Two cultures per character, please!

[LordofSaxony]

I have a question, if I were say.. a King of England and I decided to launch several campaigns into France with the aims to occupy it, and eventually I do, and while doing so I "replace" all of the French vassals with my English cultured vassals, wouldn't that spread culture to new areas that way? If that's the case, wasn't this represented that way in CK1?

 

[HMAS-Nameless]

That is all fine and dandy for nobles invading foreign lands and all that, but what about the rest? Dano-Danish, Germano-German, and Polish-Polish doesnt sound all that hot to me.

I mentioned this in my post above describing in detail. If the country culture tag and hereditary culture tag match then the country tag is deleted just making your culture Danish or Polish. It only happens if your ruler has a different hereditary culture then the name of your nation.

 

[unmerged(183166)]

I am liking this idea, reminds me of the Normans, especially as depicted in the recent BBC tv documentry. They have a policy of conquer and assimilate.

 

[Gwyn ap Nud]

I have a question, if I were say.. a King of England and I decided to launch several campaigns into France with the aims to occupy it, and eventually I do, and while doing so I "replace" all of the French vassals with my English cultured vassals, wouldn't that spread culture to new areas that way? If that's the case, wasn't this represented that way in CK1?

I can't remember exactly how culture spread in unmodded CKV. All I know is that in DVIP, a good part of culture spread is by event. However, the point of this addition would not be to facilitate the spread of culture in provinces, but to show the assimilition of a character into the culture of the province he governs. The Normans are a prime example of this, as, no matter where they went, they always 'went native' to some degree. In Ireland, some of them completely 'went native'! That would be represented by the shift from Franco-Norman to Gaelic-Norman, and eventually to full Gaelic, or Irish, as I hope they do flesh out the cultures more than in CKV.

 

[gja102]

But then you're talking about different subcultures within a particular group, such as in EU3 there's an "Iberian" culture group that includes Castilian, Galician, Portuguese, etc. That's a completely different issue than having every character in the game have 2 cultures.

Not really liking this idea.

I think the key is that instead of every character having 2 cultures, each culture should be comprised of two different tags.

I actually brought up this idea on the old CKII wishlist here.

This allows for the better assimilation mechanics, as well as a representation of the EUIII-style culture groups. I really don't see a problem with the so-called 'monolithic' cultures being represented in sensible terms like "Danish Norse" or "Portuguese Iberian".

 

[A_Dane]

I can't remember exactly how culture spread in unmodded CKV. All I know is that in DVIP, a good part of culture spread is by event. However, the point of this addition would not be to facilitate the spread of culture in provinces, but to show the assimilition of a character into the culture of the province he governs. The Normans are a prime example of this, as, no matter where they went, they always 'went native' to some degree. In Ireland, some of them completely 'went native'! That would be represented by the shift from Franco-Norman to Gaelic-Norman, and eventually to full Gaelic, or Irish, as I hope they do flesh out the cultures more than in CKV.

I remember how i was always trying to preserve the Norman aristocracy, trying to prevent them from going native even murdered/disinherited heirs who went native on me! Always bugged me, that they could just change in 1 generation, so i kept on seeking out good norman wives for my sons (and good norman men for my daughters). And if none could be traced, a dane/norwegian would have to suffice..

I managed to keep the guiscards Norman until the 1320's once, then i couldn't track down anyone else, and the new heir was born Italian :/

(Quite fittingly, my Realm ended with him, as i crumbled under contenious pressure in the middle east/italy, could teach that bastard to go native! )

Anyway, my point being: It would really make it more easier to ropleplay if the transition came more slowly instead of just suddenly happening.

 

[Orinsul]

what about instead of two cultures, but a culture and a language, like Normans who speak French vs. Saxons who speak Anglisc then Normans who speak English and Saxons who speak English?
as seperate values

culture=
language=
religion=

 

[MXD]

I like the concept!
This said, whether it's hereditary-hereditary or territorial-hereditary would be random.

If it's Here-Here, one of those (random) would be possibly passed to the children. Let's say a Welsh-Welsh has a kid with a Welsh-Scottish....

Then that child could be either Welsh-Welsh or Welsh-Scottish.

 

[Te. Kenzo]

I Like.

 

[unmerged(40328)]

Don't know how I feel about this. On the one hand, assimilation of large populations could happen relatively slowly (like the Normans and Anglo-Saxons in England), and CK1 doesn't account for this: provinces instantly switch with an event.

On the other hand, there's the argument that ruling dynasties could and did change cultures very quickly. To go with the obvious example, after King John in England, the Plantagenets (and their Norman vassals), I think, went native very quickly once their power was basically severed in France.

And how in-between cultures were rulers of mixed parentage really? For instance, Philip the I of France was Franco-Kievan by birth, though I doubt anyone would consider his culture some sort of synthesis beyond his name (his Kievan mother introduced the name Philip to Western Europe when she named him). Holy Roman Emperor Charles V (a little beyond the timeframe of CK, I know), though his mother was Castilian and though exposed to at least four different cultures in childhood, was culturally French and never felt at home in Spain, where he spent most of his life once he became an adult. St. Louis, who was profoundly influenced by his mother, Blanche of Castile, still wasn't Franco-Castilian in culture. Nor was Philip IV of France Franco-Catalan despite his mother. Henry II's kingly kids (Richard and John) spent most of their lives in France and I suspect weren't even culturally Norman (or Occitan, despite their mother).

I guess after arguing with myself, here, I'm more in favor of one culture per character as is done in CK. However, I think it might be good if populations change culture more gradually since that's what populations actually do in most cases. Maybe if, say, my conquering Danish rulers in Scotland take pains to preserve their Danish culture in their successors (marrying Danish, keeping their seat of power in Denmark or fostering their chidren there), instead of one abrupt event switching the Scottish culture for Danish in a provice, you could have a repeatable event that drops the different culture penalty slowly until it's negated (the point at which the province would officially switch cultures).

 

[Orinsul]

theres the problem that cultures werent exclusive as they are today, Europe in the middle ages was one big collective thing. it was quite ordinary for an german to be born and raised in italy and goto university in france. Would he then be italio-german? no.
Which is why i think Language is the better division to make, not to add in a secondary culture.

for provinces, what if culture was a %

 

[MXD]

And how in-between cultures were rulers of mixed parentage really? For instance, Philip the I of France was Franco-Kievan by birth, though I doubt anyone would consider his culture some sort of synthesis beyond his name (his Kievan mother introduced the name Philip to Western Europe when she named him).

Hence my suggestion, just above yours.

Anne of Kiev would be, if we only consider heredity....

Russian - Swedish

And Henri I would be

French - French (unless there's an angevin culture).

So...
A French - French dad, and a Swede - Russian mom. For a child "conceived" in France. And the said dad was king. Makes it highly likely that the kid will be french.

So Philippe could actually be French - Russian. And Berthe of Flanders, well, I can't say what she'll be exactly, likely Flemish - whatever culture is associated with Saxony.

Start with heredity. And then just add in "territorial" culture, as needed.

 

[TheLoneGunman]

At least early in this period, didn't most of Europe still speak Latin?

 

[Orinsul]

priests, university professors and doctors spoke latin, some offical documents
none of the people did, just like today. the vulgate wasnt a living language but one for record keeping and a linga-franca

centuries before alfred had to go around translating everything from latin into english as even his priests didnt have a firm grasp of latin [or possibly in order to bind all the english into a single nation though a unified language, depends who you ask]. but theres some proof if you want it.
most surviving documents are in latin but no-one spoke it.

 

[Goggles89]

If there is a character who happens to be Dano-Danish, for example, I would think that the game could shorten it to just plain Danish.

Danish dad - Dano-Swedish mother -> Danish Child.

 

[MXD]

If there is a character who happens to be Dano-Danish, for example, I would think that the game could shorten it to just plain Danish.

Danish dad - Dano-Swedish mother -> Danish Child.

First idea = Sure, but keep him Dano-danish for genetics sake.

Second idea = actually, he should have a 50% chance to get the "swedish" cultural trait (as far as genetics are concerned), for the 2nd culture. If the child actually LIVES in Danemark.

The thing is : culture has to "start" by genetics, but then envolve to territorials. To a certain extent.

 

[RedRooster81]

theres the problem that cultures werent exclusive as they are today, Europe in the middle ages was one big collective thing. it was quite ordinary for an german to be born and raised in italy and goto university in france. Would he then be italio-german? no.
Which is why i think Language is the better division to make, not to add in a secondary culture.

for provinces, what if culture was a %

Exactly. (sorry for replying to such an old quote, but it makes sense.) Language was a continuum, as it is today (but more so before the rise of "national" languages--it's all politics). IIRC, it sort of went like this: A Norman could understand a Walloon, who could understand Dutch, who could understand Low German, who could understand High German, but if a Norman merchant tried to sign a wool contract with a Bavarian merchant at the Champagne fair, things were not so clear. In southern Europe, there was similarly an Occitanic continuity from Asturian to Lombard. But as to the real importance of culture, it was about group identity. The word nation was used, but it was much more amorphous.

The basic identity was native of X and vassal of Y and son of Z, who was son of L.--which in practice meant, you're not from around here, your king is not our king, and we have no idea who your grandfather was or what he did. So state your business or go away.

 

[unmerged(84239)]

I dislike the idea.

2 cultures is a waste, especially since it is only useful for normanns (who had england and sicily variants).

I really think that basco-castilian, turco-rus or occitan-catalan would s.ck.

 

[Kaleidoscope]

RedRooster you've got some textual diarrhea problems.

 

[Järnblomma]

I do not believe in this idea. Firstly, it will most likely all go extremly unhistorical very quickly, secondly it all seems very complicated (Turko-cuman mother, franco-arab father and born in greece makes what?) and thirdly I believe this will be a hotbed of flamewars and annoyances over which culture a person really is. And if I am not completly wrong I believe Paradox removed provincial cultures from CK2...