The Murderer trait reduces general opinion, but it is hardly considered a crime—except by the victim’s relatives.
In medieval times, it is unreasonable that killing a nobleman is treated the same as killing a lowborn or a pagan.
A noble might not care if another noble murders an unlanded lowborn, but they would likely find it repulsive to execute numerous innocent noble prisoners for no reason—just like some unfortunate captives of a civil war who committed no crime.
In the former case, a permanent Infamy trait is excessive, while in the latter, a mere piety cost is too lenient.
If someone kills my close friend or a trusted, promising knight, I should be able to arrest or punish them, yet the current system only allows this in specific scripted events.
Why is punishing a murderer considered tyranny? In reality, it should be the opposite—refusing to arrest a criminal should be seen as tyranny, just like in some event-based decisions.
Under the current rules, murder is far too rampant.
In medieval times, it is unreasonable that killing a nobleman is treated the same as killing a lowborn or a pagan.
A noble might not care if another noble murders an unlanded lowborn, but they would likely find it repulsive to execute numerous innocent noble prisoners for no reason—just like some unfortunate captives of a civil war who committed no crime.
In the former case, a permanent Infamy trait is excessive, while in the latter, a mere piety cost is too lenient.
If someone kills my close friend or a trusted, promising knight, I should be able to arrest or punish them, yet the current system only allows this in specific scripted events.
Why is punishing a murderer considered tyranny? In reality, it should be the opposite—refusing to arrest a criminal should be seen as tyranny, just like in some event-based decisions.
Under the current rules, murder is far too rampant.
- 10
- 5
- 1
