CK2 Dev Diary #33: Let's Talk About Sects

[CrackdToothGrin]

Yes, it's indeed unfortunate that the discussion became so heated. Nevertheless, I agree with some of the sentiments. As I see it,

• The game has events/features that are impossible to occur in reality.
• The game has events/features that sound impossible but might have a rational explanation.
• The game has events/features that are highly unlikely to have any historical basis.
• It would be nice for the player to have better control over which of these three types of events/features than the rather blunt "Supernatural" option we currently have.
• Even with more player control, you'll never please everyone because there will always be debate on how events/features are categorized.

Wouldn't it be trivial to find the supernatural events, and mod a flag of some sort for the "maybe" supernatural events, or even just change event text on them? I mean, that could probably just be done in a few hours as a mod and then bam! Problem solved.

 

[branch83wr]

Ugh, more magical, unhistorical crap.

Yup. There's FAR better routes for CK2 to go than the direction this DLC appears to be going in my opinion; especially if DLC content is starting to wind down (as some have speculated).

Some of the "Quality of Life" stuff that they've added is good, but the main content does nothing for me. Oh well.

 

[sreckom92]

Can't wait to update my portrait map!
I really wonder what pack will they release next. One guy here knows it, but won't share the info.
*grin*

 

[Orion Winterfire]

• Even with more player control, you'll never please everyone because there will always be debate on how events/features are categorized.

Indeed. I applaud them for trying, and for the result- which, while not perfect, is plenty good enough for me. I suspect I'll feel the same about mm but I reserve judgment until I play it.

 

[jyx12]

Am I understanding things correctly that one can be in only one secret society?

 

[Foxborro0]

Is this real magic?

If so at the start of the game will there be a Fantasy playthrough or a Normal Playthrough. It sounds really coool! But this is a historical game.

 

[Orion Winterfire]

Is this real magic?

If so at the start of the game will there be a Fantasy playthrough or a Normal Playthrough. It sounds really coool! But this is a historical game.

There's already a game rule for that: "supernatural events"

 

[Asiak]

Am I understanding things correctly that one can be in only one secret society?

I believe that was said somewhere.

 

[Es57]

Yup. There's FAR better routes for CK2 to go than the direction this DLC appears to be going in my opinion; especially if DLC content is starting to wind down (as some have speculated).

Some of the "Quality of Life" stuff that they've added is good, but the main content does nothing for me. Oh well.

Yeah, it seems Paradox can't make up their minds if they want a fantasy game or a historical game, lately.

My theory is that the devs desperately want to make a medieval-fantasy game with witches, dragons and magic, but don't have the time/ressources to do it, so they are just polluting their existing medieval historical game with completely irrelevant fantasy elements...

 

[riadach]

I think the magic elements have be present in order to make the game immersive. They may not be realistic, but historically many joined such societies because they believed they would gain benefits. How could you roleplay as such a character when you know for a fact that they wouldn't be worthwhile? The same goes for immortality. Many historical rulers searched for a way of achieving immortality, something we no to be virtually impossible. But why would a player pursue such an option if they knew it was impossible too?

Even if you yourself don't attempt to pursue these avenues, you're not going to dismiss reports that a group of acolytes are attempting to summon Be'elzebub just because it's impossible. You're going to be as concerned about it as you would if you were a genuine medieval ruler.

 

[Es57]

I think the magic elements have be present in order to make the game immersive. They may not be realistic, but historically many joined such societies because they believed they be benefitted. How could you roleplay as such a character when you know for a fact that they wouldn't be worthwhile? The same goes for immortality. Many historical rulers searched for a way of achieving immortality, something we no to be virtually impossible. But why would a player pursue such an option if they knew it was impossible too?

Even if you yourself don't attempt to pursue these avenues, you're not going to dismiss reports that a group of acolytes are attempting to summon Be'elzebub just because it's impossible. You're going to be as concerned about it as you would if you were a genuine medieval ruler.

My problem with fantasy elements is that the game assumes them to be an actual thing.
Of course, superstitions were a very important part of the midle-ages. And the game should depict it.
But it was nothing more than that : superstitions.

For example, I have no problem with the option to seek immortality, I have a problem with the fact that you can actually get it.
I have no problem with a character trying to use black magic, I have a problem with the fact that it could actually get some results.

As some have said previously, the game rules choice about fantasy/realism should not completely deactivate the supernatural events, it should fire a plausible version of it.

For example, when a character seeks and finds immortality with fantasy settings, realism should get him to understand that he is loosing his time, with different effects (depressed, cynical, etc...)

When the gates of hell event are actually gates of hell in fantasy settings, with realism settings, it could be revealed that the earth opening is just an earthquake (getting you better understanding of science) .

When the devil-spawn is actually that in fantasy settings, it could just be a child acting up because of some mental disease or something.

If you look closely, every supernatural event could just be a normal, natural thing that was misinterpreted because of medieval superstition or lack of scientific knowledge.

 

[TheDungen]

Honestly I think it's more a case of lazy writing than a determined effort to make the game more supernatural, it's much easier to borrow the plot from some movie for an event chain than to make one up. They aren't primarily supernatural events they just are pop culture reference events which happen to reference stuff with supernatural aspects.

That said ck2 is lacking in historical events, that's the one thing that eu4 actually does better, bring real people and event into things (There are some, rise of the hansa, the diffrent invasions). You can actually learn things by playing anew tag in eu4. CK2 might want to look at them when it comes to that. Look i'm not saying railroading but certain events from history when you meet specific criteria.

I think the magic elements have be present in order to make the game immersive. They may not be realistic, but historically many joined such societies because they believed they be benefitted. How could you roleplay as such a character when you know for a fact that they wouldn't be worthwhile? The same goes for immortality. Many historical rulers searched for a way of achieving immortality, something we no to be virtually impossible. But why would a player pursue such an option if they knew it was impossible too?

Even if you yourself don't attempt to pursue these avenues, you're not going to dismiss reports that a group of acolytes are attempting to summon Be'elzebub just because it's impossible. You're going to be as concerned about it as you would if you were a genuine medieval ruler.

On the contrary the idea of demon deals and demon summoning is a late Renaissance thing.

 

[Galaahd]

I think the magic elements have be present in order to make the game immersive. They may not be realistic, but historically many joined such societies because they believed they would gain benefits. How could you roleplay as such a character when you know for a fact that they wouldn't be worthwhile? The same goes for immortality. Many historical rulers searched for a way of achieving immortality, something we no to be virtually impossible. But why would a player pursue such an option if they knew it was impossible too?

Even if you yourself don't attempt to pursue these avenues, you're not going to dismiss reports that a group of acolytes are attempting to summon Be'elzebub just because it's impossible. You're going to be as concerned about it as you would if you were a genuine medieval ruler.

Except the way these things are depicted is NOT historical or immersive at all.

It's just mostly pop-fantasy.

 

[illathid]

On the contrary the idea of demon deals and demon summoning is a late Renaissance thing.

Wasn't consorting with daemons one of the charges against the Templars? I seem to recall there being accounts of trying to summon Bahomet.

 

[SigurdStormhand]

Wasn't consorting with daemons one of the charges against the Templars? I seem to recall there being accounts of trying to summon Bahomet.

It was, the Templars were acquitted of all charges.

Demon worship was widely feared by the church, I don't believe it was widely practised.

 

[illathid]

It was, the Templars were acquitted of all charges.

Demon worship was widely feared by the church, I don't believe it was widely practised.

Yeah, I don't think the Templars actually worshiped daemons, but it shows that the idea was out there before the late Renaissance as claimed by @TheDungen

 

[TheDungen]

It was, the Templars were acquitted of all charges.

Demon worship was widely feared by the church, I don't believe it was widely practised.

Worship, not summoning. That's what the devil does in the bible try to get people to worship him instead of god, and hence why most other religious figures are equal to the devil in christian doctrine, because they constitute a breech of that first commandment.

 

[Urzhail64]

Speaking of superstition, I'm reminded of the old MS-DOS game - Darklands.

Honestly I think it's more a case of lazy writing than a determined effort to make the game more supernatural, it's much easier to borrow the plot from some movie for an event chain than to make one up. They aren't primarily supernatural events they just are pop culture reference events which happen to reference stuff with supernatural aspects.

That said ck2 is lacking in historical events, that's the one thing that eu4 actually does better, bring real people and event into things (There are some, rise of the hansa, the diffrent invasions). You can actually learn things by playing anew tag in eu4. CK2 might want to look at them when it comes to that. Look i'm not saying railroading but certain events from history when you meet specific criteria.



On the contrary the idea of demon deals and demon summoning is a late Renaissance thing.

Not really, I'd cite Phillip IV and Clement V's cooperation in suppressing the Knights Templar in 1307 which hardly qualifies as "late Renaissance" Of course, Phillip IV's real reason was the fact he was deeply in debt to the Knights Templar and most likely lusted after their rumored riches. Didn't hurt there was a great deal of rumors about the Templars' alleged dabblings in the supernatural to ground his charges against that order.

I'd recommend "Dungeon Fire and Sword" by John J. Robinson for reading. It covers the entire history of the Templars in 1052 all the way to their final dissolution in 1314. It's a surprisingly good read by the way.

 

[TheDungen]

Speaking of superstition, I'm reminded of the old MS-DOS game - Darklands.


Not really, I'd cite Phillip IV and Clement V's cooperation in suppressing the Knights Templar in 1307 which hardly qualifies as "late Renaissance" Of course, Phillip IV's real reason was the fact he was deeply in debt to the Knights Templar and most likely lusted after their rumored riches. Didn't hurt there was a great deal of rumors about the Templars' alleged dabblings in the supernatural to ground his charges against that order.

I'd recommend "Dungeon Fire and Sword" by John J. Robinson for reading. It covers the entire history of the Templars in 1052 all the way to their final dissolution in 1314. It's a surprisingly good read by the way.

I have "deus vult" by sweden's foremost historian dick harrison I am familiar with the subject. And I saw no mention anywhere of demonic bargains and summonings, just devil worship.

 

[Wagonlitz]

Summoning demons was not something people in the middle ages believed in, that's our pop culture myths not theirs.

Indeed. In fact during the inquisition (which is a bit after the game's time frame, granted) if you accused something of witchcraft you could well end up being the one the inquisition took away, since you obviously believed in witchcraft, on which the church's position was that it didn't exist.

After all, all this accusations of devil-worshop would be pointless, if people were not ready to believe in something like this. It's absolutly same thing as Jeanne D'Arc legend.

There is a huge difference about rumours of devil worship and people actually trying to summon things. And many of those rumours probably were just scare mongering and not due to somebody actually worshipping the devil. Compare to how in Eastern and Central Europe there were plenty of rumours about vampires and werewolves and people were genuinely afraid of them, but they were just stories.

There is a huge difference between having scares due to such rumours and actually having people perform it/turn into werewolves.

There obviously also are cases where phenomenons were observed, but not understood and then said to be the work of some supernatural being.
Some examples from Scandinavian superstition include lygtemænd (lantern men) who resided in bogs and dark places and led people to their death. You weren't to point at him, since then he would drag you to him and thereby your death. He also could divide himself into multiple lantern men. You could protect against him by wearing your hat inside out. In reality it's believed to be small amounts of natural gas being emitted from the bog and then igniting in the air.

There also were changelings which were troll children which had been put in place of human children and which developed slowly and possibly deformed. (I.e. people with a disability from birth.)

Then there's the elves, who generally were supernaturally beautiful, but needn't be young as popular culture has it. They could also be really evil and generally it was really really bad to run into them---if not deadly. At night and in foggy mornings one might see them dancing around burial mounds and if one stayed to watch or perhaps even participate in the dance then despite it only appearing to have taken a few hours, yours would actually have elapsed outside the dance! There for instance is a folk story about that of a noble riding home to his wedding and refusing the invitation of the elven queen to join the dance. She then curses him to die and his bride ends up dying of heartbreak from his death.
Where the elves had danced elven rings (fairy rings) would be visible and urinating inside one would lead to STDs. The pentagram was seen as a symbol which protected against elves and hence it was e.g. carved into doors.

Lastly we have nisser/tomter which were beings which inhabited various places. E.g. a forest, a church, or a farm. Every church and farm were thought to have one. They were temperamental and if you annoyed them they might make things bad for you. E.g. by messing up the year's harvest. Or if you really made them mad perhaps burn down the farm. You generally were to treat them well by e.g. not urinating in the barn.
As Scandinavia got Christianised nisser were seen as ungodly and having one on your farm was seen as putting your soul at serious jeopardy of damnation. They also started to be believed to steal from other farms and be the reason that some farms were doing better than other. So people tried to get rid of them. And for instance in the last witch trial in Denmark, in 1692, the accused woman confessed to having a nisse on her farm and being on good footing with him.

I'd much rather have such things and other beings/references from folklore in the game that demon spawning, since these things actually were believed/thought observed in the period and they can all be explained. Perhaps also have them change depending on whether you are pagan or not to simulate things like the Scandinavian beings changing character with Christianity.
Doing this would also bring in differences between cultures in that different cultures had their own folklore. For instance the above beings were Scandinavian, although some of them had similar "cousins" elsewhere---e.g. in Britain.

What do we have? The demon child, the two byzantine ones, the killing ctulu germanic insanity event, the werewolf event, the hellmouth and the Charlamagne story ones (which last I looked were still broken).

You forgot the Robin Hood event chain. Also is Hellmouth the one with the hole in the ground? If not then you miss that one too.
I also have the feeling I'm forgetting one.

There's already a game rule for that: "supernatural events"

Except that doesn't really work well. It's an all or nothing rule where you either cull everything including all the events stemming from a lack of knowledge and attributing the unknown to superstitious beings. Those events brings immersion and can be perfectly explained today. Then there's things like regrowing limbs, actually becoming immortal (the reincarnation is fine, since there you don't really reincarnate (at least not the ways I have tried); it's just thought to have happened), and now demon spawning.

@Darkrenown
Also to the devs stating that most people have the fantasy setting on and using that for justification for adding more fantasy events: I have the fantasy setting on, because the far majority of fantasy content is the ambigious stuff which can be explained today, but which was thought to be the work of the supernatural back then. I really like that. I don't like the blatantly fantasy stuff like regrowing limbs, immortality, etc. though, but I ignore it because the ambigious stuff is so much more numerous. So it is a type of the least of two evils.
But just because I have fantasy events on doesn't mean I want more events which are blatantly fantasy like e.g. regrowing limbs. So you can't just look at how many has that setting on, since I'd wager that I'm not alone in having it on due to wanting the ambigious events and then just ignoring the blatant fantasy ones, since they luckily aren't too numerous.