I've never thought of using sterility to pollute enemy bloodlines - I feel its far too much risk. The thing I do the most is force matrilineal, so that I'd get extra renown from my alliances. I'll definitely have to try using intrigue more. Usually I just fixate my lifetime on one person.
Do you use starting characters or do you make your own?
I've never thought of using sterility to pollute enemy bloodlines - I feel its far too much risk.
Risk of what? If you have lustful people with "Carnal Exaltation", you completely balance out the sterility issue. Pair that with lifestyle tree talents and you can actually come out ahead.
If those born of such things do not share your faith, they're fucked, and pairing this with "Sacred Lies" makes seduction schemes become even more prevalent, even within the AI. It makes trysts into something dangerous for them but beneficial for you, even if it's just those within your empire doing it rather than yourself.
It also makes those within your empire without sterility breed like crazy. With attractiveness traits and fecund you could set humanity over the map like a forest fire.
The thing I do the most is force matrilineal, so that I'd get extra renown from my alliances. I'll definitely have to try using intrigue more. Usually I just fixate my lifetime on one person.
It's easy to fixate on people like that, but now I'm focused on bloodlines and religions. The AI responds to what scripts you give them within faith and culture, so this allows you to effectively steer the map beyond just your own moves.
Do you use starting characters or do you make your own?
I played before they let you make your own, and it feels dirty to use the character creator. It gives you way too much room to power game when you could just use what's already on the board, even someone weak.
I once gave my character every positive trait + 100 of each attribute, and it was overpowered. I've been playing preset characters since then.
I never bothered reforming any religions. I feel like once you have that power, you're able to already smoothly control an empire and expand. At that point, the point is easy. Usually I spread the religion by either using holy wars, or conquest and then demand conversion from prisoners/rebels.
I never bothered reforming any religions. I feel like once you have that power, you're able to already smoothly control an empire and expand. At that point, the point is easy. Usually I spread the religion by either using holy wars, or conquest and then demand conversion from prisoners/rebels.
It's not easy, it's flavorful. I still have challenges no matter what faith I make, but the challenges are vastly different depending on what those faith tenets are.
It has AI scripts embedded into it for behaviors, it's amazing, but if you aren't careful you could make your future enemies into a stronger threat. 'Sacred Lies' for instance makes others more likely to join in on schemes, which could lead to your own assassination. If you add 'Hedonism', suddenly a lot more people are comfort eating and hosting feats, making everyone nice and fat. Rather than making things too easy, it instead shows you the balancing act the CK3 people have designed, giving further reason to figure why more traditional faiths didn't emphasize sins as much in the meta-narrative, why they'd utilize chastity to control population numbers, why marriage strictness means anything versus complete polyamory, etc.
Running your own faith has other faiths see you as 'astray' if not worse, which can make it harder to land some marriages or enact alliances. You have to be kinda pushy to get through the initial new religion hurdle you make for yourself.
This could be construed as harassment.
Right because here on sc, no one harasses anyone, just wouldn't be the sc spirit, especially sexually. Thanks for the update
Well tbh, Cavs made it a big thing about how he's into scat play and how he gets off on women eating or rping about eating his shit so it's very likely that he did take you roleplaying with him as flirtation
After cavs perceived roleplay I said " my parents used to joke with me like this" and when he said it was sexual I said "really? You actually see poop as a sexual thing?" He asked me if I was into it and said "no I was joking" yet the incel still insists I was coming on to him.
yes, however, as it showed on the screenshots, I made it abundantly clear it was not sexual, and in fact, I would chalk it up to simple and understandable miscommunication had it only started with him thinking this, however, when you tell someone, over and over and over that this was not sexual, and everyone knows already that this is just your sense of humor, yet they still insist you were coming on to them, that's just pure narcissism. Had he started out thinking this and simply said "oh ok" when the evidence was presented to him it was not as it appeared I would give no shits, which is why I was nice about his confusion at first, but how many times is it that multiple people, can explain to this person that it was not flirting but is just how the person is with everyone, how long and how many times do they get explained this over and over, until the person is just clearly stubbornly thinking what they want to stroke their own ego?
It doesn't really matter what your intent with it was because you were still playing into it.
No it does matter, hence that would determine if it was actual flirting. Never in a million years would I have imagined eating shit would be sexual for another human being, I mean I knew it happened, but that's rare- that's if someone asks you to tickle their feet, and you do with platonic and nonsexual intentions, and the person happened to have a foot fetish and now insists you were flirting- only now, the person insists this to the death despite it now being abundantly clear out were not when maybe at first the mistake would have been understandable.
If the persons intent commiting these actions really mattered, people going to HR and getting fired or suspended for sexual harassment wouldn't really be a thing.
It does matter, that's why you will never in a million years be charged with sexual harassment for talking about balloons with someone if someone has a fucking balloon fetish, or why accidentally showing yourself to someone if obviously an accident, may not get you in trouble, or sending nudes to the wrong person- there IS a line.
Tc and have already said we see you sexualizing us as sexual harassment because (licks ass) isn't 'not sexual'.
Right and Jim gets a pass for calling you his loli every day
It's about how you make others feel, and while yeah it's completely unfair that you should have to watch your actions with others while trying to be friendly with them sucks,
Agreed
doing things and rping things in a sexual way can be seen as flirtation
"Can be seen as" is different than actually being so, especially when it becomes blatantly and painful obvious it was not. In fact, he asked me in public chat to lick his ass to when I was spamming licks ass to everyone, he wants to be all special, I spam the same shit to my aunt. And 80 percent of members here
This could be construed as harassment.
Right because here on sc, no one harasses anyone, just wouldn't be the sc spirit, especially sexually. Thanks for the update
Is it okay for you to do these things simply because someone else did it first?
Should we be worried about you raping children just because someone on here claims to have done it already?
This could be construed as harassment.
Right because here on sc, no one harasses anyone, just wouldn't be the sc spirit, especially sexually. Thanks for the update
Is it okay for you to do these things simply because someone else did it first?
Should we be worried about you raping children just because someone on here claims to have done it already?
(Licks turncoats ass) get over your blatant double standards, and I may take you a bit more seriously
So in other words you're fine harassing people because of a past precedent established, and we can assume you will mirror other's behaviors in a similar fashion if given the reason.
