• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Veldmaarschalk said:
Here is his thread about this subject and here is his other one

The first of those isn't accepting new posts.

In any case, unless he posts that he had some reason to specifically remove them and that it wasn't just a coding oversight, the claims are historical and were in fact exercised repeatedly during his lifetime and should (MHO) be included.
 
Where to put the Embriaco's?

Having a little dilemna here with my modding. The Genovan Embriaco's were Lord of Jebail (aka Byblos) which is located btwn CK Tripoli & Beirut. I believe they played a crucial role in latter history of Outremer (war of St.Sabas?). As their province not on the map, where would be a good alternative? So far I've put them up in Safed (C769) but its only a matter of time before someone tracks down the real rulers of that territory. And given its a pretty big family, I don't want to leave them all at Tripoli's court & die off for lack of marriagability.

So any suggestions?
 
aylo1 said:
Having a little dilemna here with my modding. The Genovan Embriaco's were Lord of Jebail (aka Byblos) which is located btwn CK Tripoli & Beirut. I believe they played a crucial role in latter history of Outremer (war of St.Sabas?). As their province not on the map, where would be a good alternative? So far I've put them up in Safed (C769) but its only a matter of time before someone tracks down the real rulers of that territory. And given its a pretty big family, I don't want to leave them all at Tripoli's court & die off for lack of marriagability.

So any suggestions?

If they're local lords between two provinces, then (a) if they're bigger and more important than the lords of the proper cities, use them as the counts or (b) if they're not, put them in the court of whichever count's more appropriate.

If they're married to nubile women and/or have young children, there's really not much of a problem.

If it's the family that's important, you can always make it a default dynasty for random courtiers as well. But no, don't just make them lords of something entirely wrong.
 
I agree -- if they weren't the most important landholders of the time, introduce them as courtiers. I did that with a few of the Normans and Saxons I added. A claim on the province might be helpful -- if the realm is somehow destroyed, there's a small chance that this might guide the AI in (re-)conquering the land for their dynasty.
For courtiers we know were married and started a family, set them as married at scenario start (invent a wife if necessary), as the AI will never let its male non-dynasty courtiers marry.

----

On another note, my main system is down so I can't work on the DVIP at the moment. Until I get it fixed or get a good replacement work is on hold :(
 
They were important and pretty independent rulers, so my suggestion would be to make them counts of Beirut. Currently that is Joscelin de Courtenay, but AFAIK he was never count of Beirut. Joscelin was the 2nd man in the kingdom after Guy de Lusignan, so I would make Joscelin count of Tyrus and duke of Galilee
 
Llywelyn said:
Eh... not too keen on reading through all 22 pages to see if this was already addressed and I'm not going to dl the mod until I'm done with my current game, but yes, the current Welsh dynasties are wrong, among other things.

If you haven't already incorporated the material from Drachenfire's Welsh mod, I'll see what I can do about updating it to DV (ie, incorporating the friends and rivals bits, new traits, etc.)

PM me to lemme know.

EDIT: And they are. Nifty.


Aye, Jordarkelf did update the Welsh dynasties, thank goodness. And we now have the corrected COA for Gwynedd, Powys, and Deheubarth. Also the geography is corrected, though I dont remember if the value of the country was improved or not.

Jord has done a fantastic job with this improvement pack! I think all of this should have been in the official DV.

However, he did decline to use patronomics... as this is his mode I aquesence to this but I can't help but notice the Scandinavian counties retain their patronomics at scenario start.

@ Ayol1: I believe that the best law in game to represent Jerusalem is Semi-salic Primogeniture, rather then salic.

According to modern historians, the inheritance of Jerusalem was cognatic in nature, with the first born having preference over the others. This, they say, is demonstrated by the fact that extra-ordinary conventions setting aside an heir had to be taken to exclude or promote another member of the family at various times.
 
Last edited:
Llywelyn said:
Just started in. Comment and question, in reverse order.

First, Why is the DVIP 1066 scenario file so much smaller (something like half the size) of the vanilla one? Are we missing a whole lot of people they added in?

Second, Gruffydd Aberffraw - courtier #81031 in Dublin, I believe - is missing his claims on the duchy and province of Gwynedd for some reason. Drachen and I might be the only people this matters for, so no rush, but it's always one of the first things I do when I start playing CK again - load up as the Irish, install Gruffydd as a local lord in Dublin or Manaw, and DOW the ap Cynfyns' sorry asses.

Historically, it took him three tries to make it and then he spent nigh on a decade in an English lord's prison, but his family had been installed for something like ten generations. Poster boy for rightful heir with a claim versus the usurper with an army.

Veldmaarschalk said:
Here is his thread about this subject and here is his other one


Yes indeedy, the rightful and dispossessed Gruffydd ap Cynan Aberffraw should have a claim on the County and Duchy of Gwynedd, and on the county of Perfeddwlad (the middle country).
 
Last edited:
Updating Cornish


I know we do not have any extra tags for a one-provance culture, however I feel that the Cornish culture of Cornwall should be represented by Breton rather then by Welsh.

Having studied the Cornish language, it is far closer in spelling to Breton then Welsh. I feel Cornish culture can be best represented using Breton culture and a targeted Cornish generic dynasty naming list.

Please, can we review this?


Generic Names for Cornwall (Provance 31)

Additionally, I would like to revisit the Cornish generic dynasty names for Cornwall. Currently, the generic names for Cornwall are all largely Norman-French and more generic for England proper. I would like to remove them from Cornwall, and replace the Cornish generic names with Cornish specific. Here is a list of some of the names that can be added. Origionating from Welsh evangelicals who moved to Cornwall, these generic names are more or less the modern versions of Cornish-Welsh with English influence. We would need to remove 31 from all of the generic dynasties naming list to prevent inappropriate Norman-French generic dynasties from appearing there.

These are place names for early Cornish churches.

St. Ive
St Endellion
St. Minver
St. Teath
St. Mabyn
Marham
St. Wenn
St. Keyne
St. Issey
Morwenstow
St. Clether
Egloskerry
Advent
Lelant

Additional names that may serve as Cornish sirnames> These are from this Cornish hereitage site sit:


Abell :from ap Bell
Allen :from personal surname Allen, common in Cornwall and Brittany
Anderwarth : an (t)dre (gw)wartha, the upper homestead (t mutates to d) (gw mutates to w
Angarreck :an (c)garrek, the large rock (c mutates to g)
Angwim : an gwyn, the white or fair (man)
Anneer :an hyr, the long or tall (man), or poss: an ewre, the goldsmith
Arscott :poss: Breton, harscoet, iron shield
Bain, Bane, or Bean :byan, little
Baricoat :bar-i-cos, over the wood
Barnicoat:
Basset ::bassya, become lower, short stature?
Bather :when Cornish, poss: bather, bathorI, a coiner or banker
Beswetherick
Bice
Bysse
Bevan
Brook : brough, badger
Canauc
Cleder
Dean :from den, meaning man
Derry :from derow, meaning oak grove
Dynham :hillfort
Dilic
Dow :from du, black
Endean :from an den, meaning 'The Man'
Endilent
Evans :Cornish and Welsh for son of John
Glynn :Glen
Gwynn: White
Hale: hal, moor
Hancock :ancestor
Haynes: from hen, meaning old
Hellyer: huntsman
Helie
Innes, Innis : from enys... Island
Julyan :Julian
Keen : ky-yn, little dog or poss: cun, dogs
Kelynack: holly grove
Kemp :from Kempen... neat and tidy
Kenhender
Keri
Kereve
Kerewe
Maddock :From Cornish, Welsh Madoc
Mabon
Merrick :from moreck, meaning meretime
Menfre
Merewenne
Morewenna
Nectan
Tamalanc
Tedda
Rowe
Wencu
Wenheden
Wensent
Wynup
Yse
 
Last edited:
Veldmaarschalk said:
They were important and pretty independent rulers, so my suggestion would be to make them counts of Beirut. Currently that is Joscelin de Courtenay, but AFAIK he was never count of Beirut. Joscelin was the 2nd man in the kingdom after Guy de Lusignan, so I would make Joscelin count of Tyrus and duke of Galilee

Not a bad idea, but I'm unsure about giving Joscelin de Courtenay a replacement title. Galilee title belonged to Raymond III of Tripoli with county of Tiberias in the hands of his stepson a Hughe de Saint-Omer (whom I'll add). I'm hoping to save Tyrus for the Grenier dynasty & given de Courtenay & his yet to be created wife something de Milly has daughters who marry minor crusader knights maybe make him a courtier at JERU?
 
aylo1 said:
Not a bad idea, but I'm unsure about giving Joscelin de Courtenay a replacement title. Galilee title belonged to Raymond III of Tripoli with county of Tiberias in the hands of his stepson a Hughe de Saint-Omer (whom I'll add). I'm hoping to save Tyrus for the Grenier dynasty & given de Courtenay & his yet to be created wife something de Milly has daughters who marry minor crusader knights maybe make him a courtier at JERU?

Joscelin de Courtenay was married to Agnes de Milly, her sister Stefanie de Milly was married to Lord Guido (or Guy) d'Embracio. Both sisters are cousins of the other Stephanie de Milly, the wife of Renaud de Chatillon.

And since we are on that subjest, Renaud de Chatillon shouldn't be duke of Oultrejordan he was just the lord there because of his marriage to Stephanie, she should be the duchess. Just like Guy de Lusignan who isn't the king of Jerusalem but his wife is the Queen. If you wan't to be consistent of course
 
Veldmaarschalk said:
Joscelin de Courtenay was married to Agnes de Milly, her sister Stefanie de Milly was married to Lord Guido (or Guy) d'Embracio. Both sisters are cousins of the other Stephanie de Milly, the wife of Renaud de Chatillon.

And since we are on that subjest, Renaud de Chatillon shouldn't be duke of Oultrejordan he was just the lord there because of his marriage to Stephanie, she should be the duchess. Just like Guy de Lusignan who isn't the king of Jerusalem but his wife is the Queen. If you wan't to be consistent of course


Very good point! Yes, as I have read many of the lordships... including the Jerusalem monarchy, produced succession via the female line. As men were often on the front it was the women who represented stability, as they inherited title and land as the men often were killed in action.

A very simular result occured in Iberia, which produced Queen Urraca (r. 1107-1126). Iberia was divided by simular frontieer-like warfare.
 
Last edited:
Very good point! Yes, as I have read many of the lordships... including the Jerusalem monarchy, produced succession via the female line. As men were often on the front it was the women who represented stability, as they inherited title and land as the men often were killed in action.

Well I just pointed it out so that this mod is consistent. I myself find it very bad for gameplay if you replace all those male-rulers with their wifes. Nobody wants to play as Stephanie de Milly (except you maybe :) ), people who play the 1187 scenario want to play Renaud de Chatillon who as the 'de facto' ruler of Oultrejordan, Stephanie had no say in it what so ever.
 
Veldmaarschalk said:
Well I just pointed it out so that this mod is consistent. I myself find it very bad for gameplay if you replace all those male-rulers with their wifes. Nobody wants to play as Stephanie de Milly (except you maybe :) ), people who play the 1187 scenario want to play Renaud de Chatillon who as the 'de facto' ruler of Oultrejordan, Stephanie had no say in it what so ever.

Reynald de Chatillon was an arse of a man. He brought ruin to Antiochea and Jerusalem. Why anyone would want to play him I dont know. lol. But I get your point: a game about Crusades should appeal only to the boys, thus the exclusion of male-preference primogeniture or plausable cognatic primogeniture.

I simply wish for correct title holders to be in place. Male consorts who hold their title matromonial are only transitory and lose it upon the death of their spouse. And you are correct, female title holders had to have a force of will to excercise their inherited rights, else be dominated by their husband.

And hey! lol. I simply want cognatic primogeniture. First born inherits. I dont have any further preference between the gender of the ruler other then this.
 
Last edited:
I have problems with my main (gaming) computer at the moment, so I can't update the DVIP until this is fixed.

I am keeping track of everything in this thread though, and the interim changelog (see sig) should be up-to-date.
 
Veldmaarschalk said:
Well I just pointed it out so that this mod is consistent. I myself find it very bad for gameplay if you replace all those male-rulers with their wifes. Nobody wants to play as Stephanie de Milly (except you maybe :) ), people who play the 1187 scenario want to play Renaud de Chatillon who as the 'de facto' ruler of Oultrejordan, Stephanie had no say in it what so ever.

Yeah, and the Kantas were the real power in Byz in the 1337 scenario and that's represented by giving them a very large duchy. I don't see how this affects RP an iota. Make her a landless duchess and give him the other titles; or simply give everything to her and let people just focus on him as her marshal.

In re his vileness: C'mon, that never stopped any of us from saving the Third Reich, whuppin the Union, or spreading the Mandarins up and down the American coast. Who better to sack Mecca with? :eek::p:cool:
 
Hello all

I've just come back to CK, and I'd like to help out with DV:IP. I've got a few suggestions.

1) Changes to some of the terminology in extra_text.csv: "Heathen" should be changed to "infidel," as Heathen was used to refer only to pagans, but infidel could apply to anyone who did not believe in the divinity of Jesus.

i.e. "EVT_1500_NAME;Jerusalem suffers under the heathen yoke!" should read "Jerusalem suffers under the Saracen yoke!" or "Jerusalem suffers under the infidel yoke!"

2) The obviously anachronistic "Cool!" and "Supercool!" should be changed to "Excellent" and "Most excellent!" in deus_vult.csv. Excellent is also anachronistic, but less blatantly so.

3) Bishopric of Mainz should be turned into an Archbishopric to reflect its importance. The Archbishop of Mainz was the Primas Germaniae, the substitute of the Pope north of the Alps, and one of the seven electors of the Holy Roman Emperor, and so his status should be raised accordingly.

4) Moneylenders and more Jewish courtiers should be added in Cordoba, Savilla, Toledo, Granada and Malaga to represent the substantial Jewish population of Moorish spain. I don't like using moneylenders to represent Jewish minorities, but in the absence of a proper system it's a work-around. The moneylender is presumably Jewish as Christians and Muslims cannot enter the profession and it was one of the few professions open to Jews. I'm coding some reconquista events based on Solmyr's Jewish events, and this way when the Catholics reconquer southern Iberia, the events will fire.

5) Stigand of Cantebury (a courtier of William the Conquerer) should be made bishop of Hampshire, Archbishop of Canterbury, diocese bishop of England, and given the trait "excommunicated". He should also be fairly wealthy, as at the time of the death of Edward the Confessor, only the royal estates and the estates of Harold had been larger and wealthier than those held by Stigand. He was head of the Catholic church in England, and had a place in William's court. He was excommunicated five times because he held two bishoprics (Winchester in Hampshire, and Canterbury in Kent).

A new portrait should also be found for him, as he doesn't have a beard in the Bayeux tapestry, and probably wouldn't wear armour. The fact he owns so much of South-East England and the fact he has the excommunicated trait will make him a massive liability to the King of England, who will want to get rid of the character as quickly as possible. This is exactly what happened historically, with William deposing him in 1070.

More to come...

Joe
 
3) Bishopric of Mainz should be turned into an Archbishopric to reflect its importance. The Archbishop of Mainz was the Primas Germaniae, the substitute of the Pope north of the Alps, and one of the seven electors of the Holy Roman Emperor, and so his status should be raised accordingly.

That would mean offering up one of the duchy-tags, and there aren't that many in the game. Also once this 'archbishopric' is destroyed you will then most likely see a 'duchy of Mainz', which doesn't sound good at all. I have two alternatives:

1. Make the bishop of Mainz, the bishop of Cologne and the bishop of Hamburg-Bremen, direct vassals of the king of Germany.

And/or

2. Create a duchy of The Palatinate (Mainz and Pfalz) and then make the bishop of Mainz, 'archbishop of the Palatinate'.


Stigand of Cantebury (a courtier of William the Conquerer) should be made bishop of Hampshire, Archbishop of Canterbury, diocese bishop of England,

Once he has been made a 'landed bishop' he can no longer be a 'diocese bishop'

EDIT
I think that in 1066 Havoise Roazhon should be the duchess of Brittany, since she was the sister (and heiress) of the former duke Conan. Hoel de Kernow was just duke because he had married her

http://genealogy.euweb.cz/bretagne/bretagne3.html#C2

http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/BRITTANY.htm#HoelVCornouailledied1084B
 
Last edited:
Veldmaarschalk said:
That would mean offering up one of the duchy-tags, and there aren't that many in the game. Also once this 'archbishopric' is destroyed you will then most likely see a 'duchy of Mainz', which doesn't sound good at all.

Hmmm... interesting. I didn't know that.

Veldmaarschalk said:
I have two alternatives:

1. Make the bishop of Mainz, the bishop of Cologne and the bishop of Hamburg-Bremen, direct vassals of the king of Germany.

And/or

2. Create a duchy of The Palatinate (Mainz and Pfalz) and then make the bishop of Mainz, 'archbishop of the Palatinate'.

Of those two options, I prefer option 1. The problem with option 2 is that the Palatinate was a seperate elector, important in its own right. And Pfalz, I think, represents Trier (same CoA - but maybe the wrong location? I can't remember). And Trier was another elector again - separate to both the Palatinate and the Archbishop of Mainz.

The reason I'd like to keep them separate is because I'm thinking how to use one of the user-defined traits as a "Prince-Elector" trait, through which the HRE is elected with events. It might be too complicated for me, though.

Veldmaarschalk said:
Once he has been made a 'landed bishop' he can no longer be a 'diocese bishop'

Oh, yes, I completely forgot! I'm not sure whether it would be more appropriate to make him Archbish of Cantebury or the Diocese bishop. Maybe Diocese bishop - but give him lots of money and make him excommunicated. He was, after all, a very wealthy man, with two Bishoprics and several abbeys.

Joe