Right now, courtiers in all and vassals in many situations have no will of their own. Under an idealised picture of feudalism obedience truly resembled monastic discipline. On the other hand, the obligations were mutual, and in an ideal world the liege would live up to his part of the deal. In an ideal mediaeval world anybody would render proportionate respect to anybody else's dignity.
Thus, it really shouldn't be the case that you can, say, being a lowly count or even patrician, invite your king's heir to your realm and matrilineally marry or betroth his son to your daughter. Or that you can invite the Kaiser's 18 year old sister (if she has a sufficient malus with her liege or 'liege') and marry her to your 70 years old Lowborn Cuman marshal. Courtiers shouldn't have all sorts of unmatched, unprestigious etc. marriages imposed on them, especially if they belong to your (top) liege's family.
Also, there is a difference between owing fealty with taxes and levies from church holdings and automatically granting the secular power's wishes in spiritual matters. That's just too simplistic and too deterministic at the same time. Caesaropapism belongs more with investiture laws and diplomatic relationships than simply being the overlord of the cleric's temporal holdings.
I grouped the two together because they come down to the same root cause: the absence of a 'free will' in courtiers and in some cases in vassals.
A related issue is something I mentioned a while ago, i.e. the hard blocks for requesting marriages or vassalisation. Especially the 'distant realm' is awful because you can be the de iure liege, same religion, very powerful, prestigious etc. (what vassal candidates normally care for) and your provinces can be adjacent to the same sea cluster as his own, but you'll still get 'distant realm' that cuts the negotiations. The same goes for wrong religion, even among fellow Christians, which is both historically unrealistic (e.g. Armenian principalities always preferred the Franks over the alternative in the form of being conquered by Rum or Egypt) and unfun in terms of gameplay.
Unbound the choices, please. Reduce the hard blocks, replace them with what '-----' implies, which is that '+++' and '+++' will beat '-----'. Like I said, such hard blocks are unfun, as well as increasing the learning curve and annoyance because you need to remember which '-----' is really just five minuses and which '-----' is infinity.
Enable courtiers to have some say in their marriages and/or (preferably both) enable backlash from their offended families.
While at it, one needs the ability to react to one's family being imprisoned by someone else, as well as one's vassals and even their vassals. If I'm their king, why can't I ransom them out of some sort of Seljuk jail?
Thus, it really shouldn't be the case that you can, say, being a lowly count or even patrician, invite your king's heir to your realm and matrilineally marry or betroth his son to your daughter. Or that you can invite the Kaiser's 18 year old sister (if she has a sufficient malus with her liege or 'liege') and marry her to your 70 years old Lowborn Cuman marshal. Courtiers shouldn't have all sorts of unmatched, unprestigious etc. marriages imposed on them, especially if they belong to your (top) liege's family.
Also, there is a difference between owing fealty with taxes and levies from church holdings and automatically granting the secular power's wishes in spiritual matters. That's just too simplistic and too deterministic at the same time. Caesaropapism belongs more with investiture laws and diplomatic relationships than simply being the overlord of the cleric's temporal holdings.
I grouped the two together because they come down to the same root cause: the absence of a 'free will' in courtiers and in some cases in vassals.
A related issue is something I mentioned a while ago, i.e. the hard blocks for requesting marriages or vassalisation. Especially the 'distant realm' is awful because you can be the de iure liege, same religion, very powerful, prestigious etc. (what vassal candidates normally care for) and your provinces can be adjacent to the same sea cluster as his own, but you'll still get 'distant realm' that cuts the negotiations. The same goes for wrong religion, even among fellow Christians, which is both historically unrealistic (e.g. Armenian principalities always preferred the Franks over the alternative in the form of being conquered by Rum or Egypt) and unfun in terms of gameplay.
Unbound the choices, please. Reduce the hard blocks, replace them with what '-----' implies, which is that '+++' and '+++' will beat '-----'. Like I said, such hard blocks are unfun, as well as increasing the learning curve and annoyance because you need to remember which '-----' is really just five minuses and which '-----' is infinity.
Enable courtiers to have some say in their marriages and/or (preferably both) enable backlash from their offended families.
While at it, one needs the ability to react to one's family being imprisoned by someone else, as well as one's vassals and even their vassals. If I'm their king, why can't I ransom them out of some sort of Seljuk jail?
Last edited:
