Sethai, I cannot express properly how much I disagree with you. Special traits SHOULD change how a unit fights or acts. These boosts to unit statistics that you suggest is exactly what makes E:wom stats such a boring and static system.
Let there be a hundred different traits, and 3000 different combinations.
But why have a trait that changes the stats, when you could just change the stats?
So Tarth units are tough. Why is giving them +10 defence when below 50% health a better way of describing this than just giving them +1 con, that gives them a hp boost across the board? Or conversely, if you're not going to vary CON, what is the point in the attributes system?
Who wants to have to read the descriptions of 300 traits when a change to a couple of stats the player is already familiar with wouldrepresent basically the same thing? When I look at a unit to find out what it's like, I want to be able to find that out in a glance, not be reading "100 traits and 3000 combinations."
This is not an argument against traits. Traits are there to supplemented well designed and deep mechanics, not to replace them. Traits are like special rules: if they're not special you're missing the point. If every Tarthan, or every archer needs to have a special rule to behave as intended, then maybe your mechanics weren't deep or well designed in the first place.
mean if you tell me that the "Royal Guard" is a special unit who is tough due to elite training that helps them protect their ruler... do you want that to mean the unit has +10 CON, or that the unit has a "Last Stand" ability that lets it ignore what should be killing blows for a couple turns if it's near a Champion unit?
Yeah, that's a great example of a circumstance for a trait: an elite unit for a certain purpose that the player is not going to build all the time.
That's not what I've got a problem with. It's when every tarthan needs a trait to work as intended, or every archer. Why give the standard archer a trait that they have the option to remove, when you could apply that trait to the bow itself (ie, all archers), and then if players want to train a cheap low quality unit, they have the option to have a "conscription" or "militia" trait that does that? If the purpose of your trait is to show that the unit is experienced and better at it's primary function, then what is the "unit experience" there for?
Put it this way, when looking at opposing troops, how many different unit types need to have traits before it becomes annoying? And if so, how many trait descriptions do you want to have to read on every enemy unit before you know what you're dealing with? How many exceptions to the rules do you need before it becomes clear that your rules are poorly written? I'm not going to put a number on it, but you must surely recognise that a number must hypothetically exist.
