CK2 Dev Diary #17: Crusader Cats

[EnvyDemon]

It's the Middle Ages; you were lucky to get people to scoop up their own poop. At least cats have the decency to bury theirs without prompting. Now if you could just get them to stop leaving the remains of small rodents at your feet whenever they feel particularly generous...

My cat doesn't kill mice, she plays with them until they are frightened to death.

 

[Warspock]

It depended from what I understand tabby cats had a more positive image with Christians while black cats had a extremely negative image during the middle ages and the first religious condemnation of general. cats of being demon associated didn't come until Gregory the nine in the 1230s.

Of course in the 14th century you had mass slaughter of cats by Christians who saw them as witch familiars but given the medieval church view that the belief in witches was heresy or more pointedly pagan superstition I am uncertain how much church support those acts had.

Nope, it was all cats for the most part. The French especially hated them. They'd have huge cat burning festivals. And this was going on at least as early as the late 11th century (possibly earlier), all the way up to the 18th century. Italians had their own medieval superstitions about cats, that they could suck the life out of infants and all types of craziness.

Like I said before, cats were considered vain creatures that were tools of Satan and friends of witches. Even when they were kept around to kill rats and mice they were described as stealing the lives of the mice the same way Satan steals your soul.

And that's not to say cats were not kept by medieval nobility, but they were mostly found in abbeys and nunneries strangely enough. As one pilgrim put it after coming back from Jerusalem, "They (Muslims) like cats, while we like dogs."

Edit: I should add that the Norse were the exact opposite. They kept cats for the practical reason: They were the most skilled mousers. Also it wasn't taboo in their religion since Thor gives Freyja two cats which end up drawing her chariot.

And while I don't have much information about the Eastern Empire and cats, Greeks always kept cats, so I'm assuming they were more lenient in judging them and their owners.

 

[Ravenmane]

My cat is awesome

Ahem,

+500 Prestige
+15 General Opinion
-10 Troll Opinion

 

[Lord Slayaton]

Not because I need to make this a big discussion, but since people keep commenting, I feel I need to respond - I clearly stated in my post that I knew he/she tried to be funny and was making a joke, but that I didn't feel that it was the time or the place to make such a joke. So it seems rather needless for your comment that it is just a joke. I clearly know that!

I think the tone is quite aggressive in many threads - I don't mean to make it worse myself, but it is sad when people just argue with "calm down" or "chill out", as I/or others have got into a rage of some sort. It should be aloud to express opinions, questions and worries, without being punked about it.
I guess the issue is that some use this forum as a big joke community, while others like myself use it as a serious information channel. Of course there should be place for us all?

I had a question, which was only answered by a sarcastic joke by a Paradox member. I explained that I felt the joke was provocative to me, I felt looked down upon, and not what I would expect from a member of Paradox, but perhaps from a 13-year old child. The respond to this was the member saying I could just look on the internet - no comments about the obvious bad and out-of-place joke.

It doesn't matter if I am an idiot, or get upset about something that wasn't mean to upset me - but if you do the same thing in real life, the normal thing to do would to appologuise and state that it wasn't meant to upset them. My conclusion is that I continue to feel looked down upon by Paradox members, and that there often is a witch hunt from other users on those who are a bit annoyed about stuff regarding Paradox. I think Paradox should take this more serious - it is a simple customer experience, and though they might survive without my support, they should think about how they communicate on the forum, and how what they say is received.
I have always expected Paradox members here to be support-members, and have received great help from them. I have always respected them. But now it feels like they are just a band of sympathizers or thugs, that only bring joking to the forum. I KNOW THIS IS NOT THE CASE - but it feels like that...

Lets leave this discussion at this, I don't want to make a big deal out of it (thought writing all of this, might suggest otherwise) Sorry!
I look forward to the DLC, and really like the game and the work that is put into it from Paradox.

Try not to be so easily offended by sarcasm. We are all human here, even the devs, so don't expect robotic responses all across the forums.

 

[Strager]

Is it too late to change the expansion name to "Crusader Cats" ?

 

[Alvin mj]

I must point out that the Black Death contagion direct human to human? only the enormous prevalence rate excludes all other means of transmission.

 

[Jorlem]

+1 to intrigue for owning a cat? How is someone who is willing to scoop the poop of an animal on a daily basis more intriguing? Never mind, they probably didn't have cat liter back then.

That's what you have servants for. You really think a king would personally clean up after his pet cat or dog?

 

[Knotz]

Er, medieval Europeans hated cats. At most, they were in some nunneries and abbeys. And it was sort of taboo to even do that since it was the same nuns and monks that spkoe out about cats being Satan's tools and the friends of witches etc. Muslims didn't hate them, and liked them for their cleanliness. This should really only be for Muslims unless you're a lunatic, cynical etc.

Seriously Paradox, act like historians and not Tumblr kids.

Edit: Three Tumblr kids disagree.

Now if only there was something in the dev diary that acknowledged a medieval dislike for cats...

Oh.

 

[tywinzo]

But the Middle Ages (and any other period of time) weren't entirely dark and serious! People laughed, kept pets and went about their lives just like today. Depicting it as a period of constant seriousness is in itself a failure of world building (and as noted, a failure Martin emphatically doesn't fall prey to in his own work). The image of the Middle Ages as a period of overwhelming darkness and depression owes more to later Renaissance scholars than it does to reality; people are people.

I fully agree that middle ages weren't all dark and such like renaissance scholars suggest, or that it needs to be constantly serious, but it's also wasn't my point. It's more about the fact that it's very hard in the first place to give the reader a genuine feeling of the world, even if you (necessarily) convey its realities, such as for example death being a real danger (and people actually dying), and similiar things he talks of. So what I mean by serious is, like I tried to clarify a bit later, rather about "how you deliver conflict, limitations and strife.", and those things he talks of (not some general opposition to humour). And this is really hard to do, because you really need to systematically bring it out to the reader (or gamer) and make it present. Even if you keep re-inforcing this, you still need skill to actually deliver that backdrop. And here is where I'm saying that one of the best things about CK2 is precisely that it has this potential and sort of already does it a little bit. I personally believe for example that GoT is a major pull for this whole genre and one of the very reasons it sparks the kind of interest and sales it does. Hell, from what I know there's even a GoT MOD, and it seems to be widely popular, if not the most popular MOD. So neglecting one of the creator's foundations to how to portray the world obviously isn't a good thing. And this is where I feel that the proportion of such "enhancers" is too far low (events, GFX or otherwise). So the groundwork isn't done, and the new events aren't contributing to it, rathet undermining it. So it's there, but the world could be even more present if there was more of that. And this doesn't in categorically exclude fun events in any way. As you say, to a dark backdrop, using humour can actually increase the contrast. Just like love can be made stronger to a backdrop of war (how many drama's of a love story on top backdrop of a war aren't there out there?). But this is just a generic technique in itself that has to be used in the right place. My point is that the groundwork of delivering realities isn't done well enough (just as I expressed in previous DD), so those other kind of flavour events by fall short, especially since they by themselves aren't reinforcing at all, they contribute even more to the problem. I also think there's a sort of difference between trying to depict humour between two characters as it was in the middle ages, and just adding the kind of humour in CK2 which is a reference to some real-world modern movie and similiar attitudes (and there are plenty of those in CK2). Such type of movie quotes aren't "serious". They do nothing to enhance the medieval feel, in fact they undermine it by going outside of the medieval theme, using modern references. And I feel that many other events, while not necessarily explicitly using modern quotes, they rather deliver the thoughts and ideas of modern people, not of historical ones and not for the purpose of portraying the world. I find the WoL scholarship event chain really bad. Actual humour from the middle ages, surely not my expertise, but there are examples of such, if you really want to make a serious attempt at that. I believe there were example books with fables, where different animals, plants were talking to eachother, ending their conversation with a punchline. It could have some benefit if it was put into right context. But anyway, that's not what paradox is doing or trying to do.

 

[Warspock]

Now if only there was something in the dev diary that acknowledged a medieval dislike for cats...

Oh.

Except that's once you become "crazy cat lady/lord" and not just because you have a cat. Riffing on the modern term of a "crazy cat lady" hermit that is unsociable and disliked, not because it was taboo in medieval Catholicism.... Oh.

Hopefully the event chain does account or this and isn't just some satirical, meme event.

Edit: Sorry kids, you can't disagree with facts.

 

[Knotz]

Except that's once you become "crazy cat lady/lord" and not just because you have cats... Oh.

And you're implying that every lord and every lady that had a cat, singular, should have had angry mobs forming?

Oh.

 

[Warspock]

And you're implying that every lord and every lady that had a cat, singular, should have had angry mobs forming?

Oh.

That's a fallacy, as I've already said above that some nobility obviously owned cats. Try reading all of my posts next time. Oh.

Again:

Nope, it was all cats for the most part. The French especially hated them. They'd have huge cat burning festivals. And this was going on at least as early as the late 11th century (possibly earlier), all the way up to the 18th century. Italians had their own medieval superstitions about cats, that they could suck the life out of infants and all types of craziness.

Like I said before, cats were considered vain creatures that were tools of Satan and friends of witches. Even when they were kept around to kill rats and mice they were described as stealing the lives of the mice the same way Satan steals your soul.

And that's not to say cats were not kept by medieval nobility, but they were mostly found in abbeys and nunneries strangely enough. As one pilgrim put it after coming back from Jerusalem, "They (Muslims) like cats, while we like dogs."

Edit: I should add that the Norse were the exact opposite. They kept cats for the practical reason: They were the most skilled mousers. Also it wasn't taboo in their religion since Thor gives Freyja two cats which end up drawing her chariot.

And while I don't have much information about the Eastern Empire and cats, Greeks always kept cats, so I'm assuming they were more lenient in judging them and their owners.

 

[Knotz]

That's a fallacy, as I've already said above that some nobility obviously owned cats. Try reading all of my posts next time. Oh.

Great, so we have nothing to disagree about.

Oh.

 

[Warspock]

Great, so we have nothing to disagree about.

Oh.

You quoted me without refuting anything I've said. Not the other way around.

 

[BritNavFan]

I must point out that the Black Death contagion direct human to human? only the enormous prevalence rate excludes all other means of transmission.

Yes.

At first thought, one might think that cats would be a very insignificant aspect of a medieval ruler’s life, however, when the Plague comes around to visit this changes drastically. Most of you probably know that the Black Death was likely spread by fleas on rats.

Current theories are that that's an incomplete explanation of the situation. See this news article or this news article .

Basically, bubonic plague and pneumonic plague are both caused by the same bacterium, Y. pestis. If a human gets bitten by a flea that is carrying the disease, the human gets bubonic plague. Pneumonic plague, as its name suggests, is characterized by the bacteria being present in the lungs. It spreads by the victims sneezing. So it spreads much faster than bubonic plague can. It's also possible for a case of bubonic plague to turn into a case of pneumonic plague if the bacteria infect the lungs.

However, my understanding is that it was harder for pneumonic plague to spread from city to city, because it's obvious the sick person has it, whereas it's not nearly as obvious that some of the rats on your sailing ship are sick. So the plague would spread from town to town carried by sick rats on ships or carts, and then, when one of the (relatively few) people who caught bubonic plague from the rat fleas developed pneumonic plague, you'd get a local epidemic of people catching pneumonic plague.

Or, to quote oral tradition:
"Ring around the rosie,
"A pocket full of posies,
"A-choo! A-choo! We ALL! FALL! DOWN!"

i.e. people were sneezing: pneumonic plague.

 

[Virvatuli]

can we torture the cats?

O_O

Sorry to disappoint, but that's a tad bit too dark, even for CK2. Yes, I know you can become a cannibal as well as blind and castrate little children. But harming those fluffy angels? That would be taking it too far!

 

[Knotz]

You quoted me without refuting anything I've said. Not the other way around.

Oh, well have this weirdly applicable link then, except you're not my friend.

oh

 

[Warspock]

O_O

Sorry to disappoint, but that's a tad bit too dark, even for CK2. Yes, I know you can become a cannibal as well as blind and castrate little children. But harming those fluffy angels? That would be taking it too far!

It would be historical, but not politically correct. Which is another point. The history is far more interesting and stranger than some joke or meme.

Not that I'd want this, but just for context, there's medieval accounts of horses being accused, tried and sentenced for murder. They'd then bait or fight these animals against the other indigenous carnivorous fauna. Large cats, bears etc. Sometimes they'd latch African monkeys onto their backs and laugh and howl at the spectacle. And this is just one form of medieval animal fighting. Medieval thought saw these animals as wild beasts to ne feared and fought, but also majestic, hence the 12th century bestiary. The latter three of Saint John's four Evangelists (Man, Lion, Ox and Eagle) were also revered in some way and were usually exempt from this type of fighting. Though bulls and lions did make up their fair share of sporting venture in the Eastern Empire.

Oh, well have this weirdly applicable link then, except you're not my friend.

oh

...I'm not clicking that, I don't know where it's been. Next time you reply, try forming an argument first.


Edit: Sorry kids, you can't disagree with facts. But do stay ignorant about the middle ages.

 

[orochi2k]

O_O

Sorry to disappoint, but that's a tad bit too dark, even for CK2. Yes, I know you can become a cannibal as well as blind and castrate little children. But harming those fluffy angels? That would be taking it too far!

We must protest Paradox provides cats immunity to tortune which is unfair to human.
A new faction formed! "Human right shall equal to cats right"

 

[Warspock]

We must protest Paradox provides cats immunity to tortune which is unfair to human.
A new faction formed! "Human right shall equal to cats right"

Thomas Paine's Rights of Feline is that way, towards the Europa Universalis board. --------------->

In the 18th century you will find the Social Catract.

Why does Europa Universalis sound like a Kraftwerk song?