Incest WTH?

[riknap]

Notice, when you put the pointer over your character, it says "you".

You're playing that particular character as much as anything. It's the only one you have full control over.

Not being able to turn down an affair, although I've never had it happen to me, is absolute nonsense.

to be fair, you're roleplaying that character.

having a lustful person turn down a chance for an affair is like having an in-game Gandhi threaten you with nukes....

oh wait...

[LarryLeica]

If my 72 year old duke wants to kill his son, kill his grandchildren, then marry his 19 year old daughter-in-law, whilst having trysts with his cousin then so be it.

Bastard matrilineal marriage FTW.

[KristopherWG]

to be fair, you're roleplaying that character.

having a lustful person turn down a chance for an affair is like having an in-game Gandhi threaten you with nukes....

oh wait...

I'm playing my character. That's the difference. Not "that" character.

[NCreepy]

It was pretty common for cousins to marry, and that's closer than what you're describing. So, no.

It's pretty common in sertain areas these days as well.

[LarryLeica]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consanguinity

Lots of info in here.

[khedas]

By all rights, inbreeding should be a slow, progressive degeneration of a blood line due to reenforcement of negative traits and 'garbage' genetic code. The first generation of incest would be mostly fine (monster babies from the get-go is total myth), within tolerance levels of bad traits. But the longer it goes on, the worse it gets.

(...)

This should be a reasonably accurate representation of how inbreeding can wreck a family.

That's only true if a family has bad genetics in the first place. If not, it remains unaffected. Just remember that the Egyptian Pharaohs always married their sisters, and we don't have records of inbreds or rulers who were worse than anywhere else.

Also, by your suggestion almost all Muslims in the Middle East should be 'wrecked' inbreds by now, as marrying a cousin is seen as the best possible marriage in the region (cousin marriages reach over 50% of all marriages in some cities in Saudi Arabia, for example). And that has been going on for over a millennia, at least. Probably more.

Also, can you point to any royal family that has been 'wrecked' by these intermarriages? Because everybody ALWAYS points to the Habsburg King Charles II of Spain, but always forget that he was only one guy out of many hundreds (therefore not far from the statistical reality for defective sons of non-related people) and the the Habsburgs all over Europe kept putting out good rulers for centuries before and after Charles II.

The real problem in the game is about marriages. They are allowed for too close of kin, when in fact in the Middle Ages the Church forbade marriages between relatives, even between cousins.

Only occasionally did Rome allow marriages between nephew and aunt, and then only in the cases where the dynasty would die out if an heir was not produced. This permission cost gold (and I suppose we could also say piety) to get. CK2 does not have this ban, and allows dynasties to 'shield' themselves of outsiders [which is exactly what Rome did not want].

[Zorlond]

That's only true if a family has bad genetics in the first place. If not, it remains unaffected. Just remember that the Egyptian Pharaohs always married their sisters, and we don't have records of inbreds or rulers who were worse than anywhere else.

King Tut was messed up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_tut Add to the article's analysis is another theory I've heard where he suffered from a fused spine. And then comprehend that the Egyptian historians of the age were writing about Their Living GODS. Do you honestly believe they would have written about how screwed up their leiges were?

As for the Muslims, consider that any weakness was pretty quickly killed off by their society, and that only the most successful men were considered 'royal'. Anyone with screwed-up genetics, incest or not, wasn't going to be spreading his genes.

[ZechsMerquise73]

Most likely has to do with political correctness in certain places around the world. Certain nations have laws against portraying certain historical events of a less than positive nature. Rather than try to make seperate versions or dance along the line of what is/isn't acceptable in those nations the whole issue is avoided. I suspect that if the USA implemented a law banning positive references to the CSA (which some crackpots have suggested over the years) you wouldn't see the ACW either.

You also have to consider just how much the inclusion of the material would improve the game compared to the potential for problems in the public opinion or legal areas.

I'm sure where the game is popular has a lot to do with it. Japan doesn't recognize the Nanking Massacre. Having it in HOI3 would be highly controversial if it were popular there.

Even Lustful characters should have the option to turn down relations with close family members, as that's a rather special sort of perversion. They should get a trait added to their character for such incest.

[TheStrangerOrg]

didnt know incest was such a hot topic!

[Meneth]

Anyone with screwed-up genetics, incest or not, wasn't going to be spreading his genes.

The reason inbreeding can cause bad results, is primarily due to recessive traits. These traits will not show in the parents, but can manifest in their offspring. Inbreeding increases the chance that recessive traits, often rather bad ones, will be activated, as both parents are then much more likely to have the recessive gene.

[Zorlond]

So children give their genes to parents?

Yeah, I think you phrased that wrong.

In any case, an activated recessive gene (that one would consider bad) would constitute 'screwed up genetics', as opposed to inactive ones. Inactive genes are merely screwed up in potentia.

[Meneth]

So children give their genes to parents?

No, what I mean is that when inbreeding happens, it is much more likely for both parents to have the recessive gene, due to their genetic similarity.

In any case, an activated recessive gene (that one would consider bad) would constitute 'screwed up genetics', as opposed to inactive ones. Inactive genes are merely screwed up in potentia.

Sorry, I thought you were partially agreeing with khedas that bad genes are necessary for inbreeding to become a problem. My mistake.

[Zorlond]

Actually, they aren't. At least, initially. Thanks to mutation (which can happen due to random mistakes in meiosis), the origional bloodline doesn't have to have anything wrong with it, genetically. But once a mistake happens in the genetic code, incest will pretty much insure it sticks around. And sooner or later it'll activate.

Of course, once activated, it's not likely that the affected will survive to have kids, unless society does something stupid. (You are the Heir to the Throne! You are perfection!)

[Philo32b]

I think there should be greater penalties for being a product of incest in this game.
In my Kingdom of Ireland game at the moment, I've been marrying within the family for centuries with no ill effect. In fact at the moment I'm a Genius, midas touched King. That can't be right

OK, now I'm mad. lol You're riding the inbred wagon and end up with genius?! I have been scrupulously avoiding marrying any dynasty members and have constantly married women with genius, strong, or quick traits. Do my heirs ever pick up these traits? No. Instead all I see is ugly and dwarfism. :P

[Zzzzz...]

I got told 1/2 the Roman emperors were inbred.

That was before the Church become the most powerful authority in Europe.

[TheStrangerOrg]

and its not true? you became emperor by swordpoint!

[Zorlond]

That was before the Church become the most powerful authority in Europe.

Which happened because Rome fell apart when people realized the caesars were all inbred lunatics.

[Tempestra]

Also, can you point to any royal family that has been 'wrecked' by these intermarriages? Because everybody ALWAYS points to the Habsburg King Charles II of Spain, but always forget that he was only one guy out of many hundreds (therefore not far from the statistical reality for defective sons of non-related people) and the the Habsburgs all over Europe kept putting out good rulers for centuries before and after Charles II.

I think the idea that Charles numerous problems were caused by inbreeding is kind of uncontroversial. The reason the other branches of the Hapsburg family didn't suffer so badly is that they didn't interbreed so closely as the Spanish Hapsburgs, who regularly married uncles to nieces and aunts to nephews. The Austrian branch (and its numerous cadet houses) usually only married cousins to cousins. They did suffer a genetic deformity - the Hapsburg lip - but it didn't really get in the way of making them good rulers, it just made them look weird.

I do wonder about those Egyptian monarchs. I suspect the reason we don't hear about their inbreeding problems is simply lack of records.

Inbreeding is not just a fantasy, any biologist will tell you it's a real phenomenon. If the Egyptian royal families didn't suffer from their inbreeding, they were exceedingly lucky.

[TheStrangerOrg]

Which happened because Rome fell apart when people realized the caesars were all inbred lunatics.

i thought it was something to do with unwashed barbarians... i learn new things every day huh

[Garak]

Which happened because Rome fell apart when people realized the caesars were all inbred lunatics.

That's not anything I've ever heard. Some of the Julian emperors after Augustus were really messed up, but the theory I've heard relating to that has to do with lead water pipes, not inbreeding. The later emperors weren't even from a single family.