CK3 Dev Diary #12 - The Stewardship Lifestyle

[randomgamer71]

All considered, I don't think I like the new tree system. first at all it is too linear, and in an arbitrary manner. There is no reason that I can see, either logical or by gameplay, or other, for the perks to be in this order rather than any other. And this could mean that characters that pick the same tree will always have the same perks. Yes, there are different paths, but from the pictures it seems you must fill all the paths before you can go on, so the difference would be minimal.

Another thing I don't like, but this is just personal tastes. In ck2 if you wanted to , i.e. duel somebody, you just pick the war focus and this let you use the duel option. In ck3 you must pick the relative lifestyle/focus and collect enough XP to pick the relative perks, and this for every character that want to duel. I can see how that could get annoying.

If I can make a suggestion, I would like an option/game rule that rather than let you pick the perk in that order, give you a random perk from that tree when you get enough XP. That would make the game more fun (at least for those of us that like more randomness in their game, That also would reduce the temptation to dip in a tree just to unlock particular juicy options of course that would exclude the Final perk, (that would be got only after all the other perks were given)

TL-DR not see it as a bad system, it is just that I don't see it as such an improvement over the CK2 system.

 

[Pied-Noir]

I agree with @randomgamer71 that the linear tree system has me curious as to how well it will 'age' over time - I'm sure it's fun, but is it going to have longevity as a feature? How many playthroughs are we going to be able to have before it feels like constant deja vu?

I don't know what the solution is so I can't provide much constructive feedback here. From an aesthetic point of view a tree system is great because it's immediately obvious where everything is and how you progress, but from a replayability point of view I wonder whether a more open-ended system with perks being more of a jigsaw might not be a more interesting approach.

 

[Wade Aznable]

@randomgamer71
Randomness is something I don't really love, maybe a perks-level system à la Wasteland 2 would be better.

 

[Metz77]

I think it might be less confusing to call them satisfied powerful vassals rather than happy.

 

[Magmus]

the dilution of the concept of nobility at all.

What does this entail?

 

[PedroLuiz]

[Cutting Cornerstones - Building Construction Gold Cost: -10%, Building Construction Piety Cost: -10%, Building Construction Prestige Cost: -10%, Holding Construction Gold Cost: -10%, Holding Construction Piety Cost: -10%, Holding Construction Prestige Cost: -10%]/QUOTE]
Couldn't you just put "all Building and Holding Cost -10%"? that's a big mouthful

 

[Denkt]

What does this entail?

Well if you sell noble titles you kinda devalue them and that is represented with the prestige cost. However prestige is now just a currency and the characters now care about fame which is a more permament effect of prestige.

 

[Whyareall]

Claim the thrones is totally useless if you are already at the top, but necessary to get if you want the last perk. I think it is the same problem that with the "incest trait" of the seduction tree, a may be too narrow perk.

What are you talking about? The incest trait is useful for every ruler!

 

[Varren]

Couldn't you just put "all Building and Holding Cost -10%"? that's a big mouthful

The tooltips are presumably auto-generated, which is sensible enough--though it does expose the somewhat worrying fact that the devs have apparently not included a generic "build cost" modifier and instead must manually specify each type of currency individually.

 

[Alfray Stryke]

The tooltips are presumably auto-generated, which is sensible enough--though it does expose the somewhat worrying fact that the devs have apparently not included a generic "build cost" modifier and instead must manually specify each type of currency individually.

Or they've been testing different effects before deciding on this and it's easier to make changes and bug test if things are listed separately?

 

[Dunaedine]

What are you talking about? The incest trait is useful for every ruler!

The pope want to have a word with you .

 

[Turambar88]

This mostly looks great. I'm a little put off that the administrator perks almost all seem like they'd be a better fit under a diplo focus though.

 

[Vohen]

A lot of people are complaining on how much of these feels too focused on modifiers rather than mechanics, so I think there could be a nice way to integrate mechanics into these trees.
The avarice focus is interesting imo because it flashes out a lot of character interactions, such as extortion and hooks, as well as dread.

But architect and administrator are the ones I'd really like to shake up.
For architect, I'd have the ability to construct a handful of unique castle buildings be unlocked by certain perks, perhaps the final one unlocking even one of those duchy buildings.
Administrator could maybe give the ability to hold cities with a diminished penalty as its final perk, and along the way maybe give a couple unique buildings for cities as well.

These changes could make each tree much more mechanically unique and interesting, and are very fitting for a stewardship focus imo.

 

[Pied-Noir]

For Administrator...

There should perhaps be a small % of revenue that is wasted/lost by default, owing to the general incompetence of those beneath you or simply due to it being stolen or lost as it filters through the feudal hierarchy. After all, rulers rarely got every single coin they were entitled to according to the tax books.

The Administrator trait could either reduce or remove this flat tax modifier, thereby allowing rulers to benefit from less wastage within the taxation system.

This would be similar to the current effect but done in a slightly more realistic way, rather than simply conjuring up additional money from nowhere.

And I agree that the Architect trait should open up some unique building types.

So far these unique focus traits seem a bit bland tbh.

@Voffvoffhunden

 

[Andrzej I]

Administrator could maybe give the ability to hold cities with a diminished penalty as its final perk, and along the way maybe give a couple unique buildings for cities as well.

Just to play devil's advocate, because it's not that I fully disagree here, but what happens when your ruler-with-Administrator dies and his heir-without-Administrator inherits? Sure, you spent that ruler's life accruing city titles under him (because he wouldn't start off with any, I imagine!), but now your heir has to give them back up... only for another heir down the road to maybe have to revoke them back. I think having something always and readily applicable, like the ability to negotiate special feudal contracts, is a better route to take.

Definitely back you on the idea of Architect unlocking the option to build special and unique buildings, though! The knowledge that the Architect trait represents should be required for some of the more ambitious projects.

 

[Pied-Noir]

Good points @Andrzej I - agreed.

 

[Vohen]

Just to play devil's advocate, because it's not that I fully disagree here, but what happens when your ruler-with-Administrator dies and his heir-without-Administrator inherits? Sure, you spent that ruler's life accruing city titles under him (because he wouldn't start off with any, I imagine!), but now your heir has to give them back up... only for another heir down the road to maybe have to revoke them back. I think having something always and readily applicable, like the ability to negotiate special feudal contracts, is a better route to take.

Definitely back you on the idea of Architect unlocking the option to build special and unique buildings, though! The knowledge that the Architect trait represents should be required for some of the more ambitious projects.

I had thought of it really as a finisher for the tree, so something really powerful and unique, that takes a lot of effort to get.
So it'd indeed not be something your heir would immediately get indeed unless he worked for it himself, but since the tree already gives +2 demesne limit, I figured it wouldn't be an issue, they could already be considered the "city slots" (if the player so chooses, of course), as the heir won't have them as well.

Revokation really is an issue, maybe the finisher can also give an interaction with his direct vassal mayors to give him the city without penalties.
Then, it's all on the player, does he want to go ham and get every city he can, knowing full well that he'll likely have to give them up on inheritance, or does he just takes the extra two cities and safely leave it at that? Or something in between?
It's a pure risk vs reward calculation, an important part of game design.

 

[Varren]

But architect and administrator are the ones I'd really like to shake up.
For architect, I'd have the ability to construct a handful of unique castle buildings be unlocked by certain perks, perhaps the final one unlocking even one of those duchy buildings.
Administrator could maybe give the ability to hold cities with a diminished penalty as its final perk, and along the way maybe give a couple unique buildings for cities as well.

As someone who loves the construction bloodlines in CK2, I'm 100% on board with that Architect idea. I'd also have the perks give a bonus to those buildings, so that you have a reason to take them as an heir.

 

[Andrzej I]

Since the tree already gives +2 demesne limit, I figured it wouldn't be an issue, they could already be considered the "city slots" (if the player so chooses, of course), as the heir won't have them as well.

Excellent counterpoint, something I had forgotten about! I suppose, also, baronial-level city mayors are often rather trivial characters, so them losing their titles shouldn't be too negative a thing.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

To add to the Architech unlocking new buildings discussion, I think it would be a good place for a 'magnu opus' of building projects. Not necessarily a great work per say, but still something significant that will greatly improve one province (or maybe only one per x years). You can use stuff like the 'rebuild an inn' project or the great garden event chain that the stewardship focuses trigger. The player would be allowed to pursue it at their leisure, once they unlock the perk, with several different options for construction with several levels of power.

So there can be stuff like building a great tower, a large caravansary/harbor/market, an elaborate palace keep, expanding a temple, or a major knightly order hall. Each also has a few sub buildings that you can choose how much you spend on, eventually leading to one of your holdings having one to three special buildings in it.

For example, my ruler decides they want to build a grand market in a city in their capital county. This city first has to not already have such a market at max level. They then get several opportunities to bring in new goods, expand the warehouses, and improve the effectiveness of their caravans/ships. All three are different buildings with several levels associated with them, with increasing effects but also increasing costs to make.