• 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.
Hello everyone!

I'm Tobias Bodlund, Scripter on the Crusader Kings II team, and I bid you all welcome to this week's dev diary for Crusader kings II: Charlemagne.

Autumn is coming in Sweden but the birds are still singing, though sometimes out of tune.

Today we'll be discussing some new changes that affect how you rule your realm. Some of these things are obviously patch content, while some are locked to having the Charlemagne expansion.

The first thing we've done is to add a vassal limit. This is exactly what it sounds like - a limit to how many vassals a ruler can have without receiving penalties. Every vassal of count tier or above will count against this limit. The vassal limit will be higher for rulers of higher tiers, and for rulers with higher diplomacy skill. Another factor that increases the limit is your dynasty's prestige. You can also affect your vassal limit by changing your Centralization Law (this touches on an important new law mechanic - more on this later in this dev diary).

So what are the penalties of going over your vassal limit? Well, you will immediately get a penalty to the taxes and levies for all your vassals. This penalty increases exponentially, and if you go far enough over the limit you will get no vassal taxes or levies at all.

The second danger of being over the limit is that when your ruler dies, there is a chance of any vassal simply becoming independent instead of swearing fealty to your heir. The risk of this happening increases the higher over the limit you are. Vassals who are geographically more distant from your capital are the ones who are most likely to declare independence.

cm_dd_3_laws_2.png

We've also made a very important change to how laws depend on technology. Many laws are now unlocked by advancing your Legalism technology. Higher levels in this tech are needed to unlock higher levels of Centralization, Crown Authority, Levy and Taxation laws and Viceroy laws (again, just keep reading to find out more about this). This means that you will see a big difference in the tools available to organize your realm early game vs late game.

With these changes, Legalism no longer directly increases your demesne size limit, this modifier has been removed. Also, the short reign penalty modifier has been moved to the Majesty tech.

So, what does the Centralization Law do now? Well, firstly, it's a demesne law and so applies to your entire realm. Secondly, it has five tiers, going from fully decentralized to fully centralized. Lower centralization grants you a bonus to Vassal Limit, while high Centralization grants a bonus to Demesne Size Limit and a penalty to Vassal Limit. This presents the player with an interesting choice - do you want to focus on a larger, less centralized realm or on a stronger personal demesne but having a harder time of organizing your many vassals?

How legalism unlocks laws will be moddable to a large extent.

Now, to viceroys... With the Charlemagne DLC, it will be possible for a non-tribal emperor tier character to appoint viceroys to rule any kingdom or duchy titles that the emperor himself holds. This is effectively a lifetime governorship, where the viceroy becomes a vassal of the empire. Any landed vassal of count tier or above can be granted a viceroyalty. However, the viceroy does not own the title, but rather rules in his liege's name. When he dies, the title goes back to the liege. For all other purposes, the viceroy functions as a normal vassal. One character can hold several viceroyalties.

cm_dd3_viceroy.png

The ability to appoint viceroys is unlocked by the Legalism tech, and kingdom viceroyalties are unlocked much earlier than duchy viceroyalties.

Viceroys will gain an opinion bonus to the liege who grants the title, so should usually be quite loyal. However, should a viceroy mount a successful rebellion or otherwise become independent he will gain the granted kingdom or duchy as a permanent title.

We have also made some changes to regencies. The essence of it is that a character's regent is now more of a conscious actor, and will not automatically act in the liege's interest. A regent who dislikes you will be somewhat likely to make things difficult for you, and certain types of personality traits will also be likely to cause problems. Diplomatic actions may be blocked if the regent does not approve, for example. A friendly regent is your best bet for getting things done your way, but there are also other considerations. Any regent is likely to prefer seeing you married to someone of their own religion and culture, for example.

cm_dd3_regent.png

Since choosing your regent has now become much more important, you will be able to name a regent beforehand, via "Award Honorary Title" in a character's diplomacy interface. Your Designated Regent is officially recognized as the one chosen to take the reins if a regency is required.

In addition to the things mentioned, there are a number of smaller changes intended to make ruling your realm more interesting, and some intended to just make it easier. One example of this is the possibility for a councilmember to help you assign recently acquired titles for you if you have a lot of them.

In the final dev diary next week we will be talking about the new tribal mechanics. See you then!
 
I have to agree, even though I'm incredibly excited for the opportunity. Just a few quick 'off the top of my head' ideas on balancing them:
- A viceroy's heir(s) should get a claim (maybe just weak) on the viceroyal title their parent had upon the viceroy's death, and an opinion penalty against their sovereign if the viceroyalty is given to someone else.
- A viceroy should be able to plot to make their title hereditary, and that should be a high priority for any viceroy.
- Possible opinion penalty for sovereigns that are not the ones that appointed the viceroy in the first place.

Those should be culture- and/or title-specific. Ottoman viceroys might become hereditary, for instance, but English might not(?). For some countries, it changed over time. Ethiopia for example: possibility of heredity for some centuries, but by the 19th and 20 centuries, for life only.
 
I have to admit, I wasn't hugely excited about in Charlie, as the earlier start isn't that interesting to me. But some of the stuff last time round (custom kingdoms) and now this DD has rather tweaked my interest. These really look like they'yll make the game more fun and intersting to play :)
 
No it doesn't, those are just arbitrary, unrealistic and unhistoric rules. (...) but compared to all the stuff EU IV is about to get, that IMPROVES the game, this really reads as a poor attempt to make the game more "difficult" without actually adding to the game and make it more fun.
Seriously? You are comparing it to EU4? EU4 has monarch points, vassal (diplomatic relations) limit and tons of other unrealistic limits that EU3 didn't have.

CK2 had a problem with large, blobby, stable empires. Vassal limit will make those large empires weaker and will break them (with that independence mechanic).
And the choice between more vassals and more demesne makes perfect sense. Either you control everything yourself (bigger demesne) or you delegate (to vassals). You can't do both. If you spend too much time managing your lands, you can't control your vassals efficiently and vice versa.


And, to the people saying that viceroys are OP: STOP TRYING TO NERF THE GAME BEFORE EVEN PLAYING IT. Seriously, some poeple are trying to always nerf everything...
 
The ability to appoint viceroys is unlocked by the Legalism tech, and kingdom viceroyalties are unlocked much earlier than duchy viceroyalties.
- will eastern european, muslim and byzantine realms start with ability to appoint viceroys as they properly should?
 
I have to agree, even though I'm incredibly excited for the opportunity. Just a few quick 'off the top of my head' ideas on balancing them:
- A viceroy's heir(s) should get a claim (maybe just weak) on the viceroyal title their parent had upon the viceroy's death, and an opinion penalty against their sovereign if the viceroyalty is given to someone else.
- A viceroy should be able to plot to make their title hereditary, and that should be a high priority for any viceroy.
- Possible opinion penalty for sovereigns that are not the ones that appointed the viceroy in the first place.

Also, anyone else think that appointing your oldest suitable vassals as viceroys would be an automatic strategy, to minimize the amount of time your heir will have to deal with left-over viceroys that don't have an opinion bonus towards him?

i don't think the heirs should get any claim, that would give legitimacy to an idea that the viceroyalty was hereditary when all knew when it was appointed. it was not hereditary and such talk is fantasy, so there is no heir to those titles because they are not the viceroy's to give
 
You don't "manage" vassals, that is the point of vassals and you can rule a large number of small vassals much easier then a small umber of very powerful ones, EVERY freakin' Kaiser of the HRE can attest to that. The small count or monasteries never made much of a problem, it where the powerful electors, that made trouble all the time.
I won't be worry too much about the limits...
Based on MP stream and screenshot, the limit seems to be high enough that even Abbasid Caliph doesn't hit its limit, plus it increase with your dynasty prestige which means there will be enough amount of vassal limit if you manage your conquest well...

And in case if you go over the limit, there is the viceroy option which seems to be a good alternative for those king vassal with relation penalty against you...
Assuming the viceroy work the way we think it works (reduce your vassal limit) and isn't a DLC feature (it is too important for DLC and should be patch feature IMO)...

EDIT: Oops, miss the part where it says that viceroy is DLC feature, thus make it less of an option (if you don't have the DLC)...
 
Last edited:
What is the maximum number of vassals with maximum centralization?
 
You'll probably still be able to rule over most of the map. You'll just need to form and empire and allocate kings. Most large states had greater subdivisions than what is currently represented by the duchy: Rome had governors while China had prefects.

This just forces you to create those divisions (it's silly to have 400 counts if you're a king).

But that is exactly the point: Paradox made all the rules in such a way, that you basically had to appoint only counts, because everything else was bad for you. But instead of fixing this rather obvious and glaring flaw in the game mechanics, they just put duct tape over it (arbitrary limit). What about all the stupid "desires xy title of you" penalties, that you get with them for example? Or the massive cut down on levies, as soon, as you create a duchy and give it out? How about giving all counts a "desires the duchy" penalty, while kings and dukes don't get a penalty?
 
The second danger of being over the limit is that when your ruler dies, there is a chance of any vassal simply becoming independent instead of swearing fealty to your heir. The risk of this happening increases the higher over the limit you are. Vassals who are geographically more distant from your capital are the ones who are most likely to declare independence.
When this had been mentioned before, it was always in relation to tribal mechanics. Should this be taken to mean that feudal realms will also be in danger of breaking up upon succession?
 
But that is exactly the point: Paradox made all the rules in such a way, that you basically had to appoint only counts, because everything else was bad for you. But instead of fixing this rather obvious and glaring flaw in the game mechanics, they just put duct tape over it (arbitrary limit). What about all the stupid "desires xy title of you" penalties, that you get with them for example? Or the massive cut down on levies, as soon, as you create a duchy and give it out? How about giving all counts a "desires the duchy" penalty, while kings and dukes don't get a penalty?

Why arbitrary? As many here said... It makes sense. It gives the game a new option. You can controll a greater demesn with less viceroy kings... or a small demesn and many vasalls. You have the choice.

When this had been mentioned before, it was always in relation to tribal mechanics. Should this be taken to mean that feudal realms will also be in danger of breaking up upon succession?

Only if you are over the vasall limit. Which makes sense. Tribals can split for other reasons.
 
...while kings and dukes don't get a penalty?
Well, if you've read the viceroy part of the DD, that is what viceroy does...

When this had been mentioned before, it was always in relation to tribal mechanics. Should this be taken to mean that feudal realms will also be in danger of breaking up upon succession?
I always under impression that breaking for independence for tribal government is inherent to the form government, aka there is always a random chance they will become independent regardless of vassal limit...
While the non-tribal government will only break up if you go over vassal limit...
 
Last edited:
i don't think the heirs should get any claim, that would give legitimacy to an idea that the viceroyalty was hereditary when all knew when it was appointed. it was not hereditary and such talk is fantasy, so there is no heir to those titles because they are not the viceroy's to give

Thats why I'm suggesting just a claim, or even a weak one (most likely one that is not considered pressed). There have been countless realms throughout history where titles were not supposed to be hereditary but ending up as such. It is most certainly not fantasy. Fantasy will be if we have no trouble, besides researching a requisite legalism tech, in maintaining a perfectly non-hereditary organization to our realms.

But lets think about what would happen if the heir had a weak claim: He's probably far too inferior in power to the Viceroy or the Emperor to actually fight for the title, but he will agitate and plot for it. Which sounds pretty realistic to me.
 
- Can viceroys start factions/plots to make their title hereditary?
- Can the CA of a viceroy's title be changed by the viceroy or their vassals?
- How does the vassal limit scale with dynastic prestige, Diplomacy, and tier? In other words: How many vassals do you get for a point in dynastic prestige, one point in ruler Diplomacy, or from a specific tier?
- Does any tech give a bonus to vassal limit? Can this be modded in, if that is not the case?
- Can a designated regent be unseated through the actions of other vassals or courtiers?
- How hard is it to change the regent's mind? Is it mainly based on their opinion of you, or will you be running into a "-----" to some actions even if the regent really likes you (a Zealous Catholic regent might oppose any attempt to declare war on the Pope even if you bribe him)?
 
Thats why I'm suggesting just a claim, or even a weak one (most likely one that is not considered pressed). There have been countless realms throughout history where titles were not supposed to be hereditary but ending up as such. It is most certainly not fantasy. Fantasy will be if we have no trouble, besides researching a requisite legalism tech, in maintaining a perfectly non-hereditary organization to our realms.

But lets think about what would happen if the heir had a weak claim: He's probably far too inferior in power to the Viceroy or the Emperor to actually fight for the title, but he will agitate and plot for it. Which sounds pretty realistic to me.

well i guess i was thinking of the ERE where it would have to be conferred again. perhaps an event on the death of a viceroy and an opinion penalty for not giving it to someone who thinks they "deserve" it because they are a brat (which could be an issue if he inherited other titles) but i wouldn't call it a claim
 
Interesting new features, I do like them - probably more interesting to me than that Charles guy. I'm sure the new features might need some tweaking, but it's better to wait until Charlemagne comes out before we make any judgments. The Viceroy system sounds like it might be a way to mimic Byzantine governorships as well, come to think of it.
 
The vassal will become independent without any war starting and without the ruller gaining a casus belli. However, if the vassal is your de jure vassal you can still use the existing De Jure casus belli to reclaim the lands.

THAT!
I see a greater utility to take a title now.
 
Viceroy’s will be loyal to the emperor who appointed them, but will that loyalty transfer to their Emperor’s heir? If not, and it probably shouldn’t, I predict a string of “elder statesmen” appointed to the job.

Also, good to see that barons will not count towards your vassal limit. That was something I was worried about.
 
It's been said, viceroys are normal vassals. So, they can plot for independence (and that would make their titles hereditary) and other things.

I meant having the title become hereditary while they remain a vassal. The CA part might cause trouble when the title reverts to the liege, as it might cause issues with the succession law if you choose to keep the title (similar to how *all* usurped kingdoms revert to Gavelkind).