• 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:
What about if we want to designate which heir gets what? For example, William I the Conqueror. He did not get along with his oldest son Robert so he gave the Kingdom of England to his second son William Rufus, who became William II, and Robert became the Duke of Normandy. William I's youngest son Henry, who eventually became Henry I, didn't get any land but was given money instead. What if we wanted to do something like that? Also, Robert tried both against William Rufus and Henry I to conquer England but failed. In the end he lost to Henry and was imprisoned for the rest of his life.

So why can we not designate heirs? There could be a mechanic where your vassals can approve of your choice and support the succession or not. Also if a son is ambitious and you give him a lesser title (like William I's son Robert) he could start wars to gain the title. That would be far closer to the way it was historically.
 
Last edited:
Extremely disappointed at the negligence with the Byzantine Empire and that the official dev response basically amounted to “well, if you like playing the Byzantines, CK isn’t for you”. At least don’t downgrade from CK2.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
To get an easy overview of your realm, we in CK3 have the Realm screen.

If the goal is to get an easy overview, why does it only show 4 out of 44 vassals on the screen? Why is there no obvious sorting options for religion, income, levies, opinion etc? Since most of your games seem to be about growing empires (which at least I think is fine, on the whole), why not give us an interface for that istead of an interface for a small to mid-size realm?
Sorry if this has been addresses already, and thanks for the diary.
 
I hope to see that the oldest child inheritance and youngest child inheritance will revert back to primogeniture and ultimogeniture upon release. The new terms seem very dumbed down, and could be kept in the tooltip or in the description tab. Ditto with the removal of agnatic/cognatic. This is a simple text change that it seems the majority of players commenting Agree with.

I also agree with the individual feudal contracts could be fleshed out a bit more in the future rather than a linear based system. Features such as restricting/allowing war and vassal inheritance outside of realm could be tacked into this system instead of overarching as it was in ckii.

I would be interested in instead of only using hooks to sway them to change their contracts, that you could “buy” a better contract in the forms of lands, titles, marriage, and even gold. Similar to buying favor in a way.

I do really love the sortable vassal tabs, that should make searching much easier.
 
Gotta admit, aside from the raiding (which actually looks pretty awesome), most of this seems like a case of excellent ideas with mediocre execution. Particularly the changes to laws seems like a watering down for the sake of casual players rather than dedicated fans. And I once again press F to pay respect to the dearly departed Merchant Republic, which I've always loved.

Feudal contracts seems like something that could've been an incredible and dynamic system to make a cycle of strong and weak rulers reduced to 'do my vassals hate me little enough that I can squeeze extra tribute from them?'. If that system could be made more robust, I'd be ecstatic. Give us Merchant Republics and I'd be over the moon.
 
Is asking not to have to pay for features we already paid for toxic entitlement now?
I mean, If Byzantine or Nomad mechanics come later in DLCs and are more fleshed out than in CK2, then yes, I wouldn't complain if I had to pay for it (though Paradox is always free to let us play them without paying :D). If it turned out to be something much similiar to what we already had in CK2 then yes, I would complain.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
If you can raid across sea, you can also travel on major rivers, yes.

I don't think we've decided yet how moddable that will be. Republics and theocracies don't work well with the dynastic gameplay of CK3 though.

CK2 without modding and creativity of modder would be poor game, so CK3 should be very moddable, Paradox will also benefit
Theocracies are aside but Rapublic and patricians have potential
 
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:
Levies are taken from the vassals themselves, unlike CK2's magical troops.

I think they currently reduce the # of men available to the vassal, though I'm not 100% sure about that.

Thank you! That was one thing that irritated me in CK2.

In that sense, Clans are somewhat similar to how Feudal realms played in CK2. :p

I'd go as far as to say you renamed Feudal government from CK2 into Clan government and then made a brand new Feudal government. ;)
 
Thanks for the patience @blackninja9939 , I'll try giving an answer to the questions you posed (though other people will of course have differing opinions)

Is it the vassal contracts themselves being on character level instead of realm level?
This seems to me the good step forward made by feudal contracts. Having to negotiate with vassals themselves instead of generic realm laws is great for me. Though of course we will also need some realm-level laws, and aside of Crown Authority I haven't seen any about imprisonment, title revoking, religion, etc. I wonder if it's something you could share with us or you're not ready yet.
Is it not enough options in the contracts? What sort of options would you like to see?[
That's probably what I'm a bit bummed about, because at the end of the line you basically only have three types of vassals, according to their feudal contract status. I understand that adding many options to feudal contracts would require a lot of testing and balancing, so I wasn't going to ask specific religious, imprisonment, title laws for each singular vassal, but I hoped at least to have taxes and levies separated from one another. I'd definitely care a lot more about money than levies in specific counties of the map. It could also lead to interesting events, with vassals trying to convince you to give you less levies in exchange for more tax, and the opposite in, say, trade-focused counties or the ones controlled by a bishop. Still though, it is very good in my opinion that having higher feudal contracts than other realms can help you punch above your weight, that's definitely something we lacked in CK2, where large, decentralized realms would always prevail against smaller, more centralized ones.

Is it the different government types playing differently? Or not differently enough? What differences or similarities would you like to see?
I think that everyone likes the fact that different governments play differently, and that's probably the reason why so many people are concerned about the Byzantine Empire, that it will be identical to a feudal realm when they would have liked to see it play differently than other systems, as the different Feudal/Clan/Tribal government seem to do (at least to me). Personally, I'm absolutely OK with waiting for a Byzantine/Nomad rework after release to have them properly fleshed out, but I also understand the fact that many wanted at least Imperial government to be a day-one feature.

Just my thoughts on these things. :) I'd also like to add: good work with the raiding system!
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
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.
Does this mean there's hope to see the return of Primogeniture, Agnatic, Enatic, etc? Changing the names back to their proper terms doesn't seem like a big change, though I wouldn't know for sure since I'm not a programmer or game developer.

And tooltips explaining the terms for that sweet learning experience.
 
Is it the vassal contracts themselves being on character level instead of realm level?
IMO that's a huge improvement.

Is it not enough options in the contracts? What sort of options would you like to see?
Your system seems to be slider system from Conclave. Instead of that, I'd like contract drive different purposes, say there were the following contracts:
  • Appanage contract
    • vassal is relieved of all obligation (levies and tax)
  • Serjeanty contract
    • vassals contribute fixed amount of troops, in exchange, they are relieved of taxes
    • opinion -5
  • Socage contract
    • vassal pays a certain percentage of tax, in exchange, they don't have to contribute troops
    • opinion -10
  • Benefice contract
    • vassal contributes both troops and taxes
    • vassal can't declare wars, but can revolt
    • opinion -20
Serjeanty contract being the default, appanage contract being ideal for vassals, benefice contract ideal for liege, and socage contract being a compromise.
 
Does this mean there's hope to see the return of Primogeniture, Agnatic, Enatic, etc? Changing the names back to their proper terms doesn't seem like a big change, thoigh I wouldn't know for sure.

And tooltips explaining the terms for that sweet learning experience.
If CK3 functions as most Clausewitz games do, its a single line in a localization file, modding it is so simple and aesthetic only that it doesn't even change the checksum.
 
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


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.
I liked this dev diary and I find that most things have been upgraded since ck2.
That's why I don't understand why so many people express more their discontentment than their excitement.
Of course their are things that I wished would be different in the game (I hope for at least the same amount of counties density than in ck2 but the last diary showed Ireland with less counties than before) but overall I'm impatient to play this game and new mechanisms that look awesome. And if I post a reply I would at least underline as much what I liked than what I disliked. Being nice to people always help to communicate with them.
As one said : "If you don't like my game, make your own."

Thank to all the team for your work, I hope you will keep on listening to the players.
 
Will governments still be as moddable as in CK2? that with moddable contracts could be quite intresting