• 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.

Dev Diary #24 - Fervor, Religious Hostility, and Doctrine Showcase

Hello everyone, and welcome back to our final Dev Diary on Religion in Crusader Kings 3! Today I will be talking about what the mysterious Fervor is, how that ties into Heresies and Heresy Outbreaks, as well as how Religious Hostility works and some of the ways that Doctrines can impact it. To wrap things up, I will show off some additional never-before seen Tenets and Doctrines!

Fervor
Every Faith has a Fervor score, which is a representation of how strongly adherents of that Faith believe in the righteousness of their religious and secular leaders. While Fervor has a slow ticking increase over time, it is primarily influenced by the virtuousness or sinfulness of that Faith’s leaders. Virtuous priests can inspire a populace and rally the people behind themselves, while sinful ones (especially religious heads) can cause massive scandals that damage the faithful’s trust in their religious institutions.

DD_WM_Scandal.png

[A screenshot of the Pope looking very guilty after being caught in flagrante]

Adherents of a Faith with high Fervor are willing to fight and die for their beliefs. They gain bonus resistance to attempts to convert them to another faith, and both secular and religious leaders can declare Holy Wars to spread their Faith across the world. However, while these Holy Wars are ostensibly waged in the name of the divine, in practice they often tend to be little more than opportunistic land-grabs — as a result, every Holy War declared will slightly damage a Faiths’ Fervor, while losing land to hostile Holy Wars will actually increase your Faith’s Fervor as the embattled faithful dig in and fight for their way of life!

When a Faith’s Fervor drops, adherents of that Faith become vulnerable to conversion. Characters are more willing to accept a Demand Conversion when their Faith’s Fervor is low, and the Court Chaplain’s ‘Convert County’ task gains a scaling bonus against Faiths whose Fervor is lower than their own. In addition, if Fervor drops low enough, a Faith becomes vulnerable to heresy outbreaks!

Heresy Outbreaks
A heresy outbreak is what happens when a ruler becomes disillusioned with their current Faith and is swayed to join a different one. If there is already a heretical Faith present nearby, they will convert to that one automatically. If no suitable heresies are around, they will become a heresiarch and start espousing the doctrines of a brand new Faith, which is typically (but not always), one from their Religion.

A ruler who converts to or founds a new heretical Faith will then attempt to convince nearby rulers of their old Faith to join them, with the success rate of this being dependent on how low their old Faith’s fervor has fallen. This means that while heresy outbreaks can vary wildly in size, converts to the new heresy will tend to remain clustered together in a specific region — this both protects the burgeoning Faith while simultaneously limiting its influence in distant lands.

DD_WM_Heresy.png

[A screenshot showing an outbreak of Lollardy, originating in southern England]

As you can imagine, heresy outbreaks are incredibly divisive events; nobody wants to sit on the fence when your immortal soul is on the line! As a result, after a heresy outbreak occurs both the old Faith and the new heretical Faith will gain a substantial increase to their Fervor score. As this is likely to encourage Holy Wars for both sides, it is not uncommon for a new period of religious violence to follow as the two Faiths fight for supremacy!

Ultimately, the flow from scandal to heresy to zealousness and back will cause Fervor to vary wildly over the course of a game of CK3. Unlike the relatively static Mortal Authority in CK2, this means that even the big dominant religions will have periods of weakness, making them vulnerable to fractures and religious violence.

Religious Hostility
Speaking of religious violence, how does that work? With so many different Faiths and Religions in Crusader Kings III, how do they view each other? What is the difference between how an Orthodox ruler views a Catholic, a Bogomil, and an Ash’ari?

In Crusader Kings III this is all handled by the Religious Hostility system. For characters of a given Faith, every other Faith in the game will receive one of the following rankings:
  1. Righteous
  2. Astray
  3. Hostile
  4. Evil
Righteous is how a Faith views itself and, in a few rare circumstances, other Faiths that have certain things in common with it. Righteous Faiths have no penalties at all with each other.

Astray is how a Faith views other Faiths that have similar goals and ideals but are just a little… wrong. For example, Orthodoxy and Catholicism consider each other to be Astray. Astray Faiths have only a minor opinion penalty with each other.

Hostile is how most Faiths view their heresies and other significantly divergent Faiths. Opinion penalties are more substantial at this level, and rulers gain the ability to declare Holy Wars against rulers of Hostile Faiths. However, intermarriage is still common when it is politically convenient, and alliances can still be forged between rulers of Hostile Faiths.

Evil Faiths are considered to be an anathema, and cannot be tolerated. Evil Faiths suffer the most severe opinion penalty possible, and Holy Wars against each other become commonplace. Rulers will almost never accept marriages with characters of an Evil Faith, making alliances all-but-impossible.

So how is Religious Hostility determined? The primary factor is what Religion Family both Faiths belong to:

DD_Hostility.png

[A screenshot of a spreadsheet showing how base Religious Hostility is calculated, with Abrahamic Faiths being the least tolerant and Eastern Faiths being the most tolerant]

But wait, if Abrahamic Faiths view other Faiths within the same Religion has Hostile, why do Catholicism and Orthodoxy only see each other as Astray? The answer to that, my friend, is Doctrines!

Doctrine & Tenet Showcase
Now we’re going to take some time to reveal a bunch of the various Doctrines and Tenets available for Faiths in Crusader Kings 3. For starters, the Catholic, Orthodox, Apostolic, and Coptic Faiths all have the ‘Ecumenism’ Doctrine, which changes the Hostility of any other Faith with the same Doctrine to just ‘Astray’, thus allowing these Faiths to have cordial relations with each other.

DD_WM_Doctrine_Ecumenism.png

[A screenshot showing the Ecumenism doctrine, which reduces Hostility between certain Christian Faiths]

In a similar vein, the various Muslim Faiths all have a doctrine representing their belief in the true succession for Muhammad. The various Sunni Faiths all see each other as Astray, with the same being true for the collective Shia Faiths and the collective Muhakkima Faiths.

The embattled minority of Gnostic Faiths have an ever stronger version of this; having always struggled to have their beliefs accepted, they see all other Gnostic Faiths as being fully ‘Righteous’. This allows us to have coalitions of Faiths within or even outside of a Religion that see some Faiths as allies and others as enemies, completely changing the dynamic of how religious relations play out in Crusader Kings III.

DD_WM_Doctrine_Gnositism.png

[A screenshot showing the Gnosticism Tenet, which among other things eliminates Religious Hostility between Gnostic Faiths]

Finally there are other Tenets which can modify how your Faith sees, and is seen by, Faiths in other Religions.

DD_WM_Doctrine_Syncretism.png

[A screenshot showing various Syncretism Tenets, which reduce Religious Hostility across entire Religions]

Diplomacy not your thing? Try some warfare!

DD_WM_Tenets_Warfare.png

[A screenshot showing various warfare-focuses Doctrines and Tenets, including Armed Pilgrimages which enables Crusades]

Or is all of this just too secular for you? After all, isn’t religion supposed to be about spiritualism, a belief in otherworldly entities beyond our understanding? Well then maybe one of these tenets would suit you...

DD_WM_Tenets_Mysticism.png

[A screenshot showing various Tenets of a more spiritual nature: Astrology, Auspicious Birthright, Reincarnation, Sun Worship, Sky Burials, and Esotericism]

Of course, this is just a sample of the Tenets and Doctrines that we have in Crusader Kings 3. It would take too long to go into this level of detail for all of them, but here is a teaser of some available Tenets on the Faith Creation screen, showing both some previously revealed and unrevealed Tenets.

DD_WM_Tenets_List.png

[A snippet of a handful of available Tenets from the Faith Creation screen]

That’s all for now — hopefully this post has given you something to think about as you plan your first campaign of Crusader Kings III, and every one after that!
 
  • 70Like
  • 14
  • 12
  • 2Love
Reactions:
so this is stupid and nitpicky and maybe not in the appropriate place but today I discovered in the ck2 files that for some reason "Brahma" is listed as the high god for Buddhism. Can you please make sure not to have such an error in the next game. This is the equivalent of having the son of the Christian god being named Satan. I can see how this error was made as Brahma is listed as king of the Gods in some texts, but "Gods" in Buddhism aren't seen in the same light as Gods in other faiths. In Buddhism a being that is qualified as a God doesn't necessarily have any more divinity than a human would, they just experience an existence that is magnitudes more enjoyable. Only beings that are on the path of enlightenment are worthy of being described as divine.

I respect that this game isn't specifically focused on the religions of the Indian subcontinent but if they are going to be included it seems important that they are at least represented in an appropriate way. Some appropriate terms would include Buddha (awakened one - this is the ultimate be-all and end-all), Arhat (one who has gained insight into the true nature of existence and has achieved nirvana), Tathagata (one who has come, one who has gone), Bodhisattva (one whose goal is awakening), Dakini (sky dancer/wind dancer - the embodiment of female enlightened energy). There is also not just one Buddha as Buddhahood or enlightenment is the ultimate goal for all practitioners.

If this issue has been addressed please just ignore my comment. I'm not trying to be obnoxious at all. I only just noticed as I don't play Buddhist characters very often as they don't really have any interesting mechanics compared to the depth and richness of other faiths. Though I am truly looking forward to what you guys are working on with this next iteration! Thanks for listening to the ramblings of an enthused Buddhist!
 
  • 7Like
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
I think a better way would be to have *declaring* a holy war reduce Fervor, and *winning* the holy war increase it (by the same amount, or slightly more). The reverse would also be true. This is realistic for the reasons you describe, while still balanced.
That would just defeat the point of stopping blobbing religions.
Winning religions don't need a mechanic that helps them win harder.
 
  • 11
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
so this is stupid and nitpicky and maybe not in the appropriate place but today I discovered in the ck2 files that for some reason "Brahma" is listed as the high god for Buddhism. Can you please make sure not to have such an error in the next game. This is the equivalent of having the son of the Christian god being named Satan. I can see how this error was made as Brahma is listed as king of the Gods in some texts, but "Gods" in Buddhism aren't seen in the same light as Gods in other faiths. In Buddhism a being that is qualified as a God doesn't necessarily have any more divinity than a human would, they just experience an existence that is magnitudes more enjoyable. Only beings that are on the path of enlightenment are worthy of being described as divine.

I respect that this game isn't specifically focused on the religions of the Indian subcontinent but if they are going to be included it seems important that they are at least represented in an appropriate way. Some appropriate terms would include Buddha (awakened one - this is the ultimate be-all and end-all), Arhat (one who has gained insight into the true nature of existence and has achieved nirvana), Tathagata (one who has come, one who has gone), Bodhisattva (one whose goal is awakening), Dakini (sky dancer/wind dancer - the embodiment of female enlightened energy). There is also not just one Buddha as Buddhahood or enlightenment is the ultimate goal for all practitioners.

If this issue has been addressed please just ignore my comment. I'm not trying to be obnoxious at all. I only just noticed as I don't play Buddhist characters very often as they don't really have any interesting mechanics compared to the depth and richness of other faiths. Though I am truly looking forward to what you guys are working on with this next iteration! Thanks for listening to the ramblings of an enthused Buddhist!

The bigger issue in CKII wasn't the name list, but the text that surrounded it. It doesn't make any sense to say, "They are with the Arhant now" on the ruler death screen, for instance. As well, there's the problem of the highly divergent sects. In any sect, if Brahma Sahampati shows up and tells your Buddhist ruler something, you'll know who that is and be enthused about "the voice of Brahma" but a Sri Lankan Theravadin is going to be like, "Dakini who?"

Honestly, Buddhists and Jains are always going to be the odd ones out and unfortunately I bet there's still going to be some awfully hilarious madlibs from inserting their words into christian templates. Given that, I might rather they just use the names of lowly supernatural beings like Devas, Nagas, Garudas, etc, who do appear in visions in all on-map varieties of Buddhism and many of whom are unskillful enough to endorse wars and oppression.

Also CKII Buddhists are pretty fun. Tibetans are like muslims without decadence and Indian Buddhists have open succession and kingdom-level subjugation.



I like the new hostility system (though evil seems a bit strong, for instance this is saying a Muslim views other people of the book as evil).

Now seeing the religious hostility system, I still don't see why oriental religion group makes sense for Zoroastrianism. The last major Zoroastrian power (the Sasanian Empire) persecuted not just other religious families (Christians), but also the Manicheans, who I assume are in the same religious family as Zoroastrianism. Additionally, Zoroastrianism, and related religious like Yazidism, aren't for marrying outside your faith. Both of those don't seem to fit well with the Oriental religious families' hostility settings.

With Zoroastrianism it's tough, and doesn't track through their whole history. On the surface, Iranian and Indian religions consider each other to be, basically, demon worshippers, with Ahura / Asura and Daeva / Deva basically flipping side from one religious group to the other in terms of good and bad. Proto-Mazdan tribes were likely engaged in horrible religious warfare that drove Deva worshipers to India and the near east. Mazdans had prayers like the Frawardin Yasht section twelve, which talks about killing deva-worshippers by the hundreds of thousands of hundreds of thousands (AKA ten billion). But practically, they had much more antagonistic opportunities against non-deva worshippers, especially Christians and Muslims (just before the time of the game) and made only relatively minor, non-genocidal incursions into India.

Then they lost all their lands, were welcomed into Gujarat, and have been fine neighbors to their Deva-worshipping co-nationalists with occasional intermarriage (far beyond the game scope, but Indira Ghandi's husband was a Parsi).

I suspect that this can all be modeled by tenets and doctrines that modify hostility and intermarriage, but it's also another example of why dynamic hostility would be great. If they stay a minority, Zoroastrians should grow more and more accepting with time, but in an Alt-History where they restore the persian empire, they should gradually get more hostile.

Also, I really think the Abrahamic settings really only make sense for Christianity. Even a hypothetical restore-the-temple, reinstate animal sacrifice, resume religious execution, "We've got a Kohen Gadol Yo" version of Judaism would, absent unknowable political pressure, see Christians and Muslims as compliant with the seven Noahide laws and thus merely "astray".
 
  • 5Like
  • 4
  • 2
Reactions:
Will fervor be a map encompassing thing for that entire faith? Or is there any chance we might have more localized fervor / moral authority?
Fervor is global for the entire Faith. However, the more dynamic nature of the Fervor system means that Faiths simply won't end up in the 'heresy death-spiral' that CK2 had, since Fervor will jump back up after an outbreak and give the original Faith some breathing room to recover and deal with the heretics.
 
  • 6Like
  • 3
Reactions:
People can "respectfully disagree" with my comment, but no one seems to have an actual argument that they're posting - when in real life did a religion winning wars against other faiths make its adherents less fervent in their faith, and when did losing make them more fervent?

How could you say the first crusade weakened Catholicism and made heresies more likely to pop up? How can you say that Zoroastrians being wiped out made them stronger when in fact their religion collapsed more than ever? It's a nonsensical mechanic. I get why it's implemented, you don't want snowballing and you want it to be harder to wipe out faiths like Catholicism or Sunni Islam, but please do it a different way and don't punish players for success, because that's just annoying and ahistorical
 
  • 8
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I like the new hostility system (though evil seems a bit strong, for instance this is saying a Muslim views other people of the book as evil).

Now seeing the religious hostility system, I still don't see why oriental religion group makes sense for Zoroastrianism. The last major Zoroastrian power (the Sasanian Empire) persecuted not just other religious families (Christians), but also the Manicheans, who I assume are in the same religious family as Zoroastrianism. Additionally, Zoroastrianism, and related religious like Yazidism, aren't for marrying outside your faith. Both of those don't seem to fit well with the Oriental religious families' hostility settings.
The Oriental/Eastern group could definitely be helped with a split.
I'm thinking of an Iranian group for Zoroastrianism and other faiths in the sphere of the old Persian empire, an Indian group for Dharmic religions and an Eastern group for Chinese religions which are apparently in the game and don't really fit with Hinduism honestly.
 
  • 6Like
  • 2
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Just a tiny bit worried that at the end of a game the entire world will just be a hodgepodge of different heresies and new religions. Feels like it would be tricky to balance with the systems explained. Will there be dominant religions still if the fevor can be so fluctuating?
We have the AI play automated games every night, and the 'big' faiths like Catholicism and Ash'ari generally remain quite powerful. Even though they regularly suffer from heresy outbreaks, their sheer bulk and military might means they almost always end up re-asserting themselves as a dominant power.

Interesting. In the final screenshot why are some tenets hatched out? Are these already chosen, or somehow unavailable?
Unavailable due to being incompatible with currently selected Tenets/Doctrines. Switching the blocking Doctrine out for something else will enable them to be chosen.

Is there any way to change the religious hostility value in game without changing tenets? Could you in some fashion manage to make Catholics and Orthodox consider each other "Righteous", and thus co-valid paths to salvation? (Maybe as a first step in an eventual "mend the schism" pathway for future use?)
You need to use either a Tenet or a Doctrine to change religious hostility. Either option works just as well; Ecumenism is a Doctrine for example, while Christian Syncretism is a Tenet.

Currently only Gnostics are able to achieve a Righteous view of other Faiths, but mods can change or expand upon this to enable schism reformations and the like without too much trouble.
 
  • 5Like
  • 3
Reactions:
People can "respectfully disagree" with my comment, but no one seems to have an actual argument that they're posting - when in real life did a religion winning wars against other faiths make its adherents less fervent in their faith, and when did losing make them more fervent?

How could you say the first crusade weakened Catholicism and made heresies more likely to pop up? How can you say that Zoroastrians being wiped out made them stronger when in fact their religion collapsed more than ever? It's a nonsensical mechanic. I get why it's implemented, you don't want snowballing and you want it to be harder to wipe out faiths like Catholicism or Sunni Islam, but please do it a different way and don't punish players for success, because that's just annoying and ahistorical

The First Crusade focused on retaking land, recapturing Nicea which had been taken just a decade earlier, and other territories seen as "theirs". Then the fall of the crusader state of Edessa triggered the second Crusade. Then the fall of Jerusalem triggered the Third Crusade.

What it horrendously misrepresents is the Rise of Islam and fall of Zoroastrianism. But honestly, any system that could represent that period of history accurately would make for a terrible game, because Mohammed and the Rightly Guided Caliphs were crazy OP.

And Fervor isn't lost by winning wars. It's lost by declaring them, and only by a slight amount. So you can't have everyone spamming it - and Oh, look, in real life there was a cooldown period between Crusades, and it wasn't just exactly 30 years but rather was related to events going on at the time.

C.f. say Bogomil and Bogomilism. It was founded in the 900's around the time Christian rulers were getting involved in tons of wars with pagans all over Europe, to mixed results, though rarely outright losing territory to Pagans.
 
  • 5
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Can we have something similar to Fervour for culture, so that cultures have little holdouts against total annihilation? (It could also encourage massive cultures to fracture into regional variants).

You could even have it so that less valuable and controllable places (deep forest, mountains, deserts) are harder to convert than plains and farmlands, so even massive empires have little pockets and enclaves of "old" cultures in their hinterlands.
 
  • 4
  • 2Like
  • 1Love
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Good point, but these sorts of interfaith marriages should still be fairly rare. Maybe add an attribute to certain cultures (Byzantine, Spanish, Crusader, etc.) that makes them more likely to accept interfaith marriage proposals?
I'd suggest making these interfaith marriages acceptable for neighboring realms only. So, as a matter of principle the parties will refuse, but they'll make exceptions for rulers who are right at their borders who they interact with more closely.
 
  • 4
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
A triumphant faith losing fervor makes no sense in an era where success in war showed God’s favor and loss showed the opposite. This is a change that I really don’t like
 
  • 4
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Just a small idea.

Give a small mitigation to opinion penalties between two Astray religious followers if there is a hostile religion bordering (or nearby) both rulers.

The 'we've got bigger problems than each other' consideration.

Same could be done for hostile Vs evil too.
 
  • 6
  • 1Like
Reactions:
clearly there is a large faction who prefers unrealistic constraints and nonsensical systems in place to force outcomes that they like in this game - the OP seems to confirm that that's the direction Paradox is taking with this game, which doesn't bode well for its realism. Not that I had much hope for it anyway.
Gameplay and fun should always be prioritized over historical determinism when those priorities clash.
 
  • 4Like
  • 3
Reactions:
The religious hostility system could be improved too honestly.
The way it was worded in previous dev diaries made me think that it could have been able to represent stuff like occasional intermarrying between Christians and Muslims, or how Muslims themselves tended to be more tolerant toward Christians and Jews compared to pagans (you'd think that Christians and Muslims would view each others as "Hostile" instead of full on "Evil", especially when it comes to the Muslim view on Christianity. They'd still holy war each others to death, but the shared Abrahamic roots should matter somewhat like they mattered in real life).
 
  • 4
  • 3Like
Reactions:
This is the Dev Diary I have been waiting for and it did not disappoint!

While Fervor has a slow ticking increase over time, it is primarily influenced by the virtuousness or sinfulness of that Faith’s leaders.

Right off the bat, 100% better than Moral Authority. Leaning into the roleplay, and opening up opportunities like sending your spymaster to look for dirt on the Pope in order to lower Fervor right before initiating a schism. Or maybe the opportunity will just fall into your lap.

They gain bonus resistance to attempts to convert them to another faith, and both secular and religious leaders can declare Holy Wars to spread their Faith across the world.

Does this mean that Holy Wars can't be declared with low Fervor? Or is it just that the AI will usually choose not to in order to avoid decreasing it further?

every Holy War declared will slightly damage a Faiths’ Fervor, while losing land to hostile Holy Wars will actually increase your Faith’s Fervor

This seems like it's fairly controversial on here, but I think it's both historically accurate and good for gameplay. Think about it: when a Holy War/Crusade is declared, the people who are signing up are the most fervent ones. Once they're gone, those left are less fervent overall. Those who leave will either die or mostly feel like they have put in their time and are too old/injured/busy to go to war again. Fervor ticks up constantly, so the next generation will be back to fully ready to wage war, likely primed by their parent's stories. And while it is true that it's a little unrealistic that a Holy War in Africa hurts Fervor in Ireland, for pretty much every Faith other than Catholic it makes complete sense to have one unified score, so I get it. Also, I imagine if you win a Crusade you still gain a ton of piety, prestige, and gold in addition to more land, so it's not like it's not worth it. You just can't spam them because you'll be literally depleting your populace's percentage of people willing to go to war for your Faith.

This means that while heresy outbreaks can vary wildly in size, converts to the new heresy will tend to remain clustered together in a specific region — this both protects the burgeoning Faith while simultaneously limiting its influence in distant lands.

Very nice, much better than random sprouting of heresies all over.

after a heresy outbreak occurs both the old Faith and the new heretical Faith will gain a substantial increase to their Fervor score.

This is a great mechanic. I would imagine an area with two Faiths at high fervor is basically polarized, either you're one thing or you're the other, and everyone's willing to kill to decide who comes out on top for control of the region.

Now we’re going to take some time to reveal a bunch of the various Doctrines and Tenets available for Faiths in Crusader Kings 3. For starters, the Catholic, Orthodox, Apostolic, and Coptic Faiths all have the ‘Ecumenism’ Doctrine, which changes the Hostility of any other Faith with the same Doctrine to just ‘Astray’, thus allowing these Faiths to have cordial relations with each other.

Now this is fascinating. The fact that ecumenism is a main doctrine implies that any Christian Faith can take it without sacrificing a Tenet slot, although I imagine if you want both that and a gay witch sex cult Faith it is going to cost an absolute metric ton of Piety, with I think is a good mechanical way to prevent such things from being relatively trivial to accomplish. That would probably be something to dedicate a run to, rather than a fun side project. It would feel very unrealistic to be able to implement a super out-there Faith while remaining ecumenical unless everyone in Europe pretty much agreed you were the most pious person since Saul.

The various Sunni Faiths all see each other as Astray, with the same being true for the collective Shia Faiths and the collective Muhakkima Faiths.

Ok, I will take this, although I still think various Sunni/Shia faiths should share Holy Site bonuses.

The embattled minority of Gnostic Faiths have an ever stronger version of this; having always struggled to have their beliefs accepted, they see all other Gnostic Faiths as being fully ‘Righteous’. This allows us to have coalitions of Faiths within or even outside of a Religion that see some Faiths as allies and others as enemies, completely changing the dynamic of how religious relations play out in Crusader Kings III.

This is super cool. I'm imagining a multiplayer mod where each player starts with a Faith that has a modified Tenet that makes them consider all the other player Faiths Righteous. Then everyone takes over the world, leading to religious harmony.

Some of these seem super cool, and some seem nearly useless. Unless Divining the Stars and the benefits of a Sky Burial are super powerful, that is.
 
  • 5
  • 2Like
Reactions:
what I will still say is the implementation if "Insular Christianity" is a mess - they were loyal to the Pope in Rome, yet you've implemented them to be like a third branch of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, where they will have the same attitude that they have to each other, as well as being wholly independent. This is going to make the Isles a mess religiously and politically and will make any sort of situation where the Irish fall back under Catholicism peacefully basically impossible. The best implementation would've been to at least make them a heresy of Catholicism but have some mechanic where they aren't being holy warred constantly, since apparently it's impossible to make them have the Pope as an authority while being "different". You should have just not put them in the game until a later patch/DLC allows for shared religious heads, to be honest.
 
  • 4
  • 4
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Question: why are pagan faiths hostile to other pagan religions? Considering the nature of pagan religions wouldn't it be regarded as Astray instead. I don't think that the norse when settling in Russia / Ukraine were religiously hostile to the Slavic pagans.
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
Reactions: