搜索结果: *

Ow. I'm sorry to hear you're ill. I hope it's not too serious.
I wish you a quick recovery !

See you soon Callum !

*look at his calendar for the fourth time*

Which tomorow are we talking about ?

For a short moment I felt like Dewe :

But don't worry Callum, I shall wait, you are forgiven (even for tomorow's today). I just hope the blog will be as nice as the last one.

Well to be fair, the true meaning of your question eludes me too. Please, try a clearer formulation.

By the way, simple question of courtesy : don't look down on us. At least we are able to use a foreign language to be able to communicate together. We are doing the effort. You're not. Keep that in mind.

And to try to give a bit of an answer (for what I grasp of your question) : I don't see where the AI is stupid. If you want realism or intelligence, no one should have the silly idea to ride in front of his own archers and if he/she did, I think he/she should be hit. But the topic of friendly fire has already been discussed on another thread.

In all friendship, have a good day

Thanks, good blog.

Just a question too : is it still possible to command only your soldiers on a battlefield like in warband (not only a certain kind of troops, but your archers along with your infanterie...) ?
If I happen to loose my whole unit of archers because of a foolish lord, I'm going to be sooo mad 

Sounds fun, I'll see if I really have luck or not : (I am considering myself lucky if it is before, or if I happen to be right, unlucky if it is after...)

My guess is the end of 2020 : I'll say the 10th of December 2020 (10/12/2020)

Thank you Callum ! Nice blog : this feature should give a nice depth to the game ! I plan to be rather honorable but if my character was to be executed, this would really put quite a lot of emotions into it (I wish so much to have a daughter who will then turn into a Boudicca like warrior )

I also support the ideas of NPC99 to be able to negociate a way out of an execution. However to use it a negociation tool to put pressure on a lord in order to obtain more money might be tricky to balance : we will already have to negociate a ransom to be released from prison and I wouldn't like AI lords to abuse this system to extort money from you or other AI lords.
So I think the negociation proposal should only be available to the prisonner as a last chance to escape death. Not as a way to obtain more gold (once again, only because i'm concerned about balancing issues).

I also like the idea of returning the corpse of the executed lord with his possessions or burying him on site and keep his goods.

Thank you Lolbash for your very helpful contribution.
However I do not clearly understand what you mean by « human relationship ». For what I modestly know, video games may hardly even mimic real human relationships, but I guess you must be familiar with the concept. Also classes played quite an important role in society (and not only in the past : just read The Great Gatsby where the learning of a certain etiquette could play an decisive role in human interactions). Maybe you must focus on how human/class relationships currently work in the US, but sadly I don't think they are televisions in Caldaria where some wannabe kings may recruit their vassals.

What I was really looking for was a way to make the social ladder harder to climb, to earn it. So I like the idea behind this proposition.

But indeed, thinking of it, this mecanic might be a little cumbersome and it would be bad to drown the player under a whole bunch of stats as Rodrigo Ribaldo rightly said.
The system of prestige used in Nova Aetas seems nice (I really must try this mode but I lack time to play).

I only hope Bannerlord would oppose a little bit more resistance to my irresistable ascension . After all, I'll have a whole dynasty to do so (something like the video game "the guild" would be so interesting, maybe a mod could go that way)

Hi esteemed colleague,

Actually, I like this idea. Indeed, only few leaders had the insight or the plain possibility to put commoners in position of command because of social misconceptions or because of the peers' pression, who would often reject the idea itself of sharing the demanding task of warfare with someone not gifted with noble blood. I only think of Gengis Khan, Napoleon, George Washington... However, I guess some leaders of mercenary groups weren't required to be nobles...
-> So maybe in time of need, the requirement attached to this skill could be lower and serve as a sergeant in another Lord's army (thus gaining some points in etiquette).
-> Persuasion should help improve the score of this skill
-> Intelligence should also boost this skill
-> to be able to enter a banquet, your skill must be rather high depending of the host (high for the king, middle for the other nobles : i had always find strange to directly be able to enter a banquet if you won the tournament)

I also really like this idea of having to improve your etiquette for each faction
However :
-> If you have a high etiquette for a specific faction, you should at least be able to gain points more quickly for the other or even start with some points to be able to fight beside this faction if your reputation is high enough.
-> This skill should be able to articulate appropriatly with reputation
-> maybe you could pay a friendly noble to train you ?

I like the idea of having to send your son/daughter to another noble's castle for their formation : you then have to keep an eye on your relationship with this noble and protect his lands etc.

Yes! Killing people in the streets is completely legal here! It's also our national past-time in heated soccer finals - the fans start throwing chairs and ganging up on the seats to fight the other team's fans because they lost the match. Some very entertaining stuff.

隐藏: some true brazilian sportsmanship!

点击展开...

Waow, quite interesting... You're quite the tourist information center, aren't you  ? (thank you for the grass samples of you country by the way, I had really no idea how some of your landscape could look like : the last picture even made me think of my sweet Brittany -extrem west of France- the "Mont d'Arrée" in some ways )

But back to "sport" : it has been already largely discussed on this forum, but this fighting sample shows quite well that retreat was a "natural" reflex from large groups of people (even though there wasn't any commanding officer to organize the combattants...), but I think that it would be very nice in BL to increase the probability of massive troops retreat if you haven't nominated enough sergeants to keep the soldiers in their formation : then if you want to be the only one giving out orders, you have to take only a limited number of people (like a hundred ?).

There isn't much to say about this blog : if so why I am wasting time visiting the forum ?

Two reasons :
1. Terco_Viejo
2. Yaga

Thank you very much for your efforts bringing confort to these desolated lands 

Nice and interesting blog, thanks.
I'm impatient to hear more about caravans !

I was quite worried when I read "Reins" on today's blog, but actualy, I think it was rather interesting and well written : not that much informative but that was enjoyable anyway (I already said it but I would really appriciate a more opened communication to follow this developement adventure more closely but I won't be too demanding either... so "always look on the bright side of life" as they said).

Thank you and nice week to you !

Hello !
Good blog, thank you !

Just two quick questions :
- Will we be able to capture Lords who commit crimes to turn them over to Justice ? Kind of like a bounty hunter ? For example, a Lord from Vlandia attacks villagers and caravans from Sturgia. If I am a Lord of the Empire, could I hunt the Vlandian and deliver him to Sturgia ?
- As a King, can you influence their sentence and ask for their execution or drop the charges ? (if you ask to execute a criminal Lord who hasn't done enough severe crimes to deserve this punishment, you could be challenged by his/her family who will leave your country or try to overthrow you and meet the opposition of other Lords who didn't hated him/her. If you drop the charges, it could displease your vassals and the population of the realm and give a boost to local criminal activities)

Thank you !

Nice blog and thanks for the video ! For those who want to see the previous blog about music, see
(Just thinking about blogs... It would be so good if they could do something similar to the development roadmap from Robert space industry for Star Citizen...
Or like Yanderedev...
It might spoil some things here and there and our waiting certainly won't be easier to bear but still, it might give a sense of progress.

But yeah, just dreaming, no complains made ^^. Afterall Taleworlds isn't crowfunded, unlike my examples, so having these blogs is better than nothing... But Callum, if you have other videos to spare, they will be most welcomed  )

Demat Ettenrocal ! (I hadn't notice you are Briton too !)

Yes, I completly agree with you : they were cases, where some vassals had several lords, but exactly as you pointed out, it was more a game of power (Gilles de Rais is a very good exemple !). This practice could just trigger some... legal difficulties in case of conflits between some of the suzerains of a same vassal, but otherwise I guess it was worth taking the risk if they did it !
And you're also right on your second point : you can ba a vassal of a Lord for a certain territory and the vassal of another for an other one (the funniest example I know is the case of the King John who was both King of England which should meant he couldn't have a suzerain technically speaking but was a vassal of the king of France for his Duchy of Normandy... and it became event more complexe because as such he had some privileges others had not like to right to stay in his Duchy and to invite the King to come to him intead of having to come to Paris, but one day, because of a feud between John and another vassal of the King of France, the later summoned John to come to Paris, not as Duke of Normandy, but as his vassal, which John refused, which started a war etc.)

Through my remark of your comment, I just wanted to underline what the theoretical rule was. With the time, it became more and more perverted or simply ignored. Anyway, feodal Law is quite a mess...

Kenavo ar wech all mignon ker !

Hello !

I just wanted to respond to Ettenrocal and give a little more details about this :

A real vassility system would be great, cause in medieval times you could be vassals of two "masters" like a King and a Duke if you had lands in their territories.

点击展开...

Indeed some vassals had several suzerains but that didn't mean they could. In fact this tendancy was a deviance of the feodal system where lesser nobles understood that they could gain power (mostly land or/and finances) if they swore fidelity to several more powerful nobles. But it wasn't legal per se, because vassility requires a total fidelity (the pact is only broken to moment your suzerain use violence directly against you and you only, not even your family : there was indeed a very revealing song in France "Raoul of Cambrai" which depicts the extend of the fidelity a vassal owns his suzerain : his "master" killed his father, burned her religious sister but he was still compelled to help him, because of his engagement and could only turn against him once his master hit him directly). I could only find an english article on wikipedia about this (they are some more relevant sources in French if you'd like : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raoul_de_Cambrai)

About the rules (customs) that applied in France (which were almost exactly the same throughout Europe) they were written by a famous jurist of that time : Fulbert of Chartres, a bishop who was a renown jurist and had to answer to several legal questions about feodal law (on of them being if a vassal may have several suzerains, which was, as I said : legaly no.)

So I think this system on Bannerlord is much more respectful of the customs that were applied in the feodal system this way (and much easier) ^^.

Question : do someone know anything about feodality in the other non occidental cultures ? Was it similar (I guess in some way maybe ?)

Hello !
Sorry to bother you once again +Innocent Flower but first I wanted to thank you for giving me the opportunity to discuss a bit of history. It is quite enjoyable.
On the first point of your response, you convinced me : a common footman wouldn't spend too much money on such an attire. He may belong to the second class (the one that could afford its own equipement, like in the roman Republican time period). However, leather offers some advantages mails do not : this "skirt" should protect the legs, therefore leather is obviously more confortable in order to run. But that is nitpicking. I think the real reason why this soldier has this kind of protection is because of the roman design of officers' uniform like this one .
I guess there isn't anything left to discuss on this subject.

About colours however, I ask you one more time : what are your sources ? If they are coherent I might reconsider my position and my own sources, but until now, I was the only one to say where my informations came from :
you can both go to war and be fashionable at the same time. So if the artists from Taleworld want to imagine beautiful uniforms, why not ?


If you had sources, I will be happy to read them.

Innocent Flower 说:

Well I have then to confess you should have the means to purchase such an equipement but still ! It is still possible. Multiples examples confirm this strategy : the celts had refined armors and weapons, saxons too, german tribes also... Landknecht in medieval times had the authorisation to wear fancy and bright colors (normaly only reserved to nobility) to appear as an elite warrior troop (which was the case).

点击展开...

If the dude was rich or trying to pretend as much why leather? Why not metal? Anyone who was actually worth a lot would be wearing metal, so who would you kid with some leather? 

Bright colours were not at all reserved to the nobility. Many bright colours were very cheap, and it's a modern convention that we think of medieval people as wearing very drab clothes. Purple might have been insane (go squish a thousand of a very specific type of shellfish and you can dye a shirt) but Red,Blue,Green, yellow, all bright, were cheap and could be obtained by easily accessible sources.  Medieval clothing was Garish.

点击展开...

Dear Innocent Flower,

Sorry but once again I'll have to contradict you.
Firstly (about the third picture with the leather protections), I just said it was important to be beautiful on a battlefield to impress, but of wourse within their budget. Why no metal ? For a lot of reasons : because it fits the cultural design of the roman army, because leather is much more confortable than iron armor, because it's cheaper (you're not either poor nor rich you could be in middle class so affording an armor might be out of your reach but not a fancy leather garment).
Now about colours : where are your sources ? I am basing my affirmations on the work of Mr. Michel Pastoureau a renown french historian specialised on colours (you may check on the internet his books). So as you might know medieval societies in western Europe where highly codified also some colours were reserved for certain people because of the church of the ruling nobillity.
About those bright colours you were refering, this idea might be based on the assumption you had after seeing some pictures of this time period. However you have to remember that those clothes were often ceremmonial and were not "every day" clothes. Indeed, they are still more colorfull than one can imagine (even paysants and so on) but not necessarily bright because it was expensive (as an example, for the red, two ingredients could be used : garance, which was very dark but cheap and kermès, which was very expensive but bright). And even for the colours which were affordable, one may not be allowed to wear it according to your statut (a noble just can't be confused with a anybody no matter his wealth). This depends on the country : if I remember well some shades of red were forbidden in England (my source is the Shakespeare Globe museum in London).
Another example: clothes that were in contact with the skin had to be natural or white.
In the late medieval period, the french king for example published the "sumptuous laws" which clarified which colour may be used by whom.
Finaly, the example about the Landknechts should suffice to prove that some colours were not accessible to everybody, because why the priviledge then ?

Always glad to help,

Mmm
I have to disagree with you Innocent Flower "You're going to a war, not a fashion show."
Indeed, being impressive on a battlefield is really important. Being beautifully protected too. It may convey a message of wealth and therefore power to your opponents.
Well I have then to confess you should have the means to purchase such an equipement but still ! It is still possible. Multiples examples confirm this strategy : the celts had refined armors and weapons, saxons too, german tribes also... Landknecht in medieval times had the authorisation to wear fancy and bright colors (normaly only reserved to nobility) to appear as an elite warrior troop (which was the case).
This mix of fashion and war was very important until the WWI ! In 1914 french soldiers had to wear red trousers to be beautiful and to show they were not afraid... Well it turned out machine guns were a bit too effective with such an uniform...

I congratulate Ali Eser for these pictures !! Well done. An art book would be quite a nice !

Interesting blog !
I'm very pleased to see a Triskell as a banner for Battania, that's very satisfying ! I don't know if I can be more impatient to play this game (I already can't wait for thursdays...)
Thanks to the team and to you Callum