Why not adjust HI instead of AI?

[pezhetairoi]

I agree that the random element would be nice, but it'd not solve the entire problem because we'd still have generals' bodyguards on the field charging into phalanxes. The faction leader's personality wouldn't affect how he fights on the battlefield unless a pacifist faction leader has -5 attack or something to that effect.

[Akka]

The point is, the player like to play the game.
If the game decide what the player have to do, then yes you have removed the "human is too good for AI" part, but in the end you simply have removed the player from the game, which isn't really the point :p

[RabidGibbon]

It sounds a fun idea to me.

On a similar note I've recently been running a campaign to turn into a story for the Mead Hall, and began sketching out basic characters for the major figures in my empire.

This meant that I was always trying to keep characters actions in line with these and any traits they might pick up along the way (ie: Famously Courageous general is going to charge those elephants head on).

The results have been a campaign thats a lot less succesful than normal, and also a lot of fun.

But that said I suppose everyone has their own different playing style, and some will find the above ideas ridiculous in a computer game.

[pezhetairoi]

Not really--anything that seems realistic in one way or another has some credit, one way or another.

[Kull]

It turns out there are 157 VnVs, so developing a set of role-playing rules on a one-for-one basis would be a nightmare. That said, they could probably be grouped into a smaller set of general characteristics. If anyone has any thoughts on what those should be, lets discuss. Here's a link for those who are interested:

http://geraldtan.com/rtw/