Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Dynasty name

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Europa Universalis III 46143 EU3 - After Action Reports (AAR)
Show only dev responses
unmerged(138395)

unmerged(138395)

Private
4 Badges
Mar 27, 2009
24
0
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
I would like to change the name of the dynasty my current ruler belongs to. Is it possible? And if so, what should I do?

Consider that I changed from a Republic to a Monarchy, so the dynastic name is the surname of the last republican leader.

Thank you very much!
 
You can change it in the save file.

Just change the red for the dynasty name you want. Remember to change the name for your heir as well.

Code: 
1484.5.1=
        {
            monarch=
            {
                name="Johann I"
                DIP=7
                ADM=5
                MIL=6
                id=
                {
                    id=8085
                    type=37
                }
                leader=
                {
                    name="Johann I [COLOR="Red"]von Habsburg[/COLOR]"
                    type=general
                    manuever=1
                    fire=4
                    shock=1
                    siege=0
                    activation="1484.5.8"
                    id=
                    {
                        id=4472
                        type=38
                    }
                }
                dynasty="[COLOR="#ff0000"]von Habsburg[/COLOR]"
            }
        }
 
Where does this name come from, in the game data files? Is it randomly selected from the list of leader surnames?
 
Barnacle Bill said:
Where does this name come from, in the game data files? Is it randomly selected from the list of leader surnames?
Click to expand...
You mean when you start a game?

From the history files.
 
Mazzini said:
Consider that I changed from a Republic to a Monarchy, so the dynastic name is the surname of the last republican leader.
Click to expand...

I, too, am irked by this. I remember playing as England, starting 1647 or thereabouts. Anyway, about thirty years later I had an awesome Lord Protector who I decided to make king. I was troubled to see that he became King Henry Marlborough...... I mean, that is just lazy coding, not even putting his number in there. Henry IX is fine, as is Henry IX Marlborough, but c'mon, he can't not have a number....
 
Maleficus said:
I, too, am irked by this. I remember playing as England, starting 1647 or thereabouts. Anyway, about thirty years later I had an awesome Lord Protector who I decided to make king. I was troubled to see that he became King Henry Marlborough...... I mean, that is just lazy coding, not even putting his number in there. Henry IX is fine, as is Henry IX Marlborough, but c'mon, he can't not have a number....
Click to expand...
He can if he's the first of the dynasty.
 
OrangeYoshi said:
You mean in RL, or in the game?
Click to expand...

He means in RL. The number refers to the country, not the dynasty. So Elizabeth II is the second Elizabeth to rule England, regardless of dynasty. If it wasn't done that way, the number would be pointless. You could have three or four Henry IIs, for example, and you'd have to go out of your way to explain which one you mean. At that point, why bother with the number at all?
 
Yes but if a Lord Protector was to take the throne he may not wish contineity with those that went before him (which is why everyone else chose a umber) just like William I, who made year 0 for the monarchy, there were Edwards before Edward I, but he was the first Edward to traced his claim to William, so he did not take the number of the previous.

In this case the Duke of Malborough may hate the old dynasty and is forging a new one.
 
England begins his royal numeration after the Conquest (William the Conqueror, 1066). That's why Edward I was not the first Edward, for there were three other Edwards (Edward the Confessor among them) ruling pre-Conquest England.

But yes, the numeration goes regardless the dynasty. But it seems like the number is a matter of naming the king, and if the king is made from a republican president or a Lord Protector, he just does not have the name. You can always modify this, I usually do. Tired of kings named Louis and Philippe in a Burgundy game, I decided to "fake" (in IN, not in HttT) a dynasty change: the house of Valois-Burgundy fell and the House of Lorraine got to power (at the same time, I annexed my vassal Lorraine). So I changed the history file to add royal names like "Thibaut", "Simon", "Eudes" and "Robert". It turned out that Thibaut III was a great king, and Robert V converted to protestantism.

In this case the Duke of Malborough may hate the old dynasty and is forging a new one.
Click to expand...

Yes, but that's not how it worked. Any king in the XVth Century would number himself "as it is proper". The Swedish and Norwegian kings count also mythical kings that never existed, thus the last Eric was Eric XIV, but only eight Erics before him are historical. But Eric XIV though that he needed to represent those legendary kings into the numeration.

Another example: Peter the Cerimonious, king of Aragon, signed as Pere Terç, Peter III, even though he was the fourth Peter to rule over Aragon. He did so because in Catalonia only had been two Peters before him; Peter I of Aragon was not ruler of Catalonia, but Peter II was, after the Crown of Aragon was created.
 
Last edited:
Dynastic numbers are basically a political decision, as many before have already stated.

I can present the exemple of Vittorio Emanuele III: he was the last king of Sardinia-Piedmont (the third with his name) and when the kingdom of Italy was forged he decided not to change his number. So Italy has never had a Vittorio Emanuele I. But that was a deviation from normal coding: it was a political decision to remember to the rest of Europe that nothing really changed South of the Alps and that they needed not to worry about order.
 
Trin Tragula said:
Because this is how it worked in real life? Atleast in other countries...
Click to expand...

Shuriken said:
Elizabeth II is not of the same dynasty as Elizabeth I.
Click to expand...

Garak said:
He means in RL. The number refers to the country, not the dynasty. So Elizabeth II is the second Elizabeth to rule England, regardless of dynasty. If it wasn't done that way, the number would be pointless. You could have three or four Henry IIs, for example, and you'd have to go out of your way to explain which one you mean. At that point, why bother with the number at all?
Click to expand...

Ok, ok, ok. I really didn't know, and that is why I was asking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back