[quote=Iarumas] Do Pegasus and other winged mounts count as beasts?What does Thunder of Hooves actually give you? A better cavalry charge? [/quote] They do not. They're pure "air force". Thunder of Hooves gives you a much more intimidating Cavalry Charge than normal. [quote=ASTA] No, any idiot cannot use a gun. Even modern firearms, though easier to handle and being of superior technological background, cannot be utilized correctly by any random smuck that chances upon one. Like any weapon, firearms require a certain level of experience, talent and finesse to use correctly and efficiently. While the firearm (generally) boasts more stopping power than the crossbow, shortbow or longbow, early firearms were prone to catastrophic failure, which in turn often resulted in the death of the operator or the loss of his hands. You also need to ask yourself just what 'type' of gunpowder weapon you're working with. Gunpowder technology is not just limited to muskets. You also had early gunpowder weaponry dating all the way back to the 11th and 12th centuries, like hand-cannons, hand-held bombs (which were basically an early form of grenade), rockets (which later evolved into primitive rocket artillery, which was extremely effective during the era it was used), and mines (these existed, but were only effective when under the care of a man watching the mine, who would trigger it when an enemy walked over it). Cannons ranged from gargantuan (and rather dangerous) brass-forged 'superguns' firing stone balls to the iconic smoothbore breech-loading cannons that we're all so familiar with. Mortars existed as well. I'm not going to go into a massive history lesson here, but in order to seriously understand capability of the firearm and the tactics employed by those armies that chose to adopt it (most notable that of the early 'Pike and Shot' strategy and formations), as well as the different types of firing mechanisms later and more advanced smoothbore muskets used. The wheellock, matchlock and flintlock come to mind. If you're worrying about firearms being overpowered, then direct your gaze to flintlocks utilizing rifled barrels, weapons firing Minié balls and flintlocks utilizing percussion cap technology. Combined, a weapon of this make can, in a sense, be considered 'overpowered' for a setting featuring mages and archers, as a man equipped with one of these and two weeks of training is more or less a force to be reckoned with. In addition, if you're worried about the relative ease-of-use associated with the firearm, I suggest you remove crossbows from the game as well. They, like their gunpowder counterparts, required little training to use and could be given to conscripts withdrawn from the regional peasantry in times of conflict. They were also highly destructive (and deadly accurate), if not lacking in rate-of-fire. However, If used correctly, they were powerful tools. There's also this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbalest ...Which is basically a crossbow on steroids and will gut a plate-armored knight and probably the man standing behind him at a distance of 300m. Rate of fire? Two bolts per minute (provided the user was seasoned and of sufficient strength and agility). Two shots per minute was about the same rate-of-fire an early firearm user could expect (though, this was probably truer for those that used early matchlock firearms like the Arquebus). [/quote] I'm well and truly familiar with it, and fun fact, despite your belief any idiot can handle a gun. I can give any ten year old child a firearm. Show them how to use it in five minutes, and have someone who knows how to operate that weapon. Even if only to a basic level. There is no actual skill barrier. They require no special strength, no extended training, a near cripple can use a gun. Where, even today not many men can fire a properly made longbow. I understand the history of warfare in extreme detail (and much to the chagrin of my history teachers). Firearms are far more overpowered than crossbows and won't be making an appearance in this for a while. (Which is the other reason, there will be advancement, not just on the map, but technologically as the "years" go by. [quote=Bugoycmike] I assume the reasoning behind not putting gunpowder isn't just a historical one but a in-game mechanic one as well. Although along those grounds I'd argue on the incorporation on Magic given it's essentially game-changing nature. I mean muskets, rifles and cannons can misfire; magic only so if the user is pushed or pushes themselves beyond their limits/knowledge. That being said, it is a Fantasy game. *shrugs*On that note, does an Army necessarily have to be experienced? I've been seeing a lot of Nations featuring armies without any sort of 'fresh' regiments and am a little concerned. Unless of course my math's a little off... [/quote] No it doesn't have to be. Some people are willing to pay a bit more for experienced troops. [quote=GreivousKhan] I think experience and elite and so forth, are meant to reveal level of skill/training. Though if such is the case, the word experience could be a bit miss leading. Of course that's just my guess. [/quote] Yes, and no. It does also reflect a bit on the history, Experienced Troops will have used their training, such as against bandits, raiders from across the borders, elite have been in the military for some time and have quite a bit of experience and training. Royal Guard are a step above that. It also partially reflects quality of equipment. Royal Guard will have the finest weapons and armour your people can forge. Elite will have good. Experienced will have normal equipment and in general so will "trained" (the 'free' skill level) [quote=Iarumas] Ah thanks, i'll get to that. Also, I noticed you have 4 mechanist traits when you have mage traits Another question:-The *cults of xxxx* seems to be a much better flaw to choose than Dangerous Cults, whats the difference between them?[/QUOTE] Cults of XXXX are basically your regular insular cults teaching beliefs you don't like, they'll passively (but skillfully) recruit disillusioned people from your populace etc. They can become dangerous if allowed to fester for too long. Dangerous Cults are typically smaller cults, but of people that take active action against you, they're the closest thing there is to terrorists, they'll burn grain stores, slaughter loyalist families, poison wells etc. [QUOTE]I really feel like taking Haunted by the Past cus it just fits so here are some basic Custom Trait ideas im gunna play around with: -Spread the Word: Your preachers, diplomats, traders, hell even soldiers, basically anyone who goes out of the border carries with them the will and material to preach your religion to the uninformed and ignorant. They do so in more numbers and ability than simple preachers. -Preachers of Steel: Your preachers can do far more than simply stand on a street corner and yell at the top of their lungs for hours on end. They travel in armed retinues and carry the garments of war, eliminating evil and aiding the needy in their travels to spread the word. In doing so they are mostly more than welcome in other lands and preach with more ease than normal. In times of need these preachers can even be drafted into the military, inspiring the soldiery by their presence, deeds and stories. [/quote] Nice. Those would be fine. --- All of the flaws "change the chance" for random events that I roll. If someone has dangerous cults, some sort of attack by them is more likely than if they didn't have it for example.