Remove ads

The King is Dead, An Heir Is Born: Crusader Kings 3

Reader mode
Pidl said:
Might be some mods that can help you? I know land exchanges are in the base game (bugged, but still)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Nope. Nothing that'd allow me to nitpick just that specific titles.

Also in somewhat related term, does tax office's bonus apply to your holding in that duchy even if you don't hold the duchy title or capital?
 
warhammer651 said:
but the bordergore is historically accurate!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Let's hope that they add vassalage based on the title of your character (like historically it was) than your character himself as it is now. It would create less annoying scenarios when you have the Duke of Normandy be the King of England, with the King of France treating him like his in an "different" kingdom.

This could potentially alleviate the border gore problem in feudal Europe at least. Still, CK3 needs an desperate feudalism and political systems overhaul, which would add patrimonial monarchies (for the 867 start date at least, though for example Poland was still an patrimonial monarchy in the XIth century), an realistic depiction of feudalism and it's regional differences. As far as things are now the system doesn't work at all and it's unfunnily unrealistic.

And these suggestions are the tip of the iceberg, mind you.
 
Remove ads
Dev Diary #61 - The Royal Court
  • Threadmarks

    • CK3 Dev Diary #61 - The Royal Court

    Greetings! Welcome to the first Dev Diary for the Royal Court expansion! As we mentioned in a previous DD, we’ll go back to Azure patch DD’s for a few weeks after this one. But do not fear, there will be some more Royal Court DD’s before the...
    forum.paradoxplaza.com forum.paradoxplaza.com
     
  • Threadmarks
    • Mrmastro said:
    Let's hope that they add vassalage based on the title of your character (like historically it was) than your character himself as it is now. It would create less annoying scenarios when you have the Duke of Normandy be the King of England, with the King of France treating him like his in an "different" kingdom.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    This is really hard to implement right as soon as you get into wars though.
     
    My wishlist for ck3 includes

    • Being able to conquer individual baronies.
    • A less strict delineation between different types of baronies that more accurately reflects how areas were governed and fortified, and how the garrison, religious, and population center of a region might be the same place, not spread out.
    • Untie tech tree from culture and make it regional.
    • Implement a more detailed and universal raiding mechanic to reflect how warfare was often based as much on raiding and pillage, as it was on sieges.
    • More ability to invest in improvements to a realm: As fun as it is to conquer a realm, I also like to have my rulers be able to build great works within one: public fountains and baths to recall Rome, good roads, and even schools. While some of this is technically in the game, it is all abstracted away as a modifier or temporary bonus.
    • Less of a sharp divide between tribal and later societies, perhaps restrict building types by population density and subsistence methods the locals use?
    In general, I want the game to evolve in a way that faces me with the choices and realities a medieval monarch would face in ruling their realm beyond the dynastic system that is, to their credit, already quite robust and functional.
     
    TBH my biggest pet peeve is the holding system. I think it just doesn't work and should be scrapped and reworked. Baronies sort of made sense when they were individual provinces, but right now the issue is very difficult- the reality is that castles, cities and churches were often overlapping.
    What I'd love if the ability to have separate church jurisdictions which could ignore the feudal borders. For example the Polish can Scandinavian churches were initially subject to German bishops until they received their own archbishoprics. Cities/settlements should be the sole holding type and the difference between a metropolis like Constantipole and a small villages should be entirely down to development/buildings/population.
     
    Last edited:
    Undead Martyr said:
    TBH my biggest pet peeve is the holding system. I think it just doesn't work and should be scrapped and reworked. Baronies sort of made sense when they were individual provinces, but right now the issue is very difficult- the reality is that castles, cities and churches were often overlapping.
    What I'd love if the ability to have separate church jurisdictions which could ignore the feudal borders. For example the Polish can Scandinavian churches were initially subject to German bishops until they received their own archbishoprics. Cities/settlements should be the sole holding type and the difference between a metropolis like Constantipole and a small villages should be entirely down to development/buildings/population.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    It'd be amazing if you could have proportion based distribution of land holdings within a county. Stuff like "the church hold 55% of the land that's nominally yours" as well as "10% of your land has city charters and is thus directly in the hands of burghers". It could even handle landed barons with an inherited feudal contract as distinct from your own administrators.

    This would also mean plenty of opportunities to alter those proportions. Successful cities thanks to trade and prosperity would ask for charters, resulting in burghers administrators, but be very useful in providing funding. Donations to the church could result in their share growing, while deals with the pope if you're very pious might get you some of the land back. And of course being heretical would let you do a land grab on them, as happened historically. And landing barons would be a good way to reward and retain useful courtiers.

    You could even introduce smallholders for the areas that had them historically.

    The whole distribution between the types of land ownership would thus vary.

    One issue with it is that it doesn't provide discrete titles for characters to hold.
     
    TBH the whole point of localizing holdings is for character driven political intrigue, but barons aren't really full fledged characters, so there's not really any benefit to keeping them.

    But like- Rome was a city, with the Castle Sant'Angelo, and the Vatican. How to represent that in game? And Rome itself actually revolted and had a self governing commune for half a century in the middle of the game period.

    The Guelph-Ghibelline feud, rise of the communes, temporal power of the papacy and imperial aspirations of the HRE rulers all need to be placed front and center.
     
    I have to say a lot of this looks like a lot of added micromanagement and work that at least in my eyes detracts more from the gaming experience than it adds.
     
    I've come back to CK3 recently, playing a custom character game (under the 400 limit for achievements) as a Welsh petty king. Managed to unite Wales under my first King, now on my second.

    The game plays more solidly than when I last played, Kingdoms are able to fight back, rather than getting utterly curb-stomped by the Vikings. Though the Vikings still hold a lot of Northern England, parts of Scotland, and much of central Ireland.
     
    Just started this and loving it, though playing a modded abomination that might grant an unusual user experience as my current PC is a Werewolf Deep One with Valyrian Blood who would be a giant albino cannibal even without the magical boosts.

    Questions.

    1. Why is my son wearing a terrifying mirrored mask? Is this just a normal type of helmet that happens to look creepy, something to do with mods, or entirely normal? It makes some IC sense but it worries me with the Lovecraftian Gods mod that this is a terrible sign.

    2. Are there mods around the stat cap? When playing a Sith Lord Vampire Giant who I assume became king by walking out of the ocean and devouring the last king I hit the Prowess cap fairly easily, which is a bit disappointing as vampires in the mod are supposed to get stronger over time. Is this an easy fix, hardcoded, or just a terrible idea/nonsensical either way due to how the stats actually work?

    3. Is there a way to reliably make your heirs cannibals if you're one already? Cannibalism as a sadistic viking lets me get piety and lose a ton of stress whenever I devour a prisoner, and I like the idea of a dynasty that just goes "fuck it, we eat people" wholesale.
     
    Last edited:
    grommile said:
    Does he have the "disfigured" trait?
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Not according to his file, though mod changes left a few spots of weirdness so maybe he had similar. He did have "Purified Deep One Hybrid" though which might or might not trigger something similar?

    Also I got my first stress bomb that wiped out most of a dynasty after two of my Deep One children went into the ocean, which the mod treats as death. With one ritual combat murder that reduced the number of living children of my original king down to two, with my current PC working very hard to narrow that down to one to consolidate his family's holdings.

    It strikes me that "most of the family died of nebulous stress and mental health after three of us left to join the Deep Ones" is an amazingly Lovecraftian event.
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top