They should have made a tree instead of the "pick this or that" we have now, gain a skill point every x levels, but since we are ****ed in that regard already, at least give us something like Keystone passives in Path of Exile, a game changing bonus for a trade off.

Also there is nothing special for heroes anymore, the only thing they had going before was being immortal, but now they are worse than the average troops and cost a lot more. From the OP warband companions to passive relationship grinders in Bannerlord, what a downfall...

 

[madnessario]

How about the player can set themselves as governor of 1 fief at a time, that seems fair to me.

This would also work. I was mainly trying to avoid a solution that feels "less immersive" for some (I govern my town when I am on the other side of the globe). For me anything that would solve the "half of this perk" is useless is a plus.

It should be fine to have a way to set player as a captain. You're going to want multiple groups so you'll still want companions.

We are on the same page!

They should have made a tree instead of the "pick this or that" we have now, gain a skill point every x levels, but since we are ****ed in that regard already, at least give us something like Keystone passives in Path of Exile, a game changing bonus for a trade off.

But then you restrict a large number of perks for this specific playthrough (for this character). I think the only way for a tree-like structure to work would be the same as in CK3 game; dynasty play! You loose a lot of perks but you can take them with your heir. The way the game is structured now I doubt a lot of players reach the point where they play with their children and grandchildren.

Also there is nothing special for heroes anymore, the only thing they had going before was being immortal, but now they are worse than the average troops and cost a lot more. From the OP warband companions to passive relationship grinders in Bannerlord, what a downfall...

Ah, the tactical AI! It needs a lot of work to reach a good level but I would not go as far as to say that companions are a complete waste (you can find some good governors, etc.)

 

[black_bulldog]

How about the player can set themselves as governor of 1 fief at a time, that seems fair to me.

I would agree with the caveat that they have to be within a days ride of the settlement otherwise the bonuses don't apply. I mean you can't really oversee a settlement if you're half-way across the map.

It should be fine to have a way to set player as a captain. You're going to want multiple groups so you'll still want companions.

Yeah it's kind of stupid the player can't be the captain of a group. Why go to the trouble of having perks that the player can take that are useless to him/her? It's about as counterintuitive as it comes.

Yeah this is the bottom line for me, there's way too much garbage in the skills and perks. Something needs to give so that everything can benefit the player and ALSO so that companions can raise whatever skill the player wants them to in a timely useful manner. As it is the games over and normal NPCs barely improve at all.

I mean really they should overhaul most stuff and make them better and get rid of absurd things like "+50% damage when you hit someone in the head with a glaive" TW come on nobody lives through that anyway, wtf.

There are times when I honestly think that many of the TW devs either don't play games or throw in stuff without any thought, because they just don't seem to understand how to make game mechanics that are fun and/or immersive.