• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

CK3 Dev Diary #17 - Governments, Vassal Management, Laws, and Raiding

Good afternoon, everyone. I’m Magne “Meneth” Skjæran. You might know me from the CK2 dev diaries or the Paradox Wikis, but for the last couple of years I’ve been working on CK3 as a programmer. Today we’re going to cover a number of topics closely related to government types: governments themselves, vassal management, laws, and raiding.

Let's start off with a familiar concept from CK2: governments. For the player, we have three playable governments: Feudal, Tribal, and Clan, which each have some significant differences in how they play.

The Feudal government type is based on European feudalism, and is heavily based around the idea of obligations: you owe service to your liege, and your liege owes you protection in return. It is the most common government form in the game. Feudal realms play pretty similarly to CK2, focusing on claims and inheritance more so than the other government forms.

A new addition in CK3 is Feudal Contracts. Every feudal vassal (except barons) has an individual contract with you, rather than obligations being set realm-wide. These contracts have three levels; Low, Medium, and High, with Medium being the default. High will provide more levies and tax at the cost of an opinion hit, while Low provides less but improves opinion. Higher levels are usually better (though perhaps not if you’re at risk of your vassals revolting), but cannot be imposed unilaterally.

You’ll need to have a hook on your vassal in order to increase their obligations unless you’re fine with all your vassals considering you a tyrant, but you can always lower them. As a result this means you can significantly increase your power if you’re able to obtain hooks on your vassals; perhaps a bit of judicious blackmail might be in order?

Feudal Contract.png

[Modifying a Feudal Contract]

Furthermore we have the Clan government form. This government is the rough equivalent of the Iqta government in CK2, though in CK3 it does have a more Feudal bent than it did previously.

The Clan government type is used by most Muslim realms. This government puts more emphasis on the family rather than the realm, with most vassals being members of your dynasty. Obligations are heavily based on opinion rather than being contractual, with happy vassals providing significantly more taxes and levies than unhappy ones. A happy family is a powerful family.

Clan governments also have access to the Clan Invasion casus belli, which can be used once in a lifetime at the highest level of Fame to invade a kingdom, providing a powerful boon for a well-established clan ruler.

Finally we have Tribal realms. Much like in CK2 these have their own Tribal holding type, providing more troops but less tax. Additionally, most tribals are able to go on raids, which you can read more about below. Tribal realms are unaffected by development, and cause non-tribal realms to have lower supply limits in their lands, making them a tougher nut to crack, but reducing their influence as the years drag on. Tribal realms also pay for men at arms using prestige rather than gold, allowing smaller realms to punch above their weight.

Tribal rulers base their obligations on levels of Fame rather than on contracts or opinion; the more famous your ruler is, the more troops and money your vassals will be willing to provide for your pursuits.

Finally, Tribal rulers have a once-in-a-lifetime Subjugation casus belli, allowing them to forcibly vassalize an entire realm.

As the game goes on, you can eventually reform out of Tribalism, becoming a Clan or Feudal realm instead.

Vassal Overview.png

[The vassal management tab]

To get an easy overview of your realm, we in CK3 have the Realm screen. Let’s start with the Vassals tab of this screen where all your vassals are shown. This gives you a clear overview of where your levies and taxes come from, who might be a threat to you, and allows you to renegotiate feudal contracts.

This is also where you change your crown authority (or tribal authority), which I’ll talk more about later in this dev diary.

Lastly, the screen shows your Powerful Vassals. Much like in CK2’s Conclave DLC, your realm will have some powerful vassals; these expect to be seated on the council, and will make their displeasure known if that is not the case.

Domain overview.png

[The Domain Tab]

Then we have the Domain tab. This lets you easily inspect your domain, showing where you’re earning money and levies, and where you can build more buildings. It also shows the level of development and control in the counties you personally hold, letting you easily tell where you can make improvements.

Finally we have the Succession tab. Due to being a bit of a work in progress, I’m afraid I can’t show you a picture of it right now. Here you can change your succession laws, see your heir(s), and check what titles, if any, you will lose when you die. If you hold any elective titles, you’ll be able to easily get to the election screen from here.

Now with all these mentions of laws, let's go through what laws exist. We’ve trimmed down the number of laws from CK2 as much of what used to be law is handled on a more individual level now, but some still remains.

Like in CK2, we have crown authority for Feudal and Clan realms, and tribal authority for Tribal realms. Higher levels of authority unlock mechanics like imprisonment (for tribals, the others start with it), title revocation, restrictions on internal wars, and heir designation. However, increasing these levels will make your vassals unhappy. Tribal authority is significantly less powerful than crown authority, representing how Tribal governments over time gradually got supplanted by Feudal and Clan governments.

Succession Laws.png

[Changing succession law]

Then there’s succession laws. To no one’s surprise, Gavelkind is making a return, though we’ve renamed it to Partition to make it more obvious what it actually means. This is the default succession form of most realms in both 867 and 1066.

For added fun, there’s now three variants of Partition. We’ve got regular Partition, which functions like Gavelkind in CK2; your realm gets split roughly equally between your heirs, and any heirs that end up a lower tier than your primary heir becomes a vassal.

However, many realms start with a worse form, especially in 867. This is Confederate Partition, which will also create titles of your primary title’s tier if possible. So if you as Norway have conquered all of Sweden but destroyed the kingdom itself, it will get recreated on your death so that your second heir becomes an independent ruler. Tribals are typically locked to this succession type, with some exceptions.

Finally we have an improved version of Partition: High Partition. Under High Partition your primary heir will always get at least half your titles, so it doesn’t matter if you’ve got 2 or 10 kids; your primary heir will get the same amount of land.

We’ve also done a lot of tweaks to the internal logic of who gets what titles, which tends to lead to far nicer splits than in CK2; border gore will of course still happen, but to a lesser degree than before.

Then we have the other succession forms. There’s Oldest Child Succession (replacing Primogeniture), Youngest Child Succession (replacing Ultimogeniture), and House Seniority. A notable difference from CK2’s Seniority Succession is that under House Seniority, the oldest eligible member of your house inherits, not of your entire dynasty.

We also have a number of variants on elective succession, ranging from Feudal Elective, to Princely Elective (HRE succession), and a handful of cultural variants. Each of these have different restrictions on who can vote, who can be elected, and how the AI will select who to vote for.

Additionally, we’ve got a full suite of gender laws, corresponding to the gender laws in CK2. These are: Male Only, Male Preference, Equal, Female Preference, and Female Only.

Finally, we have raiding. If you’re a Norwegian like me, sometimes you feel your Viking blood coursing through your veins, the noise of it drowning out everything else. Times like this, there’s only one solution: go on a raid.

Fans of Pagan gameplay in CK2 will be glad to hear that not only have we implemented raiding in CK3 as well, we’ve made some improvements to it to make it more fun to play with, and less unfun to be on the receiving end of.

The core system is very similar to CK2. If you’re a Pagan or Tribal ruler, you have the ability to raid other rulers’ lands. To do so you raise a raid army, and march or sail over to your target. Only the Norse can raid across sea; other raid armies will simply be unable to embark.

Rally Point.png

[Raising a raid army]

Once at your target your army will start looting the barony they’re in. This is a pretty quick process, but during it your army will be unable to move, preventing you from running away from any counter-raiding force. This change makes it a lot simpler to deal with raiders if you’ve got enough men and can raise them quickly enough, as the AI won’t just immediately run away.

Raid Lindisfarne.png

[A raid in progress]

While in CK2 raiding was done on a county level, in CK3 it is on a barony level. Another difference is that in CK3 raiding no longer uses the siege mechanics directly, but rather a similar system where things like siege engines do not have an impact since you’re raiding the countryside, not a heavily fortified castle.

Another significant change is that if you beat a raid army, you receive all the gold they’re carrying. This means that even if you cannot respond instantly to a raid, it is still very much worth it to beat up the raiders. Like in CK2, you also become immune to raiding by that enemy for several years.

Just like in CK2, a raid army is limited in how much loot it can carry based on the army size. Loot is deposited once the army is back in friendly lands, after which you might either disband or go raiding once more.

On the quality of life side, we now show on the map what provinces have already been raided when you have a raid army selected. This makes it easy to see what places to avoid. Hovering over a province will also tell you how much loot raiding it would provide.

Raid.png

[Northern England in its natural state]

That’s all for today, folks. Tune in next week to learn more about how war functions in Crusader Kings 3.
 
Last edited:
  • 18Like
  • 9
  • 6
Reactions:
Screen Shot 2020-05-17 at 10.36.47 AM.png


You guys really took the feedback about feudal contracts! These look amazing, there are so many specific options and variables. I'm honestly more excited to be a vassal now to make my ruler grant me eternal council power and my own coinage.
 
  • 8Love
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
No imperial/bureaucratic government for Byzantines?

Boo.
 
  • 6
  • 4Like
Reactions:
And how is it possible to not include unique government types for two of the most popular nations of the time, the Byzantine/Eastern Romans and the Holy Roman Empire at launch?
The Holy Roman Empire does have Princely Elective - a succession form that we've put quite a bit of effort into, and that suits the Elective framework we've created quite nicely.

It's almost as if CK3 - a new game - would have been a prime opportunity in which to do this...
If CK3 was a game about playing a Strategoi in Byzantium, then we would definitely have done it. Now, the primary goal of CK3 is to make it a game about medieval drama and intrigue, with a heavy focus on characters and their interactions. And while it's fair to say that Byzantium was a hotbed for court drama, we have to make calls during development - we simply can't do everything we want.

Be honest. You grew tired of "gravelking" being thrown around :p
That and 'Gravelkind' *shudder*

Do Vassals levies come from their own pool or they are coming from the void like in CK2 ?

Meaning rising feadal contract reduce vassal power ?
Levies are taken from the vassals themselves, unlike CK2's magical troops. This means that vassals will get visibly stronger/weaker based on the contract they have and that civil wars are MUCH more dangerous as the Vassals instantly get all their contractually obligated levies returned.
 
  • 4Like
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I never cease to be bemused by people white knighting a corporation when its customers are expressing dissatisfaction. This is not about entitlement or toxicity or whatever buzzword you want to toss around. If we don’t get the features we want, and Paradox doesn’t get the money they want, who wins? Do you think Paradox really prefers for us to not give them our money?

If its too difficult, let me explain in the simplest way possible: we’re complaining to help Paradox. We’re complaining to let them know what the consumer demand actually is. That way, they can find out before the game is released, rather than after.

Or do you think they would prefer to remain ignorant of concerns among their customers? Maybe two releases in a row underperforming is actually better for them.

I saw a big thread of responses spin off from yours about toxicity and feedback and the like but cause you were the first post I saw I am gonna respond to yours, not hard feelings you just got the unlucky quote I could use :D

If its too difficult, let me explain in the simplest way possible: we’re complaining to help Paradox. We’re complaining to let them know what the consumer demand actually is. That way, they can find out before the game is released, rather than after.
The way said complaints are done is very important, a fair amount of this thread is not giving constructive feedback. Loud complaints about how shit something is, how shit we are, and that we just wanna milk you all for expansion money is not something we can take and do any direct actions with because at best its generic dislike of something and at worse its just insulting to our team instead of helpful.

As we've said in other responses in this dev diary, we hear you all, we get there are things with this system that are disliked by our hardcore fans after seeing your responses. But we also want to have actual constructive feedback we can take as action points for the future, what in the system makes it feel bad?

Is it the vassal contracts themselves being on character level instead of realm level?
Is it not enough options in the contracts? What sort of options would you like to see?
Is it the different government types playing differently? Or not differently enough? What differences or similarities would you like to see?

We are unlikely to do any big changes before release to systems as the fact of the matter is we have limited time until then and almost all of that already has plans for what to do in it. We don't develop by picking the next focus point based on dev diary feedback, that just isn't feasible to plan for in any way.

But we can promise to look into this more for changes in the future, especially if we have a concrete idea of specific things that the community dislikes so we have targeted improvements instead of more generic things.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3Love
  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Clearly the goal is to expand the fan base. And Partition or Male Preference are way easier to understand and remember.
This is done exactly to lower the learning curve. I'm baffled how it can be perceived as the opposite.

Plus, wasn't Gavelkind mainly used on the British Isles? A generic "Partition" is more fitting if it's applied all over the world.
Yes, the name "gavelkind" was inaccurate outside the British Isles.
We'd rather have a clear, unambiguous, and easily understood name than one which is highly regional.
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
The core system is very similar to CK2. If you’re a Pagan or Tribal ruler, you have the ability to raid other rulers’ lands. To do so you raise a raid army, and march or sail over to your target. Only the Norse can raid across sea; other raid armies will simply be unable to embark.

This has been changed, right? Estonians were raiding the Scandinavian coastline even before the viking age and the first ships with sails (700-750AD) from the Baltic sea region were discovered in Saaremaa, Estonia. + Saaremaa literally has a viking ship as its coat of arms in CK.

Snorri Sturluson relates in his Ynglinga saga how the Swedish king Ingvar (7th century), the son of Östen and a great warrior, who was forced to patrol the shores of his kingdom fighting pirates from Estonia. The saga speaks of his invasion of Estonia where he fell in a battle against the men of Estland who had come down with a great army. After the battle, King Ingvar was buried close to the seashore in Estonia and the Swedes returned home.[9]

 
  • 4Like
  • 3
Reactions:
These contracts have three levels; Low, Medium, and High, with Medium being the default.
Aww, shame to hear the feudal contracts are merely taxation/levy levels. From earlier DDs, it sounded like it was going to be a robust system, extracting promises from vassals for different things. Perhaps even having contracts that represent almost entire autonomy from the crown, as was the case for several "vassals" of the French kingdom. Even so, I suppose having taxation and levy levels be on a per-vassal basis is a nice step.
Clan governments also have access to the Clan Invasion casus belli, which can be used once in a lifetime at the highest level of Fame to invade a kingdom, providing a powerful boon for a well-established clan ruler.
So the Muslim Invasion CB, but just for that specific government form? Seizing an entire kingdom in one war seems a touch powerful to be so broadly distributed, especially since if memory serves, it's not only Muslim realms, but some others.
Lastly, the screen shows your Powerful Vassals. Much like in CK2’s Conclave DLC, your realm will have some powerful vassals; these expect to be seated on the council, and will make their displeasure known if that is not the case.
Sad to hear Powerful Vassals demanding council seats has returned. I like that their opinions matter for various law changes, etc., but I hate that they have to be my chancellor or marshal, etc.
However, many realms start with a worse form, especially in 867. This is Confederate Partition, which will also create titles of your primary title’s tier if possible. So if you as Norway have conquered all of Sweden but destroyed the kingdom itself, it will get recreated on your death so that your second heir becomes an independent ruler. Tribals are typically locked to this succession type, with some exceptions.
So Elective Gavelkind, of sorts?
Once at your target your army will start looting the barony they’re in. This is a pretty quick process, but during it your army will be unable to move, preventing you from running away from any counter-raiding force. This change makes it a lot simpler to deal with raiders if you’ve got enough men and can raise them quickly enough, as the AI won’t just immediately run away.
This sounds like a wonderful change! I would like to have it be that you choose to lock in your army to raiding, rather than it being automatic upon arrival. I can imagine quite a few accidental stackwipes if one isn't paying attention and lands their army right as their target is marshalling forces around...
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Will Nomads be considered Tribal or Clan in the base game?
Generally tribal.

If an army defeating raiders earns the gold, then can this be exploited to take gold from your vassals? That is, you wait until raiders have looted your vassals' land and then crush them to gain your vassals' gold?
You can do that, yes. Your vassals won't lose gold, but they will have the Recently Looted modifier on the affected baronies. Which does indirectly affect you, but will definitely be worse for your vassals than you personally.

This sounds like a wonderful change! I would like to have it be that you choose to lock in your army to raiding, rather than it being automatic upon arrival. I can imagine quite a few accidental stackwipes if one isn't paying attention and lands their army right as their target is marshalling forces around...
You can actually turn off the automatic raiding as well. While off they just won't raid anything until you turn it back on.

Sounds like it, tbh.
I guess there could be some sort of function where the vassals remember that they were being raided by that particular raiders and request you giving them the money back
If we start seeing it as a significant issue, then we might do something like that. So far it hasn't been a problem in our tests.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
- Overly simplistic feudal contracts
Now, it's worth noting that the various levy/tax laws in CK2 were blanket laws, affecting every vassal equally. This wasn't very accurate, and it also removed both the character aspect and agency from the system. CK3's Vassal Contracts aim to more accurately represent the feudal structure and also create more drama between lieges and their vassals.

When playing, you will really feel when a vassal's contract is set to low or high - there's a much greater disparity in power between realms in CK3 than there was in CK2. Even a realm as powerful as the Holy Roman Empire can be bested by a mere Kingdom, should the HRE have lost a few liberty wars (which usually result in lowered contracts). If you manage your contracts well, you can really punch above your weight.

That said, we understand your concerns, and while we can't promise that we'll change anything for release we promise you that we'll take a look at it for the future.

- No succession type for Byzantium/ERE
Byzantium is its own beast, and requires a lot of thought to do right. The CK2 solution was not optimal, and we didn't want to repeat what we did there. Just slapping an elective variant on it and renaming its government to 'Imperial' doesn't do it justice, we would want actual mechanics to represent the intricacies of byzantine politics. All I can say at this point is that whenever in the future we choose to deal with Byzantium we will make sure that we do it well.

Do we get at least vice royalities in the base game? Even without Imperial Elective starting with everything being VRs always gave a nice bit of flavor for the ERE. You still had all the feudal mechanics underneath unfortunately, but it feels at least a little different.
Viceroyalties was one of the main examples of a feature from CK2 that we absolutely did not want to carry over to CK3. Not only was it way too micromanagement heavy and spammy, but you also had to constantly interact with the system to play optimally - even during stressful times such as during wars. Again, if we choose to make a Viceroyalty feature post-release, we're going to start from scratch and do it properly.

- Powerful vassals still needing to occupy important seats on the council instead of honourary roles, even if they're completely incompetent
This is a conscious choice as it creates drama and interesting choice. Do you want to have an actually competent Steward, or bite the bullet and put your angry but powerful vassal in the position to placate them? Also, the Council roles come with very powerful bonuses to the holder, so there's no surprise that they want to hold them!

- Clan invasion potentially being OP depending on requirements to use it (unsure how difficult reaching high levels of fame will be)
It's very hard to get to that point, much harder than the Invasion requirements in CK2. Essentially, not every ruler will reach that level of fame, and those who do probably get to work for it! Another omission about the Clan government form is that vassals will insist on having an alliance with their liege, which will most likely have to be arranged through marriage. The power of Clans rises and wanes as the years pass - at their peak, they can challenge very powerful Feudal realms where the contracts are negotiated favorably, but at their lows, they are more than susceptible to both factions and being picked apart from the outside. In that sense, Clans are somewhat similar to how Feudal realms played in CK2. :p
 
  • 4
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Please do not add mana into this game. It already ruined imperator on release. A mana system does not equal fun. Monarchy points, mana, whatever. This system doesn't look like it's going to work well with the ERE succession system either. I do not suppose they will be available on release either.

Where is there any sign of "mana"??
 
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
A reminder of the rules of this forum is order, as I just had to remove several posts that broke these rules:

You shall at all times respect and refrain from harassing and/or personally attacking other users or the staff of Paradox. You agree to respect the rights of other users to have their own and maybe differing opinions. You shall not send any messages or posts that are considered foul, vulgar, sexually harassing, racially offensive or in any way discriminatory. This includes, but is not limited to, sexist language, ethnic slurs, hate speech and religious epithets. Paradox reserves the right to, in its sole discretion, remove any such posts or messages.

Furthermore, you may not make any posts or messages that are inflammatory with the perceived intent to rile people up (i.e. "trolling" and "flaming") or post any messages that are off-topic.

We do not tolerate Toxic behavior and if you are found to be spreading Toxicity you will be issued a suspension and final warning. If you are found to be spreading Toxicity again your account will be permanently banned.

In general any post that is overly negative, doesn't contribute to the forum or simply contains foul language and insults is toxic. If your post doesn't contribute and instead serves as a way to stir up more negativity and rage from other users, it's toxic. Keep this in mind:

- Look at your post history. If the majority of your posts are troll posts against other players or telling other players that the Paradox team doesn't care/doesn't listen/doesn't know what they are doing, that's not productive. Don't reply to posts to say no one will reply. If you aren't looking to help the player with a question please do not respond.

Full rules here.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2Love
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I would, however, like to push back on the implication that your customers owe you more constructive suggestions than just expressing their dislike. If they simply downvoted the OP from @Meneth into oblivion, they’d be conveying little more info to Paradox than if they post how much they hate everything said, and expounded on how Meneth’s low character is the subject of Greek plays. Without encouraging people to be rude, there is more information conveyed when they rudely express their opinion - namely, how strongly held said opinion may be. That is useful, in and of itself.

Beyond that, just knowing that people hate X, even when they don’t have a counter suggestion of Y, is useful. A company can get that information simply through low sales, of course, but I’d say it is more cost effective to deal with outrage on an internet forum prior to release. Just imagine if Coca Cola had paid more heed to just how vehemently some people hated New Coke (focus group responses could be said to be toxic). If the focus is more on preventing toxic responses than encouraging productive feedback, many will self censor in excess of what is useful.
Thanks for the good response and great feedback! Feel free to write more or PM me later if you think of other stuff!

I will disagree with this part of the statement I quoted though that a rude response is better than no response, a rude response is not something our team should have to put up with and will likely just get removed, because we are all people here to and having someone write out a paragraph saying how awful/malicious/incompetent/whatever you and your team are is not useful and demotivates people so is not beneficial to anybody involved. It is our job to make a game, not to put up with angry online messages :p

A big red number of disagrees going up conveys the same dislike of a feature but does not have the targeted salt/anger at the team in word vomit form.

One can easily make a post saying "I dislike this feature as I think it is too simplistic, I don't have any specific ideas to fix it though" and we are totally fine with that! You can even use a bit more colorful language as long as you don't break any forums rules ;) But the second it gets aggressive or toxic about our developers its just gonna be ignored by us cause we don't have to read rude posts and quite likely removed by forum moderation as it probably breaks rules.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1Love
Reactions:
You guys really took the feedback about feudal contracts! These look amazing, there are so many specific options and variables. I'm honestly more excited to be a vassal now to make my ruler grant me eternal council power and my own coinage.
Simply being able to say "This direct vassal of mine can do this, but my other direct vassal can't" is a great upgrade from CK2's all-or-nothing (or rather, everybody-or-nobody) implementation.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
Can you build buildings from the Domain tab? That would be very convenient.
Currently not *directly* from there, but the holding view can be shown while the Domain tab is shown, and clicking on a holding in the Domain tab will open it.
So you can get there pretty quickly, though it certainly would be neat to be able to do it directly.

Yess... This not being there has bothered me in CK2 for a while.

With Partition though, is the way it is done fixed in comparision to CK2? Had a Case where the primary heir got only 1 County, while the secondary got all of the counties.

Also, for whom is high partition available?
Is it some end-tier for tribal governments?

And can we expect more Options in the Feudal Contract? I'd like to be able to actually do compromises on some thing, like for example, religious autonomy(Allows the Vassal to practice his own religion with you not being allowed to try to convert his demesne / Vassal should probably start converting or getting some hooks on you to move to the first part, you can convert his demesne / If the Vassal is of a different religion, you can freely revoke that title) or stuff like that.
Partition generally produces less border gore than in CK2, and a more sensible partition. The case you mention should be rarer.

High partition is unlocked later in the game. How that works is something we'll likely talk about in a later dev diary.

On release more options are unlikely.

Since the first start date is 867, won't you already be at war with England if you play most Norse starts instead of raiding them? Will Norse still be able to raid in the 1066 start?
Plenty of Norse rulers in 867 that aren't at war with England.

Oh, also, thank god we're finally getting confederate partition to accurately represent the way gavelkind worked in many of the places where it was used. Literally the first mod I make is going to be to disable all other types of gavelkind to prevent early-game blobbing, hopefully that's easy (or even better there could be a game rule for it).
Modding it will be easy.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
What happens when the vassal dies and their heir inherits? What if their heir was already a vassal duke under you (so they're now, say, a double duke)? Is the contract inherited or does it default to normal?
If I remember correctly, inheritance will override an existing contract if it causes a change in liege or an increase in tier.
So a duke dying and giving his stuff to his count or unlanded son will cause the contract to still apply. But if the son was a duke or king, the son would keep his own contract.

In CK2, your troops couldn't loot money more than one county away from your realm without boats (You could still pillage, but that was typically far less money, unless you were a nomad). Since you say that raiding is on the barony level now, are you now only able to loot baronies immediately adjacent to your realm? Or has a loot/money meter been implemented on a per raiding army basis? I assume norse still being able to raid from boats means their boats still also carry loot.
Right now, there's no distance restriction on where you can raid, but you will run into attrition if you go more than one county away from your own borders.
Maybe losing 5-10% of your raiders is worth it to do that; right now it's a choice you can make.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I also don't like dumbing down the succession law names. Renaming gavelkind to partition is fine, as CK2 used it somewhat ahistorically for everyone. But getting rid of "primogeniture" is bad. That's a well established word that's also used in the real world. Simple language describing what the laws do can be used in tooltips.

Agreed, I really dislike all the succession law naming changes.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
@junassa, I was just watching an IGN video and noticed a technology: "Longships," of which two of the effects are:

"Unlocks the ability to Raid over seas, if you can already Raid"
"Unlocks the ability to sail in Rivers"

...so it appears that there is a way even for non-Norse. :) You can see it here.
It's important to note that bonus is tied to the Scandinavian region. A culture can only get it if they have a sufficient number of provinces there.
 
Last edited:
  • 4
Reactions:
If an army defeating raiders earns the gold, then can this be exploited to take gold from your vassals? That is, you wait until raiders have looted your vassals' land and then crush them to gain your vassals' gold?
Sounds like it, tbh.
I guess there could be some sort of function where the vassals remember that they were being raided by that particular raiders and request you giving them the money back
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions: