SP - General Traits are gained faster, but are lost over time.

[Sir Frederic]

In my current game it took me 12 years to become generous, despite always high morale, as I made the character with no leadership at the beginning and not having a large party, I think that affected the speed. I have helped villages with grain and spared cities but I am still not merciful.

The most important thing is that now it will be almost impossible not to lose the trait of generosity and when I become merciful it will also be something that I will never lose. I also have Valor from the beginning and until now I am.

Traits are your character's Fame, at least that's how I see it. It would be interesting if these traits are obtained much more easily, but over time they are lost if they are not maintained, in the end it is the Fame you have, if you stop being a type of person for a long time, people should forget that you were So.

For example, performing two merciful deeds will make you merciful. But as time passes and you do not perform these acts, you will lose the trait. Yes, a year ago you helped some villagers with grain, but now no one remembers you for that. Also, you decided to plunder two villages, so now you are known as a cruel person.

I don't know if you get the idea, fame is immediate but if you don't maintain it, over time you will become conventional.

 

[ClickForFreeBeer]

I'd be against this given the current state of the traits and how inconsistent some of the actions/quest outcomes can be with trait development.

If traits are your character's fame, then two merciful deeds shouldn't really give them that repuatation with everyone in Calradia; this could be better reflected with relation gains with relevant NPCs and multipliers based on the nature of the act and the NPC's traits (i.e. an honourable NPC is gonna be more pissed you stole the herd you were meant to deliver than a dishonourable NPC who admits they likely would have done the same). The best in-game example is the pillage mechanic and cruel/merciful lords... the friends you keep and the enemies you make would be sufficient for my own roleplaying, dunno about you.

On a tangent though, clan tier should really be considered in context of traits and act as a multiplier to the trait points gained/lost. Sure an early-game character should be forgotten easily unless they keep up the good work, but a late-game king or powerful vassal shouldn't lose traits through inaction and would have to purposefully commit opposing deeds. I mean, we still talk about the personalities of historical figures today, so an important clan shouldn't be forgotten about just because they've spent a few weeks managing their fiefs.

 

[Sir Frederic]

(i.e. an honourable NPC is gonna be more pissed you stole the herd you were meant to deliver than a dishonourable NPC who admits they likely would have done the same).

this happens, albeit poorly. When you share traits with any hero, noble, landowner, or companion. For example, if you are merciful and the leader of a clan is cruel, your relationship will not exceed 98 points, since they have -2 for the opposite trait difference. I say poorly because I think that after introducing you to a noble who doesn't know you personally yet and share traits in common, they should win or lose relationship based on traits.

But on the idea, not necessarily all traits will wear off or get so easily. Notorious acts like denying a plunder, ravaging a city, winning a big battle, fleeing a battle, giving freedom to a faction leader should have a strong and immediate impact on your features, but in turn over time people will forget of that. Some day you will have seen how on TV a firefighter was declared a hero for saving someone and today you could no longer tell me his name, where he lives, or if he is still alive.

In general, the idea is to have dynamism for the player, something more than searching, losing or recovering. But do not take 12 years at stake for it.

 

[ClickForFreeBeer]

this happens, albeit poorly. When you share traits with any hero, noble, landowner, or companion. For example, if you are merciful and the leader of a clan is cruel, your relationship will not exceed 98 points, since they have -2 for the opposite trait difference. I say poorly because I think that after introducing you to a noble who doesn't know you personally yet and share traits in common, they should win or lose relationship based on traits.

Yeah, agree. Tbh I find it weird that every farmer from Vlandia to the Khanate knows I was a nice guy back in my town because of character creation and has an opinion on me even though I'm an unknown commoner who the lords won't even let hang out in their halls. Traits and the actions which give them should help build relations with similar minded lords and notables better than a measly +2.

But on the idea, not necessarily all traits will wear off or get so easily. Notorious acts like denying a plunder, ravaging a city, winning a big battle, fleeing a battle, giving freedom to a faction leader should have a strong and immediate impact on your features, but in turn over time people will forget of that. Some day you will have seen how on TV a firefighter was declared a hero for saving someone and today you could no longer tell me his name, where he lives, or if he is still alive.

Because the firefighter would be the equivalent of clan 0, clan 1 at most. Heads of state though? Famous commanders in historical battles? Different story. They can be immortalised for particular deeds, which can even mask their other traits by its overpowering and lasting nature (e.g. Winston Churchill and the weird, racist stuff he said is remembered a lot less than his leadership of wartime Britain).

Soooo fine with the dynamic system IF the higher your clan tier, the effect of your deeds on your reputation will more meaningful and longer lasting, like in real life.

 

[Sir Frederic]

Yeah, agree. Tbh I find it weird that every farmer from Vlandia to the Khanate knows I was a nice guy back in my town because of character creation and has an opinion on me even though I'm an unknown commoner who the lords won't even let hang out in their halls. Traits and the actions which give them should help build relations with similar minded lords and notables better than a measly +2.

When you first introduce yourself, they always make a comment based on their Traits, I'm not sure about yours as well. Right there one should win or lose relationship according to traits. In character creation you can choose that you treat people well, which gives you 3 good traits, which would make it easy to make friends with decent people and automatically make enemies with indecent people. Unable to do a mission for a villager who is greedy, dishonest and cruel simply because from the outset he does not trust anyone like you, unless by other acts such as saving the village or helping another notable in it he changes his opinion about you .

Soooo fine with the dynamic system IF the higher your clan tier, the effect of your deeds on your reputation will more meaningful and longer lasting, like in real life.

I like the idea, I understand the concept. That the level of the clan and your position in the kingdom reduce the process of erosion of your traits due to inactivity. And it would make a lot of sense.

Even, why not, to reduce the impact of your negative acts. If you are a Mercy King of a level 6 clan, deciding to devastate a city will deal less damage to your mercy points than if you were a level 2 clan noble. And the same if you are cruel and decide to be compassionate. It's like saying that people wouldn't believe you've changed.

Because the firefighter would be the equivalent of clan 0, clan 1 at most

That would be the best answer that firefighter could give his grandchildren when they ask him why people don't call him a hero anymore