So do we get to cut dudes heads off?

[MAGNUS796]

So we get to put people in prison, thats GREAAAAAAAAAT! But I want to be a medieval king not a pacifist from the 21st century who thinks that I can't have the death penatly in a computer game!

Any chance we can hang plotters or lop their heads off? Medieval europe was a bloody place with public executions often been public entertainment.

Where I live in York in North of England there was four places of execution in one city during medieval times. It was not unusual for the clergy to have the right to punish serfs with public execution using their own gallows as well as local nobility and representatives of the crown.

Secondly can we not have a dungeon so we can torture people to learn about other plotters or secrets? I mean what would medieval life be with a few thumb screws, iron maiden and other wonderous torture devices!

Im not a sadist but even I know that if your gonna buy a game based upon the ruling elite in medieval europe, you gotta have a few cool powers to keep the serfs in their places!!!

[Count Lake]

This has been talked about already and I think the general consensus is that you should be able to execute traitors and the like, but the consequences should not be something to laugh at. You have to realize that anyone named in this game is going to be the highest of the nobility and if you are seen as an axe-crazy king it will negatively affect your relationship with your vassals. Its one thing to confiscate lands or send a powerful noble into exile or imprison him, its quite another to take his head off and try to deal with his upset family members and their allies.

I'm also sure that we will get plenty of events dealing with peasant "justice" just like in CK I where you could spare a poacher or hang him.

[RhoDaZZ]

Indeed, the peasantry is abstracted to the point of them only being in events and possibly being in a revolt (besides contributing to levies and the income of a castle, perhaps). It was frowned upon to kill a defenseless nobleman/prince, so in effect when it happened (i.e., The king is weak and unpopular and the throne is ripe for the taking - Carpe diem!) the emphasis was on destroying any evidence of the crime and possibly even attributing it to an "enemy" or super natural force so as to get popular support. Even then, there would be rumours and speculations about how the previous ruler really died, and this might be what is equivalent to the tyranny value in the game.

[Wallain]

Better to be feared than to be loved. Is that it? *grin*

[A_Dane]

even when loved someone will want you dead, so might as well be a step ahead of them!

[Shuriken]

Im not a sadist

This statement seems at odds with your post.

[RhoDaZZ]

This statement seems at odds with your post.

There's a difference in having fun with RPing as a cynical character and being a sadist imho. Likewise, just because you RP with a weak-willed character doesn't mean you're a masochist. Nor would RPing with a shy/bold character make you a sociopath/psychopath.

Infact, the very core of Crusader Kings is the role playing experience and that doesn't seem to have changed with CKII.

[MXD]

Could excecution have some "positives"?

I mean... if I execute a universally-hated courtier or steward... there shouldn't be that much negatives.

[Count Lake]

The point is that there has to be a VERY strong reason for the execution to begin with. Millions upon millions of people have hated political leaders throughout history but does that make it okay for them to be executed on the excuse that the world would be better off without them?

You should be able to play as a tyrant, but you need to have realistic consequences for that behavior. Maybe you execute someone for plotting against you, that doesn't mean that their family will forget the insult or try to gather allies against your rule. Maybe you find out about THAT plot and start lopping off heads, all you are doing is cementing the popular opinion of your rule as a thin veil for tyranny.

Medieval history is rife with examples of kings and nobles making power grabs at one another but there were comparatively few examples of people really getting the axe for plotting. Confiscation, internment or other penalties were used much more often and led to more stability to the realm since you weren't getting a new dynasty in charge of a county, duchy or kingdom every week.

Basically, I would like to see options there for putting a permanent end to a perennially rebellious vassal. However, even a king with great justification would have to deal with the opinion of nobles who often saw him as first among equals. Axe-crazy kings should find their entire kingdom in arms against them very quickly.

[Shuriken]

There's a difference in having fun with RPing as a cynical character and being a sadist imho. Likewise, just because you RP with a weak-willed character doesn't mean you're a masochist. Nor would RPing with a shy/bold character make you a sociopath/psychopath.

Infact, the very core of Crusader Kings is the role playing experience and that doesn't seem to have changed with CKII.

Thanks for the info.

But RP'ing torture is sadism.

[Communazi]

Thanks for the info.

But RP'ing torture is sadism.

Torturing small animals is sadism; playing CK is far from it.

[Ograv]

Thanks for the info.

But RP'ing torture is sadism.

When I play Oblivion/Skyrim and join the Dark Brotherhood, or when I order the assassination of a rival in CK2, does that make me a psychopathic murderer at heart? When I orchestrate a crusade in CK2, does that make me a religous fanatic? No. If you've played the games you've registered, you've probably waged a few wars for fun alone. Does this make you feel different about the wars of today?

Back on topic, we do have title revokement and assassination ingame. And considering some of the event (chains) in CK, we'll probably get some "lop his head off"-choices in CK2 too. Seems enough to me.

As for torture, how do you think the spymaster discovers plots? I doesn't seem necessary to me to include "manual" torture. Again, this could possibly be represented in events ("your spymaster suspects your bastard son of plotting against you, what do you do?", with various choices ranging from trust him, to capture and interrogate). Seems enough to me.

[Wallain]

Thanks for the info.

But RP'ing torture is sadism.

It is roleplay for a reason. Your character's world views do not necessarily apply to yourself.

[Orinsul]

The point is that there has to be a VERY strong reason for the execution to begin with. Millions upon millions of people have hated political leaders throughout history but does that make it okay for them to be executed on the excuse that the world would be better off without them?

You should be able to play as a tyrant, but you need to have realistic consequences for that behavior. Maybe you execute someone for plotting against you, that doesn't mean that their family will forget the insult or try to gather allies against your rule. Maybe you find out about THAT plot and start lopping off heads, all you are doing is cementing the popular opinion of your rule as a thin veil for tyranny.

Medieval history is rife with examples of kings and nobles making power grabs at one another but there were comparatively few examples of people really getting the axe for plotting. Confiscation, internment or other penalties were used much more often and led to more stability to the realm since you weren't getting a new dynasty in charge of a county, duchy or kingdom every week.

Basically, I would like to see options there for putting a permanent end to a perennially rebellious vassal. However, even a king with great justification would have to deal with the opinion of nobles who often saw him as first among equals. Axe-crazy kings should find their entire kingdom in arms against them very quickly.

Maybe a CB system to justify imprisonment/executions, so if you have a just reason you can do it without consequences but upsetting their friends and family, but if you do so unjustly than you face dire consequences and open the door for cool event chains and plots.
i.e, if someone is a kinslayer you an imprison/kill them with no problems, or if someone has commuted murder and run away a CB is put out on him allowing any lord to imprison/kill him with impunity. But if you kill someone to stop the inheriting, or because you do like the way they look at your wife then youll be flagged with a _flag or trait or modifier and then face events that might have you lose your title, outlawed and exiled or be imprisoned etc

[Communazi]

Maybe a CB system to justify imprisonment/executions, so if you have a just reason you can do it without consequences but upsetting their friends and family, but if you do so unjustly than you face dire consequences and open the door for cool event chains and plots.
i.e, if someone is a kinslayer you an imprison/kill them with no problems, or if someone has commuted murder and run away a CB is put out on him allowing any lord to imprison/kill him with impunity. But if you kill someone to stop the inheriting, or because you do like the way they look at your wife then youll be flagged with a _flag or trait or modifier and then face events that might have you lose your title, outlawed and exiled or be imprisoned etc

I like this idea. And very much plays into the idea of (much later) the lengths say King Henvry VIII went to in order to justify executing his wives. Plus a pool of fugitive courtiers would feed the 'invite to court' possibilities

[A_Dane]

Thanks for the info.

But RP'ing torture is sadism.

As others have pointed out: no it's not.

It's only sadism if you derive pleasure from the act itself. You might argue: "but you tortured him to have fun!", no, I tortured him because I was roleplaying, and i find the roleplaying fun.

If, for some reason, you conteniuously torture people in game without roleplaying, it might become borderline sadism...

[Slaxl]

I think execution/torture/imprisonment should all be tied to kingly authority, with a dash of 'just reasoning' behind the execution. A weak king who executes someone for no reason is going to face a huge backlash compared to a strong king who has a damned good reason for executing someone. Then you have middle ground where a strong king has no reason, or a weak king has a good reason, both of which are normally fine, but occasionally something negative can spring from it.

Anyone who feels modern morals should be imposed on this side of the gameplay should be sent to the tower. Teehee.

[InboxMadness]

Didn't they already say you can execute people without consequences if you e.g. discover a plot but arbitrary executions have dire repercussions

[Tapscott]

I love the title of the post, it gets straight to the point.

I like the ideas that are being thrown around about CB's that allow execution, but surely there should be plots as well? I know there is a plot to having family members killed in CKII, but I'm not so sure about rivals. If you plot to execute your rival, the king's brother, for example, and fail then there could be an event that allows your execution, banishment or imprisioning to fire for the king; allowing killings to continue even if the plot fails. If you haven't guessed I do enjoy the idea of having my William the Conqueror stringing up some saxon dogs!

And yes I am well aware that my post correlates very closely with what InboxMadness said, but I am just agreeing with him because of the sheer awesomeness of the possibilities presented through plots.

[Frederic III]

Maybe I missed something, but is assassinating someone through a plot less sadistic than executing him through a legal system, a thing that was common until recently in the history of man and which is (sadly) still used in some areas? Rome had an option to execute, I really don't see why CK2 shouldn't have the same. After all, if you are imprisoned, you did something bad (or your liege is paranoid). I don't understand how PI could avoid this tool, since it was in other games and, I think, is far more "widely approved in the era", to not say considered as "moral", at the time, than assassination.

About torture, which is I just realized the thing about what you found sadistic the OP, I don't think it is being sadistic to want an option (or rather an event) to simulate a practice which was largely approved at this time. As long as it's not graphic, there is no problem for me. Of course, that throw in the debate about torture and its ability to give information, but it's a game. Maybe we could simply assume what assumed this time mans.