Roman Adoption

The first campaign I played on the brilliant new EB1.1 was Rome. I had only played a few years with Rome when a captain had proved himself worthy of adoption into the family of Cnaeus Cornelius Scipio Asina. This captain was named Cnaeus Licinus Crassus, and I must say, I adopted him based purely on his name, and sent him straight to Rome.

A few years later, i received a message about a certain Cneaus Cornelius Scipio. This puzzled me as I didn't think I had anyone by that name in my family. On closer inspection, it was my adopted captain, Cnaeus Licinius Crassus! A trait he had "Adopted into Gens Cornelia" right below another trait "Gens Licinia".

Is this a new thing for EB1.1? Or have I just completely missed this, and it's been in since the start?

It was in 1.0 definately. Btw I think there are two new gens in the game. Sempronii and Licinii.

This happened in one of my 1.0 roman campaigns as well, only twice though.

Does this only happen when captains get adopted? I have had other adoptions where they've kept their own name.

Was he a "Man of the Hour" adoption? That's usually when he gets adopted into a gens, at least the way it was intended.

Yes, Cnaeus Licinius Crassus was "Man of the Hour". I really liked that aspect of the game. Shouldn't the regular adoptions change the name as well then?

It would be nice if -anus was added to the nomen too, but I have no idea if that is possible. Either way, superb addition to the game!

there is also the "valerius" line of families too.

I'm struggling to think of anyone called Valerius.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Horst Nordfink

Yes, Cnaeus Licinius Crassus was "Man of the Hour". I really liked that aspect of the game. Shouldn't the regular adoptions change the name as well then?

It would be nice if -anus was added to the nomen too, but I have no idea if that is possible. Either way, superb addition to the game!

---

That's it then. Normally "adoption" in the Roman faction means "sponsorship" but a "Man of the Hour" is directly adopted. The idea was the vary the Roman Gens you see while still allowing for actual adoptions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Horst Nordfink

I'm struggling to think of anyone called Valerius.

---

from the fasti consulares:

P. Valerius Poplicola was one of the first consuls of Rome 509/508/507/504

M. Valerius in 504

In EB's timeframe (just an excerpt):

286 M. Valerius Maximus

280 P. Valerius Laevinus

263 M'. Valerius Maximus Mesalla

261 L. Valerius Flaccus

239/239 Q. Valerius Falto

227 P. Valerius Flaccus

226 M. Valerius Maximus Messalla

220 M. Valerius Laevinus

...

goes on like this...


edit: just found a whole list of them on wiki...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerius

For the Romans, we've chosen to portray the "Man of the Hour" event as a true adoption, so the character takes the name of his adoptive family. What used to be "normal" adoptions are now cast as the establishment of a patron/client relationship. If you look at the event message text carefully, you'll note that it says:

Quote:

---

This man has proven his worth as a true Roman, and would do much to bring honour and strength to his patron. Do you wish to formally accept him as a client?

---

Clients retain their family names after the relationship has been established.

Also Sharon "Boomer" Valerii from BSG :clown:

I should also mention the 6 new gens:

Valeria (Flaccvs, Maximvs, Messalla)
Ivnia (Brvtvs, Silanvs, Bvbvlcvs, Pera)
Sempronia (Blaesvs, Cracchvs, Longvs, Tvditanvs)
Caecilia (Metellvs)
Licinia (Crassvs, Lvcvllvs)
Calpvrnia (Piso)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atilius

I should also mention the 6 new gens:

Valeria (Flaccvs, Maximvs, Messalla)
Ivnia (Brvtvs, Silanvs, Bvbvlcvs, Pera)
Sempronia (Blaesvs, Cracchvs, Longvs, Tvditanvs)
Caecilia (Metellvs)
Licinia (Crassvs, Lvcvllvs)
Calpvrnia (Piso)

---

I'm sure that I had a Licinius Crassus in 1.0...

Glad to know that my waiting for a Iunius Brutus will no longer be in vain. :beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KhaziOfKalabara

I'm sure that I had a Licinius Crassus in 1.0...

---

No, but you may have had a Fabius Licinus.

Hey Atillius

If this isn't too much of a problem, could you list how many gens are there at the moment, and which ones are incorporated, because I've heard that there are 11 and 2 new, and now when you introduced 6 new, I'm really confused :dizzy2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SaberHRE

...could you list how many gens are there at the moment...

---

There were 11 in 1.0 and 6 new ones in 1.1 for a total of 17.

And I think that says enough for all those 'The EB Team hates the Romani' threads.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atilius

No, but you may have had a Fabius Licinus.

---

That sounds plausible. Was the cognomen Crassus always associated with gens Licinia?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KhaziOfKalabara

That sounds plausible. Was the cognomen Crassus always associated with gens Licinia?

---

Not exclusively. There was a Claudius Crassus in 1.0 also.