Question about Traits

[Infidel144]

I am playing as the Julii , and I have noticed that 80-90% of my generals have the bad personal security traits. What am I doing incorrectly that causes this to happen? What is the trigger for 'Lax Personal Security'?

[ReluctantSamurai]

As your generals gain fame (ie. Legendary xxxx), personal security goes down....nothing you can do about it except travel with a good spy or two and a good assassin. There are also several retainers (can't remember what they are called, offhand) that increase personal security.

Welcome to the twisted world of RTW traits

[Darth Feather]

There are also several retainers (can't remember what they are called, offhand) that increase personal security.

I think a cook increases the personal security (but it comes in a Bacchus temple, which gives bad traits as well). A bodyguard is also good, I think you get it through a good battle.

[Myth]

It doesn't matter really. The AI won't spam assassins in this game to really threaten you. Placing a single spy in your army will really help prevent assassinations in the rare case that you meet 2-3 assassins in the same turn.

[ReluctantSamurai]

One other thing you can do if you have a general with very good to excellent stats & traits is to make him the faction heir if he isn't already. Heirs and the faction leader get hefty security bonuses that even a 10-star assassin would need the favor of the probability gods to overcome.....

[Infidel144]

Thanks for the responses. I'm not overly concerned about assassination attempts, there has only been one successful one against me in 300+ turns (and one general driven insane from repeated failures). I thought, however, that I had some control of what traits I might get or not through my actions, and just did not know what it was that was triggering the 'lax personal security' trait.

[ReluctantSamurai]

I thought, however, that I had some control of what traits I might get or not through my actions

Some you do, and some you don't. Temple choice has a lot to say about what traits you acquire, and whether you park your man in a city for the rest of his life, or have him out leading an army. The latter almost always make out better as the devs seem to have considered city life as one of corruption, greed, debauchery, adultery, and just about every other nasty trait you can think of.

In my campaigns, by the time I get to the mid-point or so, my cities run themselves without the need for governors, so pretty much every family member I get is out at the head of an army.....

Far more annoying traits that you have very little control over are "Poor Farmer" or "Indifferent Builder". These two are extremely annoying when you are playing a faction that has no temple that grants a population growth factor. They both add to squalor and unrest, and hence slow or stop the growth of a city. When you have to wait many, many turns to get from the 12k level of development to the 24k level, these two traits are patently unfair, IMHO (and while pumping peasants into a city from another location is a viable alternative, it's tedious and can sometimes backfire by leading to plague which then wipes out all that work).

There are other rather annoying traits but you just have to learn how to live with them or counteract with the appropriate retainer.

[Myth]

Indifferent farmer (Poor farmer in M2) comes up each time you construct a building that is not a farm, and has a greater chance to be decreased and go into the positive side of the trait when you spend the turn in a city that is about to complete (and completes successfully) a farm building. With some planning you can jump your governor around to get it if you want.

Same for buildings, just spend the night in cities that are about to construct buildings.

[ReluctantSamurai]

That is certainly the way to micro-manage a family member to get what you want.....still doesn't excuse the poor implementation. For a faction that can build paved roads, it's not so bad to move a general around particularly if you can give him movement-boosting retainers. But for a faction that cannot build paved roads, and has huge distances to move (Scythia and Numidia, for example) shuffling a general around can be a pain...meanwhile the city that was depending on traits or retainers that the general might have, for growth, has to wait a number of turns for his return. Better to have each faction with a "growth" temple instead of a select few.

Indifferent Builder is patently unfair no matter how you look at it. In long campaigns, most of your cities reach a maximum development (whether that be 12k or 24k) and there is nothing worthwhile to build after a certain point. Why should the player be penalized for this? I've learned to live with it, and at a certain point all, or most of my cities are at ZPG and therefore don't require a manager. That's the best way to solve the problem, IMHO.