Spolia opima, devotio and individual prowess

**Hanomean** · July 13, 2012, 02:01 PM

In Roman history there are some rare occasions where the consul would ride into battle with the sole purpose to die in order to let his legions win (devotio) or where he would kill an enemy king in single combat and devote the slain king's suit of armour to Jupiter Ferertrius (wielder of the thunderbolt) (spolia opima).
Both these heroic deeds can be well incorporated into the game. Not only for the Romans but for all the tribes/nations/people. It might not be totally historically accurate but it does have historical founding and makes for some interesting gameplay. I suggest the following:

Devotio
This one's fairly easy. When you're in a tough spot, you can decide to let your general (must be a familiy member) to ride into battle alone and die. This in turn gives your units a morale boost (perhaps even stops routing units from routing) but gives up the family member. The (historical) problem is that if the consul failed to die, there were all these rites to please Mars (I think), being withold from a body. So it would be easier if the general always dies and the army always gets a morale boost. Now you could choose to just offer up all your family members but then you will run out of them. So it might be self-balancing. If it's not self-balancing, just dampen the morale boost.

Spolia opima
This one's a bit trickier. The basic premise is that you challenge an enemy leader (also family member only) and kill him or be killed. If you're succesful not only will it give a small morale boost to your own army and a small morale reduction to the enemy army, your family member will also earn some trait that gives a permanent bonus. Something like a permanent morale bonus or more influence.
The problem with single combat is the technicality of the thing. You don't want family members to constantly engage in single combat, some societies might engage sooner than others and it has to be fought on the battlefield itself. So what I'm suggesting is a very small chance of it occuring with a bigger chance for some societies. It can only occur when two family members are within a certain distance from eachother (a grey button that becomes red or something) and if it succeeds, the battle will pause for a moment (everyone wants to see their leaders fight) and zoom in on the two leaders in all their splendor. When the decisive battle is over the camera zooms out and the fighting continues with one army more spirited than the other.

**Greve Af Göteborg** · July 13, 2012, 02:05 PM

Hmm, this sounds like something you'd use when you're in a tricky situation. I like the ideas, but how common was it that they were used?

**Templar Spartan** · July 13, 2012, 02:10 PM

They sound very awesome! However, I really don't think CA will incorporate these into the game, I just can't see them fitting in well with Warscape

More likely perhaps would be an event or button on the battle scroll, before the actual battle, where you can challenge the enemy general to a duel, carried out in the manner of gentleman duels from ETW.

As for historical plausibility I have no idea :p

**Akrotatos** · July 13, 2012, 02:16 PM

And what would decide which leader won?

**Hanomean** · July 13, 2012, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Akrotatos

And what would decide which leader won?

The one that didn't die won.

And for the occurence: there are three known cases of spolia opima but historians think only one (the one from the link, 222 BC) actually happened. One is contested and one is connected with Romulus and thus probably mythical. There was one more occasion in the time of Augustus but the dedication of the spolia opima (the highest military honour) by some magistrate (don't know his name) was blocked because Augustus didn't want to be outshined while building his empire.

As for devotio, there are a couple more known cases (http://www.livius.org/de-dh/devotio/devotio.html). Especially since the consul could delegate his life to that of a volunteer.

You can imagine single combat to be more present in societies that rely more on individual prowess (like the Germans) but where the sources are lacking.

**Akrotatos** · July 13, 2012, 02:39 PM

The one that didn't die won.

Well duh, I mean what game mechanic will decide who kills the other? Because whichever general's unit has higher stats will win unless you make it completely random aka useless unless you are outnumbered 10 to 1 in which case only a fool would give you the chance.

**Hanomean** · July 13, 2012, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by Akrotatos

Well duh, I mean what game mechanic will decide who kills the other? Because whichever general's unit has higher stats will win unless you make it completely random aka useless unless you are outnumbered 10 to 1 in which case only a fool would give you the chance.

The general with the higher stats could have a better chance to win. You could make it a mini-game, but that would be quite ridiculous. So no, you don't have any influence in the outcome and it shouldn't be too pre-determined. It should be a battle between two warriors where the advantages outwheigh the disadvantages. It's not just about the battle itself though. I think the morale bonus should be way less than the devotio. It's more about the permanent bonus. Be a hero and all.

P.S. I only see this occuring in singleplayer, not multiplayer. So you can imagine a system where the computer declines the challenge more often than not and doesn't challenge you himself or seldom does it.

**underworld965** · July 13, 2012, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by Hanomean

In Roman history there are some rare occasions where the consul would ride into battle with the sole purpose to die in order to let his legions win (devotio) or where he would kill an enemy king in single combat and devote the slain king's suit of armour to Jupiter Ferertrius (wielder of the thunderbolt) (spolia opima).
Both these heroic deeds can be well incorporated into the game. Not only for the Romans but for all the tribes/nations/people. It might not be totally historically accurate but it does have historical founding and makes for some interesting gameplay. I suggest the following:

Devotio
This one's fairly easy. When you're in a tough spot, you can decide to let your general (must be a familiy member) to ride into battle alone and die. This in turn gives your units a morale boost (perhaps even stops routing units from routing) but gives up the family member. The (historical) problem is that if the consul failed to die, there were all these rites to please Mars (I think), being withold from a body. So it would be easier if the general always dies and the army always gets a morale boost. Now you could choose to just offer up all your family members but then you will run out of them. So it might be self-balancing. If it's not self-balancing, just dampen the morale boost.

Spolia opima
This one's a bit trickier. The basic premise is that you challenge an enemy leader (also family member only) and kill him or be killed. If you're succesful not only will it give a small morale boost to your own army and a small morale reduction to the enemy army, your family member will also earn some trait that gives a permanent bonus. Something like a permanent morale bonus or more influence.
The problem with single combat is the technicality of the thing. You don't want family members to constantly engage in single combat, some societies might engage sooner than others and it has to be fought on the battlefield itself. So what I'm suggesting is a very small chance of it occuring with a bigger chance for some societies. It can only occur when two family members are within a certain distance from eachother (a grey button that becomes red or something) and if it succeeds, the battle will pause for a moment (everyone wants to see their leaders fight) and zoom in on the two leaders in all their splendor. When the decisive battle is over the camera zooms out and the fighting continues with one army more spirited than the other.

On devotio...I feel that it should give the soldiers a morale penatly. In real life it might convince units to stop being "cowards" but at the cost of their commanding officer? Most armies panicked when their commanding officer died.

**Andreius Pretorianus** · July 13, 2012, 04:39 PM

I think this things,happened in the early days of the Republic.I hardly believe a consul,who most times,was just an politician who wanted to live the good life,would sacrifice his life just so the troops would gain some morale.

Hell,even when Hannibal besieged Rome,no consul sacrificed himself.So no,it s kinda silly and quite rare in my opinion

**Ichon** · July 13, 2012, 05:01 PM

I don't really see a good system for Devotio and the historical antecedents are sketchy for Rome. Fighting a duel before battle also seems rather rare even for Germanic and Celtic tribes but is described historically so maybe has a place. Its not something I'd want to see happen very often so perhaps only occurs between 2 commanders with high honor on neutral territory(if one side is invader it won't occur but if enemy armies meet in allied territory or in a territory both are at war with it might be interesting way to settle with the loser of the duel army retreating back to their own territory. The winner could be determined 33% random chance, 33% battle skills on that skill path as in Shogun 2 or a similar path, and 33% age so most of the time age will have little effect before 40 but after 40 younger general has an advantage the younger he is though that also means less likely to have gained many battles kills- mostly to prevent 70 year old becoming duel masters).