Printable View
I just noticed this when a son of L.Cornelius Scipio now Lucius Africanvs came to age his name also bore the cognomen Africanvs, seeing this was the first time i gained the Africanvs cognomen in EB i thought it was only to the FM that gained it. So is this normal? not that i mind having an entire blood-line of Africanvs' just thought it was tad odd. :sweatdrop:
I don't think it technically should. I have three Africanvs', so when they bare son's I'll check and get back to you.
It's somewhat dissapointing having the Africanvs agnomen to be passed down the generations, It makes the title rather worthless seeing how much effort a FM needs to do to get it :wall:
Not really, the Romans were very proud of their ancestors and a man was often judged on what his father and grandfather had done before him. If Africanvs was passed down, it would honour the family and the man using the name. As long as he didn't pretend he had personally earned the title it would be accepted.
What i'd like to know is if this is a bug or not., i'd like to see if people who finished a Romani campaign or is far into it have also encountered this. Its kinda off-putting to have ALOT of africanvs' throughout the course of the game that have no significant meaning other than carrying a title of someone else's achievement :thumbsdown:
I can't help you here. My one and only Gallicus got himself killed in a defensive siege against the Aedui. :oops: No sons carry his name.
Weh i think this can't be helped :no:Quote:
;------------------------------------------
Trigger Son_of_Roman_Conquerors_Carthage
WhenToTest CharacterComesOfAge
Condition FatherTrait RomanConquerorCarthage = 2
Affects AfricanusCognomen 1 Chance 100
;------------------------------------------
Trigger Son_of_Roman_Conquerors_Carthage_b
WhenToTest CharacterComesOfAge
Condition FatherTrait AfricanusCognomen = 1
Affects AfricanusCognomen 1 Chance 100
Its definatley not a bug, quite a nice feature really as I like having a whole dynasty of africanus, gallicus etc.
It's quite cool, I think, and adds a new level of uniqueness to the family tree. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
I had a Macedonicus in a Romani campaign, whose son was Macedonicus too.
I don't think its too unhistorical. Scipio Africanus' son was named Africanus (his grandson took the name also, but after conquering Carthage was entitled to the name in his own right). The other example I could find was P. Servilius Vatia Isauricus whose son took the same name.
However there are plenty more historical examples of sons not taking 'victory' agnomina from their fathers, eg. Q. Caecilius Metellus Numidicus, Q. Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus, Q. Caecilius Metellus Balearicus, M. Antonius Creticus.