Seppuku feature in Shogun 2

[ManKinD]

I am hoping that CA will add a Seppuku feature where if your "hero" unit or samurais retreat or surrender they must commit seppuku if it is a disgraceful loss.

CA didn't touch on POW's or slaves in the last two titles - it will be interesting to see if it is utilised.

Was it used in the original?

Or will SEGA find this issue too sensitive for it's games?

[Nakandakari Lobato]

In the original STW, you could effective "order a seppuku", but it's just euphemism for disbanding a unit. I hate playing a mod, and there's civil war, and you can't get rid of a worthless general. That really bites. This feature would prevent that from happening

Remember that to the samurai, seppuku was a good act to redeem yourself if you had brought shame, or failed your duty (Giri). But in addition, a noble samurai might commit seppuku in order to change the mindset of a leader, hence in reality that's what Katsumoto-sama did in The Last Samurai. He was attempting to change the Emperor's mind, and his selfless act did so.

So a cool potential roleplay feature in STW2 could be a general is upset and greatly disagrees with your actions and commits suicide to change your mind. Lose some real powerful and noble generals or even a Princess, and many players might change course.

Either way, order seppku, or more properly "offering" the general the opportunity to commit seppuku would and should have ramifications on the trait functions of the leader, and probably the other generals too. It's like when the coach does something to one star player, and everyone else takes notice from then on.

Creative Assembly could take this simple feature and spin it into something very genuine and historically correct. Even young samurai daily practiced in their mind the actions of committing seppuku, so that they cast away their life at a moment's notice, if indeed it served a noble purpose.

[Alex Suvorov]

Maybe CA should commit Seppuku if the game doesnt do well...

[Xerrop]

Was it used in the original?

Yes, when a general lost too much battles in the first STW he had to commit Seppuku.
All generals had a honour ranking - too much in the minus and you got such a video.

[xxoverlordxx]

In the original STW, you could effective "order a seppuku", but it's just euphemism for disbanding a unit. I hate playing a mod, and there's civil war, and you can't get rid of a worthless general. That really bites. This feature would prevent that from happening

Remember that to the samurai, seppuku was a good act to redeem yourself if you had brought shame, or failed your duty (Giri). But in addition, a noble samurai might commit seppuku in order to change the mindset of a leader, hence in reality that's what Katsumoto-sama did in The Last Samurai. He was attempting to change the Emperor's mind, and his selfless act did so.

So a cool potential roleplay feature in STW2 could be a general is upset and greatly disagrees with your actions and commits suicide to change your mind. Lose some real powerful and noble generals or even a Princess, and many players might change course.

Either way, order seppku, or more properly "offering" the general the opportunity to commit seppuku would and should have ramifications on the trait functions of the leader, and probably the other generals too. It's like when the coach does something to one star player, and everyone else takes notice from then on.

Creative Assembly could take this simple feature and spin it into something very genuine and historically correct. Even young samurai daily practiced in their mind the actions of committing seppuku, so that they cast away their life at a moment's notice, if indeed it served a noble purpose.

The Issue with people killing themselves to change your opinion would be extremely difficult to incorporate that wouldn't follow a linear path. And confining the players actions, it's practically holding you hostage where your Top Generals and Admirals and whoever else threaten to kill themselves. I mean this feature would be awesome and historic but it be would damn annoying if you did something out of place and all your Generals commit suicide.
I guess some new traits could be introduced, such as a Loyalty trait that effects the chances of the person committing suicide. But tie in suicide with assassination, dying of natural causes, or being killed in battle which occurs in the form of the AI immediately targeting your general. I personally would love a seppuku implementation but damn would it make the game harder... Unless CA can make it work....?

[scougall9]

Yes, when a general lost too much battles in the first STW he had to commit Seppuku.
All generals had a honour ranking - too much in the minus and you got such a video.

Funny. i was only like 7 when i got Shogun, and i remember seeing that video ALOT =/ i always wondered why it would show it like every 5 turns.

[Nakandakari Lobato]

The Issue with people killing themselves to change your opinion would be extremely difficult to incorporate that wouldn't follow a linear path. And confining the players actions, it's practically holding you hostage where your Top Generals and Admirals and whoever else threaten to kill themselves. I mean this feature would be awesome and historic but it be would damn annoying if you did something out of place and all your Generals commit suicide.
I guess some new traits could be introduced, such as a Loyalty trait that effects the chances of the person committing suicide. But tie in suicide with assassination, dying of natural causes, or being killed in battle which occurs in the form of the AI immediately targeting your general. I personally would love a seppuku implementation but damn would it make the game harder... Unless CA can make it work....?

No it's not confining. Only certain people of high honor would be willing to commit seppuku to change their liege lord's mind. It's someone that not only genuinely cares for their Master, but in addition has a very high honor score, and a very high loyalty score. See? Regardless of the discipline of the samurai, they were human beings too. But if push came to shove, and those last three characteristics came into play, then yes they very well might do something like seppuku, if they felt it would change your mind.

It's the fragile nature of our life that makes it precious.

You know, I played STW for probably five years, and I'm shocked ... I don't think I ever had the seppuku video play. A fun as it was, it got gradually less fun to play because of the graphics.

[KaRoU23]

I guess that Seppuku could only exist in the game as a punishment of withdrawal from Battle, or leaving the troops die without doing anything...Perhaps also if the General doesn't do anything in battle, a seppuku may be asked by the game...Perhaps it could also be added, in terms of a mismanagement of a city

[Seether]

Remember that to the samurai, seppuku was a good act to redeem yourself if you had brought shame, or failed your duty (Giri). But in addition, a noble samurai might commit seppuku in order to change the mindset of a leader, hence in reality that's what Katsumoto-sama did in The Last Samurai. He was attempting to change the Emperor's mind, and his selfless act did so.

One good example of that, is when Oda Nobunaga was a boy, he was wild and unmanageable. One of his father's retainers saw this and committed sepuku, which changed the mindset of the young Nobunaga, brining him to take his studies seriously, which ultimately lead to the man he became.

[KaRoU23]

One good example of that, is when Oda Nobunaga was a boy, he was wild and unmanageable. One of his father's retainers saw this and committed sepuku, which changed the mindset of the young Nobunaga, brining him to take his studies seriously, which ultimately lead to the man he became.

He was Hirate Masahide, not only a retainer of Nobuhide Oda, he was also Nobunaga's mentor..He was talented as a samurai..He was the one to to establish peace between Nobuhide and his agelong rival Saito Dosan!!!

[Xerrop]

Funny. i was only like 7 when i got Shogun, and i remember seeing that video ALOT =/ i always wondered why it would show it like every 5 turns.

Wow you must have lost many battles during your campaign

[Amorphos]

I think it would be great as long as it was optional ~ although I don’t mind if bad generals do it after loosing battles.

It would be annoying if e.g. a 3 start general had 2-3 bad battles then committed Seppuku, because you may have been using hi against e.g. a 7 star general, so that if you keep restocking his army with new men then eventually you could win and your general would go way up to maybe 5-6 stars.

I suppose it would be historical though, so maybe we just have to live with that.

[Nakandakari Lobato]

You as the leader can always be as honorable or as despicable as you desire, but there should always be consequences to our actions, hence the preponderance of civil war traits and outcomes in all the mods of MTW2.

[scougall9]

Wow you must have lost many battles during your campaign

well i was 7....and it was my dads campaign. He had like half of japan and then i went on it at like midnight and sorta...ruined it. I think he had like 2 provences left lol.

[TSD]

Its my understanding (mind you only from documentaries). That the views we hold of samurai today, their code of honor, Seppuku, etc. etc. were not established until the Tokugawa shogunate, when samurai really didn't have anything to do because the country was united, so they would just wax poetic about what the meaning is of being a samurai.

[KaRoU23]

Its my understanding (mind you only from documentaries). That the views we hold of samurai today, their code of honor, Seppuku, etc. etc. were not established until the Tokugawa shogunate, when samurai really didn't have anything to do because the country was united, so they would just wax poetic about what the meaning is of being a samurai.

Not at all.....Exactly the opposite!!!! Let's take into account that in 13-14th century, the battles between samurai were conducted that way...Firstly they would shot volleys at each other...Then they would go fighting one on one without tactics at all...Later, these niceties didn't exist, and new tactics were developed....

[TSD]

Not at all.....Exactly the opposite!!!! Let's take into account that in 13-14th century, the battles between samurai were conducted that way...Firstly they would shot volleys at each other...Then they would go fighting one on one without tactics at all...Later, these niceties didn't exist, and new tactics were developed....

Which part is "not at all" that they didn't do much fighting during the tokugawa period, or seppuku was romanticized later on more than it was actually practically used?

Even the wikipedia article supports what I saw on the history channel, During the Tokugawa shogunate, Samurai were more likely to be beaurocrats, poets, philosphers and artists, than to be found doing battle, many of the writings on Bushido et al, were not formalized until the Tokugawa shogunate and the behaviour often associated with samurai is highly romanticized.

[KaRoU23]

Well, you should take into account, that the Sengoku era and the Azuchi-Momoyama period were periods of continuous fights all over Japan! Furthermore, honor in battle was also important (cutting the opponent's head in battle, not stepping on a enemy's Yumi, etc), but that doesn't mean that honor did not exist...The bushido code was always in their mind.

[Strattios]

While it may be historically accurate, it may not follow all players ideals. I for one take time to nurture my favorite generals and mayors, and strongly believe that a living commander is better than a dead hero. If one of my followers, be it a high level general or even a religious figure were to commit suicide, I would immediately shun them, their differing idea, and anyone else who reacted positively towards it. Few things can be more demoralizing to a nation the the suicide of a well know figure, be it from a feeling of personal lose and even more so if it's because he disagrees with the ruler.

Imagine if General Patton had committed suicide during WWII after slapping that soldier? The Battle of the Bulge may have been much more difficult to deal with had he not been their. Same goes for General MacArthur after leaving the Philippines. A series of loses doesn't always mean the failure of a general.

By the way, how often did it actually happen? Was it something were a ruler would only encounter a few cases during his entire reign or was it something were he would have multiple people a year commiting seppuku a year?

[ManKinD]

It did happen quite often amongst samurai, I am not sure about the rest of the population- here is a list from wikipedia



Notable people who committed seppuku

• Minamoto no Tametomo (1139–1170)
• Minamoto no Yorimasa (1106–1180)
• Minamoto no Yoshitsune (1159–1189)
• Azai Nagamasa (1545–1573)
• Oda Nobunaga (1534–1582)
• Takeda Katsuyori (1546–1582)
• Shibata Katsuie (1522–1583)
• Hōjō Ujimasa (1538–1590)
• Sen no Rikyū (1522–1591)
• Forty-six of the Forty-seven Ronin (1703)
• Watanabe Kazan (1793–1841)
• Tanaka Shinbei (1832–1863)
• Yamanami Keisuke (1833–1865)
• Byakkotai (group of 16-17 year old warriors of Aizu-han in 1868)
• Saigō Takamori (1828–1877)
• Nogi Maresuke (1849–1912)
• Chujiro Hayashi (林 忠次郎) (1879–1940)
• Anami Korechika (1887–1945)
• Takijirō Ōnishi (1891–1945)
• Yukio Mishima (1925–1970)
• Dédé Fortin (1962–2000)
• Isao Inokuma (1938–2001)[6]