Creating a Trait to Allow Woman Leaders

Along with character immortality, it is the holy grail of CK2 modding at the moment. You would have to hack the exe--some folks did that for CK1--but it is forbidden to discuss here in detail. I'm afraid I've said too much already. I've figured out a way to have females do anything that men can, but like I said in my mod's DD today, the only thing that men can't do in CK2 is bear young, and the only thing that women can't do is lead armies and defend castles. Although I might be wrong about the first one, I am certain about the second. So, sorry no female commanders.

I was also trying that and i think the only way to do it would be to have some very awkward work around, like changing the character's sex by event ( is that even possible ? ) and then somehow also changing her portrait to that of a woman, but i hadnt tested any of that yet.

On a side note, isnt Joan of Arc in the game ? really bizare paradox made impossible to have a female military commander in the era of only the most famous female military commander of all time...

We could maybe try and petition Paradox to remove the hardcoded limitation. It's a bit ridiculous sometimes, my queen had like 21 Martial before, but it's an utterly worthless trait on a female character generally, because (in vanilla) they cannot be Marshals, nor can they lead armies. At best, it just gives a good boost to State Martial.

Vozhd said:

On a side note, isnt Joan of Arc in the game ? really bizare paradox made impossible to have a female military commander in the era of only the most famous female military commander of all time...

Click to expand...

Why do people keep saying this? Joan of Arc commanded precisely 0 soldiers during her lifetime. Which is exactly as many as she gets to command in CK2. She was more of a mascot than a leader.
Most of the armies she "led to victory" were commanded by Giles de Rais, with her simply raising morale of the troops. She was an important symbol, not an actual leader. And she was not a military commander. At all. Ever.

Dragnar said:

Why do people keep saying this? Joan of Arc commanded precisely 0 soldiers during her lifetime. Which is exactly as many as she gets to command in CK2. She was more of a mascot than a leader.
Most of the armies she "led to victory" were commanded by Giles de Rais, with her simply raising morale of the troops. She was an important symbol, not an actual leader. And she was not a military commander. At all. Ever.

Click to expand...

The idea that she was only a 'mascot' is the traditional historians view on her, but recent study has led historians to believe that she was a successful general in her own right. During the Siege of Orleans, for instance, she rode out with only one captain and many rallied soldiers and townsfolk and captured the Augustins fortress. She was also widely credited by contemporaries for the successful attack a major English stronghold only a little while later (I am forgetting the name, but the victory won her support, particularly among the clergy).

Exactly my point. She rode out with a handful of people, captured a forward encampment and made the French believe in victory. She didn't actually command the french army.
In fact, Orléans is a good example for how overstated her strategic impact was. The english siege force was so small, the last historical account I read assumed the combatants in the city of Orléans alone would've been enough to most likely defeat them, even without any relief forces. They just didn't dare to try as their first try earlier failed kinda spectacularly. At the time of the first try, the main english force was still camped by the city as well, though. Quite a few of the english soldiers had already moved on as Joan arrived and weren't there for the initial sally.
So she basically ran headfirst into an engagement France couldn't actually lose and thus forced them to try. And then got credited with divinely defeating the English, because after a decade of losses the French didn't really believe in any military victory. And even then, the army was actually led by Jean de Dunois, not her.

And yes, she was credited with basically being responsible for all further victories in her time. I'm not disputing that at all. One shouldn't forget that France basically moderately outnumbered the English in every single battle but Formigny, though. A decade after Agincourt, they just simply assumed they could probably lose even a 3-1 advantage, and as that failed to happen again, they attributed their victory to Joans divine grace, not the fact that a French victory was actually the expected outcome. Classic case of misattributed cause and effect. Human psychology is wierd that way.

I see a few iconic women often mentioned to put forward an argument for a game feature. It's usually Eleanor of Aquitaine or Joan of Arc.

Here is an interesting master's thesis that I discovered from the U. of Canterbury (NZ) on medieval noblewomen and war. Female commanders are covered on pages 47 and thereafter if you want to read on.

The author singles out Matilda di Canossa as a prominent figure in military affairs, talking about her campaigns to defend Pope Gregory VII from Kaiser Heinrich IV during the Investiture Controversy:

The religious cause for which Matilda strove throughout her life left an indelible mark on her place in history. Comments such as those of William of
Malmesbury, who lauded how ‘unmindful of her sex and a worthy rival of the
Amazons of old, [she] led into battle, woman as she was, the columns of men clad in
mail' have tended to solidify her image as one of the few women (and even fewer
medieval women) remembered primarily for their military accomplishments.

Click to expand...

But more women acted as defenders of their own property and that of their families during sieges for example and in putting down rebellions.

Dragnar said:

Why do people keep saying this? Joan of Arc commanded precisely 0 soldiers during her lifetime. Which is exactly as many as she gets to command in CK2. She was more of a mascot than a leader.
Most of the armies she "led to victory" were commanded by Giles de Rais, with her simply raising morale of the troops. She was an important symbol, not an actual leader. And she was not a military commander. At all. Ever.

Click to expand...

Her fame and impact on the actual war may be inflated, but to say that she never commanded anything its a bit far-fletched....
She still is the most famous military crossdress of all time, and since the only involvement your characters can have with the war side of the game is to lead armies, well i expected a military crosdresser trait that allowed females to lead armies, i fail to see how this would subtract from the game in any way.

Matilda of Tuscany was a pretty darn good military commander, if I remember correctly.

"He was humbled before Canossa, this time in a military defeat in October 1092, from which his influence in Italy never recovered.

In 1095, Henry attempted to reverse his fortunes by seizing Matilda's castle of Nogara, but the countess's arrival at the head of an army forced him to retreat. In 1097, Henry withdrew from Italy altogether, after which Matilda reigned virtually uncontested, although she did continue to launch military operations designed to restore her authority and regain control of the towns that had remained loyal to the emperor. She ordered or commanded successful expeditions against Ferrara (1101), Parma (1104), Prato (1107) and Mantua (1114). In 1111, at Bianello, she was made viceroy of Liguria by the Emperor Henry V."

Dragnar said:

Exactly my point. She rode out with a handful of people, captured a forward encampment and made the French believe in victory. She didn't actually command the french army.

Click to expand...

You said she did not command men- this one instance (and there are others) prove that she did led an army. She rallied the men single handily, choice their objective, and attacked with them. Given that the only other captain in the battle rallied and answered to her the only other alternative is to say the men had no leader at all, which is far more ridiculous. To say that is 'leading 0 men' is, well, factually incorrect. She was a commander, both in the CK2 sense and in actual historical terms. This one exception probably isn't enough for Paradox to actually put female commanders in the game (particularly if it the coding is difficult), but if isn't that difficult they should at least have an event covering the option (and more importantly let mods use it as a tool).

Please note that I'm not saying that she commanded the entire French army, or that France's eventual victory can be attributed solely to her. They can't. France had so many advantages over the English that all they needed was decent leadership to see them to victory. But to discount her actual commanding role is simply being too harsh on the poor woman.

Ivashanko said:

You said she did not command men- this one instance (and there are others) prove that she did led an army. She rallied the men single handily, choice their objective, and attacked with them. Given that the only other captain in the battle rallied and answered to her the only other alternative is to say the men had no leader at all, which is far more ridiculous. To say that is 'leading 0 men' is, well, factually incorrect. She was a commander, both in the CK2 sense and in actual historical terms. This one exception probably isn't enough for Paradox to actually put female commanders in the game (particularly if it the coding is difficult), but if isn't that difficult they should at least have an event covering the option (and more importantly let mods use it as a tool).

Please note that I'm not saying that she commanded the entire French army, or that France's eventual victory can be attributed solely to her. They can't. France had so many advantages over the English that all they needed was decent leadership to see them to victory. But to discount her actual commanding role is simply being too harsh on the poor woman.

Click to expand...

I can't actually imagine it's a fairly difficult coding thing. I'm not expert of course, so this is just a grain of salt thing, but it's probably just a hardcoded thing saying "no females".
Heck. Might be as simple as a "allowed_female = no" or whatever the council equivalent is, but they just hard-coded it so people can't tweak it themselves.

*Places two pennies out as well*

It is probably a hardcoded thing. Other hardcoded things can be overcome, like allowing female bishops. I'll try a couple more things and get back to you guys.

RedRooster81 said:

It is probably a hardcoded thing. Other hardcoded things can be overcome, like allowing female bishops. I'll try a couple more things and get back to you guys.

Click to expand...

I think a dev said it was hardcoded. We'd have to ask Paradox to release a patch that un-hardcodes it, if such a thing was possible, to be able to mod it I believe.

krisslanza said:

I can't actually imagine it's a fairly difficult coding thing. I'm not expert of course, so this is just a grain of salt thing, but it's probably just a hardcoded thing saying "no females".
Heck. Might be as simple as a "allowed_female = no" or whatever the council equivalent is, but they just hard-coded it so people can't tweak it themselves.

*Places two pennies out as well*

Click to expand...

You can do so for Marshals but not for actual commanders.

There.

RedRooster81 said:

There.

Click to expand...

Well... how the hell did you do it ?

Vozhd said:

Well... how the hell did you do it ?

Click to expand...

Custom event spawning a unit with the affected character as the commander.

RedRooster81 said:

Custom event spawning a unit with the affected character as the commander.

Click to expand...

Very sneaking. Might want to share it, it could be used for a whole host of ideas: not the least of which is female commanders. I can also see if for a knight and his mates wish to join your war for personal gain.

Mr. Capiatlist said:

Very sneaking. Might want to share it, it could be used for a whole host of ideas: not the least of which is female commanders. I can also see if for a knight and his mates wish to join your war for personal gain.

Click to expand...

Okay, I can release a minimod. It will work like the mercenary companies in CK1. That is what I was going for originally.