• 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.
Well, it's Friday and high time to spill the beans on the new expansion for Crusader Kings II; the Sword of Islam. Judging by the forum, playable Muslims is the most requested feature for CKII, and who are we to disagree? We always wanted to do it, provided we could do the Muslim world justice. That time is now (or, well, soon :) ). As with the Ruler Designer DLC, the Sword of Islam will be released together with a major content patch. What you get with the Sword of Islam is simply the ability to play as the Muslim rulers, but all the new mechanics will be there and running for the AI (or other players in multiplayer) even if you don't have the expansion.

I'll be doing three dev diaries on the Sword of Islam, each one dealing with some unique features for the Muslims as well as some free features that everyone will have access to simply by patching to 1.06.

THE SWORD OF ISLAM

One of the major hassles with making Muslims playable was the prevalence of text with obviously Christian or Western terminology. Therefore, we had to go through all text to make it fit the setting if you are playing a Muslim. Often, this required writing whole new events and decisions. For example, Muslims don't hold tournaments, they have the Furusiyya instead, which is an exhibition of martial arts and horsemanship. They don't hold Grand Feasts, they observe the Ramadan, etc. We also added some completely new decisions, like going on the Hajj (the pilgrimage to Mecca), which will initiate a cool little event driven story of what happens on the way to and from the holy city. Of course, there is also a whole slew of events dealing with various new gameplay features (more on that in later dev diaries.)

Another issue we needed to solve was the Gothic looking graphical interface of Crusader Kings II, which we felt did not really work when playing as a Muslim ruler. So we did a complete reskin with sand tones and green symbols and patterns instead of the church window graphics of Christian rulers. Yet another problem was that many event pictures looked distinctly Western/Christian, so we've added about 25 new ones to serve as Muslim equivalents. Then there are all the little things, like trait icons with crosses, the Crusade banner, etc. All of that has been changed to provide the right atmosphere. We've even changed the five councillor models for Muslims when they're out in the provinces performing jobs. It's all been a lot of work, but I think it turned out really well.

Muslims get a slightly different set of character traits; they don't get the Kinslayer, Crusader, Celibate and Chaste Traits. Instead, they get the Mujahid, Hajjaj, Faqih (Islamic law expert), Hafiz (has memorized the Koran), Sayyid (agnatic descendent of Fatima or one of Muhammad's uncles) and Mirza (child of a Sayyida mother) traits.

Lastly, Muslims get another set of honorary titles to hand out to their vassals. They all get a few special flavour events - especially the Chief Qadi - a position requiring an ecclesiastical education.

SoI_04.jpg

That's it for the Sword of Islam in this dev diary; next time I will go into the core dynamics of playing as a Muslim ruler.

THE 1.06 PATCH

Now then, here's some of the free stuff we're giving ya'll in the 1.06 patch...

First off, we thought the southwest corner of the map looked a bit dull, so we added a bunch of new provinces down there, representing the flourishing civilizations of the Manden people; Ghana, Mali and Songhay. The area comes with historical rulers (of course) and a new West African culture group. The region is rich but hard to reach.

SoI_05.jpg

For flavour, we have also made it so that duchy tier and above titles held by rulers of Iranian, Arabic and Turkish cultures are named after the ruling dynasty. For example, the Kingdom of Egypt automatically becomes the Fatimid Sultanate while the Fatimids are in power (though the original name is also used where appropriate.) In case the same dynasty holds several high rank titles, only the highest is named after the dynasty. Thus, we can have both a Seljuk Sultanate and a Sultanate of Rum, both ruled by the Seljuk dynasty. Randomly generated characters of these cultures automatically get a dynasty name suitable to name states after (ending with -id or -n, etc).

SoI_01.jpg

Lastly (for this dev diary), there are seven new creatable empires (the Arabian Empire, the Empire of Persia, Britannia, Scandinavia, Francia, Spain and Russia) and a whole slew of new de jure kingdoms, mostly to break up the old kingdom of Khazaria. Now, I know the addition of the new empires is controversial, but the creation conditions are designed to be fairly difficult to achieve, so the AI will very rarely do it. We want players to have the imperial option to strive for if they so desire - the Unions turned out to be a popular feature in Europa Universalis III.

SoI_02.jpg

Oh, and before anyone asks, patch 1.06 will be semi-compatible with old save games: you will be able to keep playing, but we're making no guarantees that the balance will not be completely upset, or that any added new provinces will be active and working.

That's it for now. Next week I'll talk about polygamy, decadence, and strong and weak claims!
 
Are Muslim features like polygamy and decadence going to be hardcoded to the 'muslim' tag, or can we use them for modded religions?

I would certainly hope decadence isn't only a mechanic for Muslims. It would be great to have your debauched mess of a family have to face the inevitable karmic retribution for their degenerate ways.

Are the heraldry for Muslim realms/families ever going to be changed from those randomly generated ones? I hoped those were just a placeholder...
 
Right, but the question is still a good one, I think. Right now, the Sunni Caliphate is often eliminated from the game quite early and once it's gone it doesn't come back. I also wonder if there's a way to bring it back in the DLC.

Well, a title like "Sunni Caliph" doesn't really make sense to begin with. Various people of different sects have proclaimed themselves Caliph at different points. There have been times where two different Sunni rulers both claimed the title. I think any empire-level Muslim nation should be called "[family name] Caliphate."
 
Which is why it might as well be called High Kingdom instead, without muddling the definition of Empire.

AFAIK, only Celtic regions have such names. For many others High King would look weirder than Emperor.

Thure said:
A empire in this time is not a empire like we know it. Empire mean "Succesor of rome". Its more then power of a ruler. Some have call herself so but it was not recognesized. Russia only became a empire because it say, it was the succesor of the Byzantine (Roman) empire.

But nobody in that time accomplished the prerequisites here AFAIK. Some might have made a proclamation and even if the title itself was not accepted internationally, the ruler's authority would be accepted by many. Later historians might end up using word Empire for that monarchy as well so we would have the same reason for name like Byzantine Empire (which also didn't call itself that at the time).

In the end, it is just a word that can be considered a literal proclamation, later historian proclamation, unofficial proclamation, etc... whatever the player in question decides to do. Empire is word WE TODAY would use so the situation is similar to why we call Roman Empire the Byzantine Empire.

Meneth said:
The word empire simply doesn't make any sense in a Medieval context. Using another word however (like High Kingdom, Grand Duchy, Kingdom of Kingdoms, etc.) would work the same for gameplay, while making more historical sense.

They make even less sense for most nations and for today's naming conventions.
High Kingdom is used by some nations, but others would consider the name ridiculous.
Grand Duchy and Archduchy are supposed to be a bit below Kingdom so I don't see why it should be a name for a title above King.

For today's wording conventions, Empire is used on many occasions. However, it does not mean that people inside that game call it that so, if you really want flavour, you can say later historians in that alternative universe will it Empire while you yourself can call it whatever you think is fitting.
For gameplay reasons game will simply call it Empire.

Meneth said:
Then you'd become the Roman Empire, not an Empire of Britannia or anything like that.

Roman Empire is called Byzantine Empire by historians.
What alternative historians would call "Empire of Britannia" could have at time have called itself "Roman Empire" or something.

Not everything in game is to be taken literal... no, most things in the game are not supposed to be taken literal. I can make you an essay of "wrong representation of Kingdom of Croatia and Dalmatia" but I won't because there is no point: even if terms are wrong, playing it works as it should (optimally). My knowledge if history is good enough to know how it should actually be called.

NewbieOne said:
Okay, since you're willing to talk, please allow me to try to explain: I have no problem with those empires being formable, ok (even formable as full de iure empires from day 1, as in okay, I might not hugely like that but can live with it)? That's fine by me. But 'de iure' means 'according to law'. In the case of a de iure state,however, it means that the state exists according to law, it just doesn't have a current ruler perhaps. And there's no way to say in 1066 that an Empire of Francia or Scandinavia or Brittania exists 'according to law' or 'of right' or 'according to custom'. This 'according to law', which is the crux of my concerns and the sole point of contention, is the principle which allows e.g. the Byzantine Empire to claim that the Kingdom of Syria is theirs by law because they held it before for a long time (in real life, this came into question with the crusader states, of which the Eastern Emperor claimed to be the de iure liege and his claims were taken seriously, to the point of actual vassalage by some crusader rulers, including at least one King of Jerusalem walking on foot beside a mounted emperor, which was a sign of vassalage back then). Or which allows the Kingdom of Burgundy or Lotharingia to be on the map despite not actually having a current ruler, not really existing separately right now (but there were kings before, before it fell apart). You can't say the same about the Empire of Francia or Scandinavia.

Gameplay term =/= real world term.
Word de-jure is used by game to easily explain a mechanic. The de-jure map itself is far from being correct (especially since it should change with time) but it does its job: it makes game mechanics work. Here, it it is a mechanic that makes the Empires formable without wasting time on unimportant bits.

In other words, you are looking at terms from the Historian perspective, not Developer perspective. However, Developer Perspective is correct here while Historian Perspective is used when you write AAR's (like when in EU3 you call Austria Arch-Duchy instead of game's Kingdom of Austria) or talk about your achievements to someone else.
 
Nitrousoxide: get your facts straight. Playing Muslims were never part of the game that you paid for - hence no one is removing anything you paid for. The switch in a txt file was added later on to help out modders. Now that no longer work as it causes a conflict with the DLC system. Ideal? No. But the option would have been to never add it for mods to use at all.
Uh, how do you know what people bought the game for? It doesn't matter if it was 'as advertised'. I mean I'll buy the DLC, but this just sounds bad.
 
I think all the changes are good ideas and I'll be buying this DLC for definite. Any idea when in June exactly its coming out?
 
3 dev diaries on friday are planned before release. we already had one.
the game and 1st major patch were released on tuesdays.
so it would be one tuesday after last dev diary, so expect june 19th or 26th.
 
Bullshit. There's a flag already in the game that lets you choose which faction you want to be playable. Playing as Muslims already exists in the game RIGHT NOW, all you have to do is flip one switch (albeit in a .txt file).

It's like as if they had a check box in the options of the game for whether you wanted to play as other religions, and then they TOOK THAT OUT and tried to charge you for it A SECOND TIME as DLC.

It's literally the SCUMMIEST thing you can do for DLC. Even deliberately chopping out content before launch isn't as bad because the user never actually gets the content. Paradox is LITERALLY trying to charge everyone twice for content they had AT LAUNCH.

You clearly haven't read the announcement or the dev diary, as you have no clue what you're talking about. You even got the price of the DLC wrong. You can play as a Muslim now, sure, but it's pointless and stupid, because there's no content for them. Play as them and it's obvious that it's not intended. You'll be paying for a crapload of new features and content specific to the Muslim experience.
 
Uh, how do you know what people bought the game for?

I don't. But I do know what we sold, and playable Muslims was not one of the features - not even through modding which was only added later in a patch.