I'd say that this "Legends" initiative of giving new players historically important characters to play with is the perfect time to correct this mistake.Very interesting initiative, but still disappoints me that you erroneously use Murchadh for King of Munster in the 1066 start and not his cousin, Toirdelbach Ua Briain, who was actually king of Munster at this period and would later make (justifiable) claim to be high-king of Ireland.
Toirdelbach Ua Briain - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I had a little chuckle to myself when the video says "we don't know an awful lot about Murchadh's life".
It's the biggest joke and PDS are seemingly not in on it.
I don't like to get too worked up over these things. But given people shout about certain baronies being at the wrong side of rivers or that someone's third cousin wasn't half as devious as he should have been, I think I could see myself pushing for a nascent (and rather successful) high-king being represented as more than a courtier in game.
His political life screams CK3. It's a missed opportunity for sure.
Also screams motivational poster.
It sure is easier if you live in a society that shows preferences for older men. You don't even need to be good at war, you just gonna be good at talking.
This is especially true if they’re making Murchad the Diplomacy Lifestyle starter character, a role that Toirdelbach is much more suited to: a lawmaker, famously allied with Diarmait and so close to him that he received the sword of Brian Bóruma, and a master of the “divide and rule” strategy.
Didn't do Donnchadh mac Briain much good unfortunately, and he was the only one in Clontarf who got to relish the victory.
And we have all these people in Anglo-Saxon Bishops, Nobles and Kings(just to give an example of a source) mentioned only a decade or so before 867 or a decade or so after 867. It would certainly be so ahistorical to add them in a game where Basil is emperor in 867 January 1 or a game that King Æthelred's children doesn't exist at all.
