Isn't raiding villages supposed to be a dishonorable thing?

[Apocal]

News flash: NPC character traits are cosmetic and have no impact on gameplay.

Just one of many mechanics left to implement by modders.

NPC character traits have effects on gameplay; for example the Valor trait influences wardec voting, contributes to their aggressiveness scoring and affects their willingness to assault a holding without full siege complement. Given this is a game and not real life though, they should've made it blisteringly obvious when someone is doing something because of their traits vs. default behavior. Otherwise you will never notice unless you habitually monitor AI parties to pick up on the differences between a Daring lord and Cautious one.

 

[Wulfsdottir]

Pillaging has been a thing since forever, and certain cultures (both hn real life and in game) reacted differently to it. While I agree some lords should be more prone to it than others, right now it servers as nice cash influx for lords, and stop enemies economy.

Yes, and so was the executing dishonorable lords.
So, if they strive for reality in one case, they shouldn't punish you for roleplaying the very reasonable response in other case.

Right now, even honorable lords do raids while you can't do anything about it and if you execute them, your game suddenly turns into hell.

 

[Askorti]

Yes, and so was the executing dishonorable lords.
So, if they strive for reality in one case, they shouldn't punish you for roleplaying the very reasonable response in other case.

Right now, even honorable lords do raids while you can't do anything about it and if you execute them, your game suddenly turns into hell.

executing a lord for pillaging a village would not have been considered justified back in the day in most circumstances.

 

[Wulfsdottir]

executing a lord for pillaging a village would not have been considered justified back in the day in most circumstances.

Depends on situation. And Lord. And political stance. And many other factors.
Also, only Christian lords would be granted the honorary captivity and rights of war. Muslims and Mongolians (Read Aserai and Khuzaits) were considered as barbarians and would be executed. Vikings also had different standards and so on and so on. It was never black and white. And if one lord pillages your villages over and over again, after you captured him few times and released, coming back for more and more, no one would blame you.

It was never black and white and all this code was depended on very particular circumstances. Escaping from captivity would also justify the execution. Some lords being captured were held on their word and not even locked away. There even were cases when lord would be sent to bring back the ransom himself and they WOULD. Because they gave their word.

The simple game like this can't emulate all those situations, hence why it's important for traits to function. If lord does dishonorable thing by pillaging the village, you shouldn't be penalized for executing him/her. There should be some manner for repercussions.

Being honorable or dishonorable should mean something.

For example, being dishonorable would be profitable for all the pillaging, but if you go that way, you risk being executed. At the other hand, being honorable might prevent you from raiding, but in return you could hope that if honorable enemy captures you, he wouldn't decapitate you.

It's simple game so it needs simple solutions and if it has traits system, they should mean something.

 

[lockefeer]

executing a lord for pillaging a village would not have been considered justified back in the day in most circumstances.

Even if executing them made me a baddie, it would also make them dread me and not raid my villages 24/7

 

[Apocal]

Depends on situation. And Lord. And political stance. And many other factors.
Also, only Christian lords would be granted the honorary captivity and rights of war. Muslims and Mongolians (Read Aserai and Khuzaits) were considered as barbarians and would be executed.

...

The simple game like this can't emulate all those situations, hence why it's important for traits to function. If lord does dishonorable thing by pillaging the village, you shouldn't be penalized for executing him/her. There should be some manner for repercussions.

Being honorable or dishonorable should mean something.

The problem here is the repercussions you've laid out have massive game balance impacts. Executing a lord -- especially for clans that start at tier 2 with only a few members -- is effectively a nearly two decade debuff to their numbers. AI clans tier-up just like the player clan does, that means they get to four parties relatively quickly if low-tier. If that clan starts with only four members and one is executed early on, they stay at three parties until a child comes of age.

A player executing a lord in that situation absolutely should be penalized in some way or else the game is essentially handing every clan with a dishonorable member a "free" lasting debuff, without any counterbalance.

Looking at things on the flipside of the coin, raiding a village has a noticeable impact on hearths and denies recruitment for over a week but it is certainly not close to being worth it in a situation where raiding a village is likely to get your character executed if caught.

Traits should mean something -- and more importantly, they need to be seen to mean something -- but let's not go too far with it.

 

[lockefeer]

Verdict: they need to code some brain into campaign AI

 

[NPC99]

The problem here is the repercussions you've laid out have massive game balance impacts. Executing a lord -- especially for clans that start at tier 2 with only a few members -- is effectively a nearly two decade debuff to their numbers. AI clans tier-up just like the player clan does, that means they get to four parties relatively quickly if low-tier. If that clan starts with only four members and one is executed early on, they stay at three parties until a child comes of age.

A player executing a lord in that situation absolutely should be penalized in some way or else the game is essentially handing every clan with a dishonorable member a "free" lasting debuff, without any counterbalance.

Looking at things on the flipside of the coin, raiding a village has a noticeable impact on hearths and denies recruitment for over a week but it is certainly not close to being worth it in a situation where raiding a village is likely to get your character executed if caught.

Traits should mean something -- and more importantly, they need to be seen to mean something -- but let's not go too far with it.

AI clans should have their own companions who can step up to fill vacancies and lead parties without being dependent on adolescent heirs. Executing Lords for raiding villages would have been ahistorical in most circumstances, but this is a game and it should be a more viable tactic without unbalancing clan numbers.

 

[KingEroc1st]

the mongols were knows to slaughter as much as 100% of the population of even civilians, or at least use them as "2 legged goats" for food, or as meat shields to march in front of their army and "protect" their siege engines from arrow fire.