You could also switch to Elective or Ultimogeniture to avoid playing as your first child.
A List of Interesting Female Characters
- Thread starter KestrelGirl
- Start date
-
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.
You could also switch to Elective or Ultimogeniture to avoid playing as your first child.
Man, I wish she was in the game. She sounds awesome.
Unrelatedly, this thread convinced me to start a game with Shajar. I managed to convert (and nullify a crusade) with the Miaphysite approach. But now I want to try again and see if I can stay Sunni via seduction and affairs.
Killing your husband is job one.
yrs--
--Ben
P.S. I wish that Tamar was half as cool in CKII as she was in real life. Unfortunately you can't marry her historical husband because of "political concerns."
I like this thread and I like playing female characters. But at the risk of sounding negative. I would like to point out that it is rather difficult to continue playing a female character after your female ruler dies. Agnatic Cognatic Gavelkind, Primogeniture, Elective all prefer male rulers. With the weakening of the elective law, I have yet to be able to elect a female ruler no matter how good her stats or traits. So unless all your children are female and you are running Primo, ultimo, or Gavelkind; or unless you are running Absolute Cog and your eldest child (who does not die before you do) happens to be a female, it is all but impossible to have a female inherit. That 3 Empress achievement is completely up to the RND provided you are running "the appropriate" inheritance laws.
To keep playing as a female, I modify the religion text, like Messalian.
So I able to choose my heir manually by clicking the throne crown button above her picture.
It's break the game mechanism... but it's better than nothing.
It isn't that hard to get a female heir through elective. Just be popular, and have her be particularly worthy (quick or genius or some other good trait set) with a high diplomacy.
The game represents women a bit too unfavourably sometimes. For example, when a husband died, his sons/daughers would in many places share only half of the inheritance even as adults (and in case of "gavelkind" the second/third would often become vassals to the first son, unless this was an important fief, in which case the lord could bring them under his direct control). The other half would go to the wife as part of a dowager. Since men sometimes died, substantial lands were sometimes held by powerful widows. In CKII all that usually goes straight to the children, although I have seen that females sometimes get the dowager title when she happens to be a ruler like her husband. Then on the other hand, inheritance is a bit simplified overall in CKII, since, for example, when the eldest son came of age, he would take a small part of his inheritance (long before his parents died).
CK2 is sometimes even to positive for women... Often the husband of the women inherited the title. Or the husband was the real ruler in her territory.
Yes, that is also true. Women could have assets (land, money, fishing-rights etc), but it was often the husband who "held it for her" (as if she was a child). There is also the dowry (not dower) which is another thing at odds against the woman. The small flaw I speak about is the "men gets everything", because that is not true, and that is a quite substantial thing to leave out of the picture (and if seek to enable more playable characters for women maybe it would be a route to allow them to play in those type of secondary positions too), women would normally hold more land than they currently do. Men also died frequently since war was more ordinary in a way which would perhaps not feel intuitive today (the countless of men that died on Crusades left many widows - although that would also be often be led up by a mortage [if poor] or a taxation [if noble or powerful], to fund the journey). But I would not mind expanding on both the favourable and unfavourable cases for women. Depth is usually for the better in either case (as long as it is focused and relevant for the stories of the game). Certainly overall women did not have the better half in any way. I'd be against adapting history to make it seem more favourable than it was. The first reason is that I simply prefer the historical element to the fantasy one. The second is that it would not serve women today to deny the historical injustice they were subject to back then. It is far more educational to depict it just like it was, no more, no less.
How common (or uncommon) was it for a woman to ignore these traditional prescripts and handle her own affairs? I can't imagine it was completely unheard of.
I have no numbers. But I am also not sure what you mean. As a landed noble woman with her own titles? Or as a woman in general?
For women in general, they did not control who they were going to be married to. Marriages were essentially business transactions agreed by the parents on each side. As for free will.. an example, there were even contracts like "if she dies, he marries the next oldest sister". Romantic, right? Just take the next girl in line.
I suppose she could resign from her nobility, lands, income, security, break with the church, her parents and her land lord. This would basically mean breaking the "law" and probably social alienation. More or less remove herself from society. Try to run away, try to become a serf or start whoring..?
Of course everything is relative. There are of course cases where women were in strong enough positions to have a say, but it kind of goes back to what your question is
For women in general, they did not control who they were going to be married to. Marriages were essentially business transactions agreed by the parents on each side. As for free will.. an example, there were even contracts like "if she dies, he marries the next oldest sister". Romantic, right? Just take the next girl in line.
I suppose she could resign from her nobility, lands, income, security, break with the church, her parents and her land lord. This would basically mean breaking the "law" and probably social alienation. More or less remove herself from society. Try to run away, try to become a serf or start whoring..?
Of course everything is relative. There are of course cases where women were in strong enough positions to have a say, but it kind of goes back to what your question is
Yes, this went on for very long. For example in Finland even around 1850-1900 women got financially independent only if their spouse died. Otherwise "their guardianship" passed on from the father to the groom.
Widowers were the only women who were in full control of their own affairs. One example is our first and most high profile female author Minna Canth, who wrote about these things. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minna_Canth
The job paths were also restricted severely. Either knitting/housework or teacher. Nothing else. Society tried to prevent women being educated too much, supposedly they could've fell to hysteria or other kind of nerve weakness. Convenient excuses to portray that women somehow weren't able to handle too much education, so they didn't need to be offered that many hours and years of schooling than boys.
Widowers were the only women who were in full control of their own affairs. One example is our first and most high profile female author Minna Canth, who wrote about these things. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minna_Canth
The job paths were also restricted severely. Either knitting/housework or teacher. Nothing else. Society tried to prevent women being educated too much, supposedly they could've fell to hysteria or other kind of nerve weakness. Convenient excuses to portray that women somehow weren't able to handle too much education, so they didn't need to be offered that many hours and years of schooling than boys.
Last edited:
I believe that in one of the earlier start dates maybe latin empire or the crusades) the ruler of Aragon is Female
If you start Tamar of Georgia on her ascension date (6th Apr. 1184) you unfortunately can't marry her historical second husband (the one she actually picked herself after divorcing the guy foisted upon her by her nobles—I'm so thankful that can't happen in game) because of his "political concerns." He's Duke of Alania and has a strong claim on Kartli, so despite being same dynasty he won't agree even to a regular marriage. However, if you edit the save file to remove his claim, then he'll agree and you can just give it back to him after the wedding with the console. A little cheating, but it's all in the name of a more historic match. Or you can just wait until they're married in the history (1/1/1189), but then he's no longer Duke of Alania.
In fact, the Duke of Kartli is your most powerful and difficult vassal; is there are way to push your independent foreign husband's claim against your own vassals or do you just need to wait for your kid to inherit it? If you start in 1189, this problem is solved as your husband is your courtier.
In fact, the Duke of Kartli is your most powerful and difficult vassal; is there are way to push your independent foreign husband's claim against your own vassals or do you just need to wait for your kid to inherit it? If you start in 1189, this problem is solved as your husband is your courtier.
Lucia Countess of Tripoli October 19, 1287 - the last ruler of tripoli and sister of Bohemond VII. She is married to Narjot of Toucy a rather useless Baron. A hard start since the Mamelukes are ready to pounce on the only remaining crusader state other than Jerusalem/Cyprus and Cilician Armenia.
Illona Queen of Croatia Jan 1, 1090 - A widowed childless Arpad princess, starts with her brother the King of Hungary as an ally.
Constance Queen of Sicily - the last of the old Norman dynasty and mother of Frederick II. I believe she is listed as Queen in the 1190s
Illona Queen of Croatia Jan 1, 1090 - A widowed childless Arpad princess, starts with her brother the King of Hungary as an ally.
Constance Queen of Sicily - the last of the old Norman dynasty and mother of Frederick II. I believe she is listed as Queen in the 1190s
Kashmir has two queens, both unfortunately outside available start points. Didda and Kota (whose husband should be King in 1337).
Rudrama Devi of the Kakatiya dynasty (Kingdom of Andhra) should be queen in her own right in the 1260s.
Ceylon should have a few reigning queens (all will be Buddhist) but the one who should fall in game time is
Lilavati (reigned 1197–1200, 1209–1210, and 1211–1212) widow of Parakramabhau the Great
These are at the kingdom level...there may be a few others at the lower ranks
I would have just started thread "under-used interesting characters". Would have been more comprehensive list and would have given people much more interesting characters to play as.
