SP - General Why are character traits so bad?

[Elensari]

Why are the characteristics of our character just virtues such as honor, honest and heroism? I fight and win all the time. The feature I want to come: "Good Attacker" or conquer the castle and the city The feature to come: "Conqueror", or I'm doing a good defender The feature to come: "Good Defender".

When I lose it, it should be "Bad Defender" or "Bad Attacker".

What I mean is, instead of the virtues that describe his personality, the character should develop and gain features accordingly, right? Doesn't it matter whether we win hundreds of battles or conquer dozens of castles? They must have such traits in their lord. It has a Perk system but it is inadequate. What I mean is 20% more morale when attacking, more like diversification when defending.

You give me a 30-year-old man and you want him to earn honest and honorable virtues with his work, whereas by that age the personality of the man is already seated. Pouring salt into the cooked food we do.

You know that most of these features are available in "total war". Wouldn't it be better if the game makers did such a project?

 

[rhn]

As I understand it, the traits are exactly meant to describe your personality. It is not just some small fun tags depending on what you do, they are actually the new and improved version of the diplomacy system, which in Warband only really had 2 parameters(honor and ... I forget the other one). The traits influence how well other lords respond to your propositions, based on which tags they have. Like, an honorable lord will be more likely to listen to you if you are also honourable, and less so if dishonourable.

 

[NiSt1205]

As I understand it, the traits are exactly meant to describe your personality. It is not just some small fun tags depending on what you do, they are actually the new and improved version of the diplomacy system, which in Warband only really had 2 parameters(honor and ... I forget the other one). The traits influence how well other lords respond to your propositions, based on which tags they have. Like, an honorable lord will be more likely to listen to you if you are also honourable, and less so if dishonourable.

RtR. The second one was Right to Rule, but it did matter only if you did plan to raise your own kingdom. Or to take over someone else's in VC. Or whatever it did in other exps/mods

-EDIT- Oh, and I completely agree with you. It's an improvement over what Warband's diplomacy was. To OP, also keep in mind that the trait system we currently have is very incomplete. It lacks traits leveling and more, so what you see is just a sketch of what it should become, therefore it may feel poorly designed atm, but it really just needs a couple of tweaks and it should be nice

 

[rhn]

RtR. The second one was Right to Rule, but it did matter only if you did plan to raise your own kingdom. Or to take over someone else's in VC. Or whatever it did in other exps/mods

I forgot that one, but what I was thinking off is that stat that tells how unpopular a lord is in his faction... Controversy? Something like that.

 

[NiSt1205]

I forgot that one, but what I was thinking off is that stat that tells how unpopular a lord is in his faction... Controversy? Something like that.

If my memory is good enough, that represented disputes between two AI lords, such as fighting over fief assignment and so on

 

[ZydrateTheSmoothCriminal]

Agreed.