Some negative trait ideas for Rome

[Cute Wolf]

I think those are to strong. Are there actualy traits giving +3 troop morale?

maybe to explain the fact that he was educated to a fault in military education, we can get him very severe management and trade penalty (-3 management, -20% trade, +200% building costs)

So he will never become a good governor, he must be all times on the field

[Horatius]

maybe to explain the fact that he was educated to a fault in military education, we can get him very severe management and trade penalty (-3 management, -20% trade, +200% building costs)

So he will never become a good governor, he must be all times on the field

No offense but were there people like that?

As far as I know the true top of Roman Society (which all your family members are) were essentially politicians only with the army temporarily, and were heavily advised by more junior officers who would always be there and so every Roman General would be roughly the same.

It may be more genuinly Roman to have rhetorically educated to a fault involving -3 management, -20% trade +200% building costs with +5 influence?

[Ludens]

maybe to explain the fact that he was educated to a fault in military education, we can get him very severe management and trade penalty (-3 management, -20% trade, +200% building costs)

Except that in the classical world there was no such a thing as a military academy, and even military "manuals" were pretty simple. Never mind that soldiers of all ages have held that warfare is something you learn by doing. Even if this is merely military pride, I doubt they would feel a morale boost from being led by someone who could cite Xenophon.

For that matter there was no managerial education either, so I doubt someone who was obsessed with military works would be noticeably worse at governing. Classical government was rather amateurish compared to today's culture of professionals.

It may be more genuinly Roman to have rhetorically educated to a fault involving -3 management, -20% trade +200% building costs with +5 influence?

True, but again: the average Roman senator wasn't trained in governing either, so someone specialized in rhetoric would not have missed much.


I understand this thread is meant to be helpful, but keep in mind that EB's trait are part of a system. They didn't add traits willy nilly. Furthermore, trait effects in EB are generally small: the overall result comes from adding up the effect of many traits. This creates realistic characters, rather than persons dominated by a single trait. The traits so-far proposed in this traits do not take this into account.

[Macilrille]

Nor are any single one of them well documented and realistic for their time, 272 BC - 14 AD. I am sorry- I do not mean to slag you, for the idea and the idea behind some of them could be interesting, but... well, TBH most seem to come from a combination of tabloid history and a pipe dream. No professional historian would take it seriously, sorry.

[antisocialmunky]

How about a trait for sons who serve in their father's armies for coming of age or soon there after? That's been known to have happened more than once: Scippio, Alexander, and Hannibal... etc

Perhaps give them a positive effect for supply and morale.

[Horatius]

Nor are any single one of them well documented and realistic for their time, 272 BC - 14 AD. I am sorry- I do not mean to slag you, for the idea and the idea behind some of them could be interesting, but... well, TBH most seem to come from a combination of tabloid history and a pipe dream. No professional historian would take it seriously, sorry.

Perhaps you should reread some of the Roman history then since many of these are very accurate.

The Son in Power was active and relevant through the entire Republic and most of the Empire, sons had the same non status as daughters and also had to wait for their old man to die before they could be considered their own, it's called Patria Potestas, they didn't even own the clothes on their back. No professional historian thinks Sons in Power could own anything, except military puculium which was instituted by Augustus after this time period was over.

Divorce was very common for a substantial chunk of the time period, which is why the Late Republic is often considered very lose on morales, in the absense of hard statistics you have to accept the evidence we have, i.e. inscriptions, laws (making divorce for both spouse very easy), and literature.

Roman Satirists did generally insult the general public and elite for the fact that the society advanced past the 6th century BC, and could be extremely unpopular for it, in the original Rome Total War infact they took Juvenal well out of his time and made him an ancillary that subtracted popularity with the people.

Speculators and Traditionalists were very common extremes, and the Mocks the Gods category is especially relevant, they were infact to name a couple of wars the cause of all of the social wars, and the third punic war.

Sorry but I could understand you not wanting a Caligula reference, but the reason I suggested these traits is to make them a little more authentically Roman.

The other traits I have seen are also thouroughly accurate, the Hates Romans, look at Hannibal, the Pimped His Wife look at Cato the Younger.

[bigmilt16]

Here are some of mine:

-Troops failed inspection: local governor was shamed when a legionnaire disgraced the visiting consul/praetor/provincial governor (effects of poor discipline FM in charge of city-negative effect on morale)

-champion of the circus: this man is a master horserider and has won numerous victories in the circus, making him a celebrity of the this locale (increase to influence-must be in city with a circus for a set period of time)

-Magistrate: this military tribune has been assigned to micromanage the troops in this city for the governor, in addition to police the locals of this city. (this was inspired by the antagonist in the movie ben-hur, who was tribune of Judea and policed it for a decade while supervising governors regularly switched out. there should be some minor management and influence boosts to encourage a senate run)

-Never been to Rome: this man has never been to Rome, never played in senate politics, but yet remains true to Rome's principles and has shed endless amounts of blood to defend her honor. (character must be 40, be a veteran, and have never been to rome-negative effects on influence, positive effects on morality, management)