Do you roleplay your civ?

Psychorg

Chieftain
Joined
Jan 23, 2005
Messages
41
As the title suggests, I'm interested in whether you roleplay your civs. I mean this beyond the obvious "when I play as the ljosalfar I tend to go for the fellowship and live in a big forrest". What I want to know is: Do you, when playing as the Sheaim, try to cast the Armageddon spells (for no reason other than "being Sheaim")? Do you, when playing as Bannor, attack a civ simply because it's evil? Do you, when playing as Perpentach, do crazy things, simply because...?

I, myself, tend to roleplay; especially as the Sheaim or the Elohim. There is something strangely appealing about destroying the world, and oddly enough, there's something equally appealing about being the protector of it.
 
Most civs are designed well enough that good gameplay for that civ automatically means good roleplay.
 
I stopped doing that when my wife walked in and yelled at me for playing the Balseraphs in the nude. Which was, I should say, an outrageous lie! I was not nude, I had a firemans hat on.

Seriously, I often play against type. I play the sheaim as followers of the order and the Lanun in vast fellowship forests. I do it mostly because I assume all you folks are trying the typical combinations and I want to make sure the weird stuff works too (go go vampire crusaders!). If I was truely playing, and not playtesting I would probably favor the more fitting roles.
 
Ive been playing the calabim lately and role playing it starts to get a bit out of hand i guess.

Like when i raze a city with my vampires i want them to eat everyone in the city a real "Feast Of Ages" instead of just pillaging up the place.

But i still fantasy that part out like if i take a city that has big pop i like to pretend its the feast of whatever the cities name is :)

Gobble gobble enemy citizens, yum!

Also since they level up so much i treat the most powerful one like its the "Vampire Lord" too bad they dont get a special upgrade at some point. Not sure what it would do but would be damn cool to have.

I tend to run my cities like real meat farms, just gobbling up citizens at will especially trouble makers . . . . those taste the best.
 
Heh, have you actually gifted vampiricism to a crusader? That would be awesome. Actually, making a vampiric paladin would be pretty cool, too.
 
Of cours i role-play :) have you seen my entry for my favoirt religion and (before i started to try moding) my location for this accounts was always somewere in the ffh world. Heck, it still is, sort of :D
 
tyrantpimp said:
Also since they level up so much i treat the most powerful one like its the "Vampire Lord" too bad they dont get a special upgrade at some point. Not sure w

I think you can give names to units (or am I imagining that...), but I'm too lazy to do it... might be a nice touch if this was triggered automatically on some events, like getting 100 exp or slaying a dragon etc. (with a non unique unit), of course with a proper name suggestion...
 
Yes, but probably not very well. At times even as a peaceful civ I simply annihilate a neighbor. :p
 
Kael said:
I stopped doing that when my wife walked in and yelled at me for playing the Balseraphs in the nude. Which was, I should say, an outrageous lie! I was not nude, I had a firemans hat on.

Seriously, I often play against type. I play the sheaim as followers of the order and the Lanun in vast fellowship forests. I do it mostly because I assume all you folks are trying the typical combinations and I want to make sure the weird stuff works too (go go vampire crusaders!). If I was truely playing, and not playtesting I would probably favor the more fitting roles.

Women get strange that way. A wierd "jealousy" about video games and computers. When my fiancee' finds me nude in front of the computer, her complaint is that i should be nude in front of her instead. (CHecking my email has gotten me into so much trouble in pre-shower mornings).

As for non-archtypal styles, i try them too. BUT I MUCH prefer the stereotypes. This is primarily becuase when I'm playing D&D i always go for "non-standard" characters. WHen i can SEE the entire world, i like things to be fully flavored. Though, I simply MUST try the vampiric crusaders now, after hearing the notion of them.
-Qes
 
dreiche2 said:
I think you can give names to units (or am I imagining that...), but I'm too lazy to do it... might be a nice touch if this was triggered automatically on some events, like getting 100 exp or slaying a dragon etc. (with a non unique unit), of course with a proper name suggestion...
My elite units - those with high XP and those who have done some glorious deed - always get unique names and are treated accordingly. Giving names to your units is a really cool feature.

And I do roleplay a bit, but that doesn't mean I play very different than I'd do when I'd want to play efficiently. If I need to declare war on my good neighbor as Bannor, then I just claim his religion is heresy and that he must be punished for his offenses against the Elohim or whatever. So I always play power politics, but find other reasons for doing it. Just as real-life politicians do.
 
I do sometimes.
But there are some impossible combinations. I have no problem with vampires becoming lawfully good and living on animal/criminals blood, or something like that. But sheaims becoming good, if they banded together just to destroy the world, how would they become good? Their nation would fall appart and join bannor or something else (They are same race as any other human, IIRC, and their only speciality is that they are evil and worship dragons)
 
Let all infidels be brought forth ! I shall reclaim their blood for the greater glory of the Order !

Yes, I do roleplay. Including, recently, some lawful good vampires. My inquisitors had a very personal style of execution whenever they came to purge other religions from my cities :)
 
A little. But I'm too much of a "gamer" to do it real well.

I even used to play pen & paper RPG's because it was a game, not because it was roleplaying.
 
Grey Fox said:
A little. But I'm too much of a "gamer" to do it real well.

I even used to play pen & paper RPG's because it was a game, not because it was roleplaying.

It's the same for me...

All roleplaying attemts in Morrowind turned into another round of insane powergaming :)
 
TheJopa said:
I do sometimes.
But there are some impossible combinations. I have no problem with vampires becoming lawfully good and living on animal/criminals blood, or something like that. But sheaims becoming good, if they banded together just to destroy the world, how would they become good? Their nation would fall appart and join bannor or something else (They are same race as any other human, IIRC, and their only speciality is that they are evil and worship dragons)

"There's too much suffering in this world, suffering that can never be truly eradicated no matter how much things improved.

Therefore, the only humane solution is to destroy the world and help those who are born to lives of suffering but can't or won't take their own lives themselves."

What's so non-good about wanting to destroy the world? ;) (The above philosophy isn't actually even made up - I'm still a bit undecided of whether or not it's a plausible one, but it definitely isn't one that could be dismissed outright.)
 
Sometimes what you think is good, another think is evil. Like if you roleplay a good civ on a mission to destroy the world to ease the suffering. Another good civ might stop your "evil" intentions. But in both civs own eyes, they are good. With good agendas.

Destroying the world to "save" the world or rather its people from suffering makes me think of Final Fantasy 7, where Sephiroth wants to destroy the world, or rather all the humans so that the planet can get back its much needed lifeforce. (the big corporation has been sucking out the lifeforce to create power, pretty much industrializing the world. Which kinda makes the games message clear. We have to stop destroying our world, or our changes to the world will destroy us.)
 
Top Bottom