• 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 #22 - A Medieval Tapestry

Hello everyone! Today Virvatuli and I are bringing you a Development Diary about how we’re catering to different player fantasies in CK3. We will also showcase some of the content and gameplay you’ll encounter!

We are huge believers in allowing players as much freedom as possible to shape the game world in their image, which is reflected in the Paradox slogan “We make the games, you create the stories.” Of course, when trying to model history reasonably accurately as we do in CK3, your starting environment might be a far cry from the just and equal Realm you wish to rule, but determined players should be able to change the mores of their society over time - if that is their fantasy.

As you might suspect, the CK3 team consists of some very nerdy, passionate and compassionate people. Some of the things we’re outlining in this Dev Diary were part of the regular development process, and some have been passion projects. It has been very important for us to represent our players, the team behind the game, and the people who don’t feature heavily in most history books and media. We want everyone to feel welcome and to empower you to play your fantasy.

CK3 truly is a diverse game; it spans a map of nearly half the world and almost six centuries of history. This world is inhabited by a myriad of titles, cultures, faiths, and characters. It’s been our goal to represent all of these things with a great level of detail and accuracy to give you all a deeply immersive experience with more dynamic elements and player choice than ever before. Will you recreate history, build a brand new world, or something in between? It is all in your hands.

But we haven’t just added more diversity; that variety is also much more readily available than it was in CK2. For example, all Faiths and Cultures on the map are playable on release, and the dynamic Faith system will give you much greater power to change the world. We’ve also added many different Game Rules which allow you to tailor your CK3 experience. If you would rather play as a Queen than a King from day one, the Game Rules let you do that, without having to create a custom Faith during your campaign. There are other challenges out there to conquer and stories to explore!

We are incredibly proud of all the stuff we’ve made for you, so without any further ado, let’s jump into the juicy, juicy details!


Gender Options

All gender-related restrictions in CK3 are controlled by the Faiths, either directly or indirectly. As we have an awesome dynamic Faith system, all such restrictions can be changed during a playthrough. Our design philosophy for Faith Tenets related to gender has been to have the exact same options available for men and women. For example, the “View on Gender” Tenet has the settings “Male Dominated”, “Equal” and “Female Dominated”. All the restrictions for women in Male Dominated Faiths are applied to men instead in Female Dominated Faiths.

genderviewtenet.png


Even when men historically held the highest titles and womens’ rights were limited, women still had a vital impact on the world around them. In many parts of the medieval world, it was not uncommon for women to rule in their husbands’ absence, they were often advisors and took care of estates. We have chosen to represent this with the Spouse Council Position. Your Spouse’s skills have a direct impact on your realm and you will see events about your Spouse handling all sorts of duties, from negotiating with factions to raising additional troops.

the_guard_1.png


Like in CK2, we have a Gender Equality Game Rule, but with some improvements and added variation. The “Equal” setting (corresponding to “All” in CK2) covers more areas and has fewer exceptions than it did in CK2, largely thanks to our dynamic Faith system and the design philosophy mentioned above. It also comes with an “Inverted” setting where the historical gender statuses are turned on their head and women become the dominant gender in most religions.

Diversity_female_rules.png


Women are also more visually present in Crusader Kings than ever before. We have some awesome loading screens with a diverse bunch of characters, for example, but the biggest impact comes from the new event window. In CK2 we had lovely event illustrations, but the drawback was the lack of variation when it came to characters. In CK3 we use our gorgeous character models to bring the events to life, which will showcase the rich diversity of the cast of your playthrough in the event windows.

far_from_home_1.png



Sexuality

Sexuality provides added spice to character behavior and motivations, both in real life and in CK3, and it will also affect what is considered sinful or even criminal in a Faith in the game. It’s great for drama and intrigue, and in CK3 we’ve given sexualities more granularity. In addition to heterosexuality and homosexuality from CK2, characters can also be bisexual and asexual. Sexuality is no longer defined by a trait, but has its own system, which makes it easier to handle for us and more visible in the interface for you. It also means that we do not frame heterosexuality as the default in CK3, which was also important for us.

Children develop their sexualities around the age of 10 and once set, it will not change. It’s worth noting that we don’t model sexual and romantic attraction separately in the game, so a character’s sexuality sets both their sexual and romantic preferences.

budding_attraction.png


We do however differentiate between sexual preference and sexual behavior in-game. A character’s sexuality in and of itself can never be criminal, but certain sexual acts can be. For example, if a Faith’s “View on Same-Sex Relations” is not set to “Accepted”, two men who have sex will get the “Sodomite” Secret (no matter their sexuality). While the AI doesn’t pursue romance or sex with someone they’re not attracted to, the player can sometimes choose to act against their sexual preference (albeit with a penalty, and it can never lead to a lover relationship). This means a player’s heterosexual male character could get the “Sodomite” Secret if they seduce a homosexual or bisexual man.

We have two Game Rules related to sexuality: “View on Same-Sex Relations” and “Sexuality Distribution”. The former is very similar to the “View on Gender” rule I mentioned above; it can change all Faith’s “View on Same-Sex Relations” from their historical defaults to “Accepted”. The latter can change how common each sexuality is. The settings are “Default” which means Heterosexuality is the most common sexuality, “Equal” which makes all four sexualities equally common, and one setting each for Homosexuality, Bisexuality, and Asexuality which makes them the most common sexuality instead of Heterosexuality.

accepted_same_sex_relationships.png



Faiths

As the dev diaries of the last couple of weeks have shown we have given Faiths a lot of attention, and as you might already know, all Faiths will be unlocked at game start. The dynamic Faith system has allowed us to add plenty of variation at release; we hope you’ll find that each Faith has its own flavor and quirks.

Even better, we now have more distinctions between different non-Christian Faiths, especially in Africa and India! African Paganism from CK2 has been replaced with at least six new Faiths; Roog, Bori, Siguism, Akom, Waaqism, and Kushitism, all with their own Tenets and flavor. For example, the Bori have a long history of matriarchs and worship the spirits. As they believe in spirit possession and that spirits can be either feminine or masculine, they are accepting of same-sex relations. The Siguics, on the other hand, worship their ancestors and believe that twins are blessed.

religion.png


Hinduism has been split into seven different Faiths. In addition to expanding upon and fleshing out the four main traditions of Hinduism (Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaktism and Smartism), CK3 also sees the addition of less well-known Hindu traditions such as Krishnaism and Advaitism. Buddhism has five Faiths, Jainism three, and many Religions across the map have received similar diversification. We have also added a Dualism Religion with seven different Faiths, for example Manicheanism, Mandeanism, and Sabianism.

india.png


And as you can create your own Faiths, you will be able to create the kind of society you want to play in. As I have mentioned, some things can be preset through Game Rules, but the challenge of changing the world to your liking can be a really satisfying experience.

For example, we have the Game Rules “Faith Acceptance” which makes religious wars and disagreements a thing of the past, and “Randomized Faiths” which gives everyone in the world a random Faith. For those of you who are sensitive to border gore, please proceed with caution as the following screenshot contains graphic imagery. For the rest, how many Faiths can you spot in the screenshot?

how_many_faiths.png



Ethnicities and Cultures

We have expanded the amount of portrait asset sets from the two in the CK2 base game to a grand total of seven in CK3! On release, there will be a visual distinction between Western Europe, Northern Pagans, the Middle East/North Africa, Byzantium, the Steppe, Sub-Saharan Africa, and India. We will also have an even greater number of ethnicities, so you will see variations within these seven groups.

Thanks to the new portrait system, ethnicities now blend seamlessly. When two characters of different ethnicities have a child, the children will look a bit like both parents. More on this in a later Development Diary!


The End

That’s all for this week, friends! Unfortunately, Virvatuli will not be around to answer your questions this time, as she has set out on a new adventure after four years at Paradox. But the rest of the team will be around, of course, so ask away!

Take care of yourselves and each other <3
 
  • 12Love
  • 9Like
  • 5
  • 3
  • 2
Reactions:
How will the different Hindu and Buddist faiths be treated? Will they be something like heresies, the divide between Catholicism/Orthodoxy, the branches of Hinduism in CK2, or something else entirely?

The historical ones will presumably be historically close (at least at the start; if e.g. Theravada rulers start oppressing Mahayana rulers/provinces during the game perhaps they'll become less friendly as time passes), so I'd imagine non-Zealous rulers wouldn't get particularly noticeable penalties.
 
(at least at the start; if e.g. Theravada rulers start oppressing Mahayana rulers/provinces during the game perhaps they'll become less friendly as time passes), so I'd imagine non-Zealous rulers wouldn't get particularly noticeable penalties.

This is something I wish they'd be able to implement, but I think it'd be too hard to code.

Historically, there were ~18 schools of Buddhism that coexisted in the early start dates, and these schools likely had "Mahayana" and "Hinayana" elements within them, as well as other diversity like monastic communities that practiced marriage and "wrong livelihood" like astrology and "witchcraft". While the more extreme local variations may have been treated differently, it is generally said that the 18 schools and their different aspirants coexisted in peaceful acceptance, even performing certain practices together that are analogous to being "in communion". It was through geographical splintering and secular leaders instituting reforms that we ended up with more discretely separated Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana. In Sri Lanka, there were many, many back-and-forth examples throughout the era of the game, but the most prominent was King Parakkamabāhu I (1153-1186 CE), who, in game terms, basically revoked the holdings of all the "Mahayana" Buddhists because he was especially zealous. Outside of the context of the game, in China, it is my understanding that a lot of the reason why "Hinayana" and other schools (technically all "Mahayana" monks are Dharmaguptaka) wasn't because they were being oppressed by a zealous leader who wanted them to die out, but rather because they were living under an oppressive bureaucracy that just didn't care about their survival (imagine if every time you went to confession, you had to go to the DMV first).

What might be doable is an "intolerance of X" trait, like the opposite of "Sympathy for X" traits, that allows for characters who have it to take more serious action against religions that overall have good relations. But a system of gradually deepening schisms is probably too big of an ask.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I hope that the default setting will try to mimic real life distribution of sexuality as close as possible and not try to inflate non-hetero sexuality to make things more interesting. Encountering a 'sodomite' and using that information to your benefit should feel an interesting unique experience that might not present itself all too often. I do like these changes very much though, I just hope for it not to interfere with the historical immersion of the setting by applying modern concepts and standards.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I hope that the default setting will try to mimic real life distribution of sexuality as close as possible and not try to inflate non-hetero sexuality to make things more interesting. Encountering a 'sodomite' and using that information to your benefit should feel an interesting unique experience that might not present itself all too often. I do like these changes very much though, I just hope for it not to interfere with the historical immersion of the setting by applying modern concepts and standards.
Do bear in mind that whether a character is a known criminal/sinner in this way will depend on their willingness to transgress the norms of their society and culture, their success in finding a partner, and their carelessness in getting found out, rather than just the underlying frequency of their orientation.

nd
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Do bear in mind that whether a character is a known criminal/sinner in this way will depend on their willingness to transgress the norms of their society and culture, their success in finding a partner, and their carelessness in getting found out, rather than just the underlying frequency of their orientation.

nd
Of course the 'sodomite' situation was just an example I thought of. Point being that the best way for the whole system to feel natural in my opinion is sticking with the realistic proportions by default or at least have it covered among game rules. I really dislike the idea of making the game deliberately more unrealistic just to 'spice things up' or even for political reasons like some people have suggested.
 
Last edited:
Of course the 'sodomite' situation was just an example I thought of. Point being that the best way for the whole system to feel natural in my opinion is sticking with the realistic proportions by default or at least have it covered among game rules. I really dislike the idea of making the game deliberately more unrealistic just to 'spice things up' or even for political reasons like some people suggested.
I'm not sure what you think realistic proportions are, or who you think is pushing a political agenda. I thought I had been agreeing with you, but it feels like we're saying quite different things now.

nd
 
Do we not have Indian Nestorians anymore?
 
I'm not sure what you think realistic proportions are, or who you think is pushing a political agenda. I thought I had been agreeing with you, but it feels like we're saying quite different things now.

nd
By realistic proportions I mean realistic proportions like they are in reality, whatever is most accurate. I am partially reacting to someone writing, that the realistic proportions of non-heterosexuals would be too low, so the game should have them multiplied or else it would just be tokenism (that was what I meant by being political about it). I must say I really love the idea of portraying how people of different sexualities didn't have it easy in the Middle Ages and I look forward getting to play as a character undergoing such a struggle. I just hope to have an option to keep it at a realistic level in order to have an immersive experience.

EDIT: For example wikipedia says about 97,5% of people are heterosexual, I do realize wikipedia has to be taken with a grain of salt, it might be less, it could possibly be even more, not that important now though. What I am trying to say is that I think the best way to handle this in my opinion would be to look at a study about the proportions and say: 'Well, according to this study the percentage of heterosexuals is 97,5% (in my example at least), so let's make the probability of heterosexuality in game also 97,5% (or whatever else the most accurate data suggests) or at least have a 'realistic' (or something) game rule which makes it like that." And not go about it in a way like: 'Well, the data suggests this, but we're going to amplify non-heterosexuals by 2 or 3 to make things more interesting.' (However, it could very well be a nice option to have as a game rule though)
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
I am partially reacting to someone writing, that the realistic proportions of non-heterosexuals would be too low, so the game should have them multiplied or else it would just be tokenism (that was what I meant by being political about it).
I don't think anyone has ever claimed anything like this, but I could have overlooked it. Could you please help me find such request?
 
I don't think anyone has ever claimed anything like this, but I could have overlooked it. Could you please help me find such request?
If we take the heterosexual ratio as the example default I would say non-hetero sexualities will likely make fifteen to twenty percent at a guess. That feels like the kind of range where it seems rare but you can still come across it, even if most characters don't act on their sexuality.

I'd say the real life range of 1.5% - 4% would be too small to be impactful for gameplay purposes, and I would guess that that would feel too much like tokenism as a opposed to a meaningful mechanical choice,

You can find it on page nine.
EDIT: It wasn't perhaps meant to advocate multiplying it necersarilly for political reasons, so I might not have been 100% correct, my bad. However the idea is still there. (I mean no offense to the sir or lady saying that of course)
 
Last edited:
You can find it on page nine.
EDIT: It wasn't perhaps meant to advocate multiplying it necersarilly for political reasons, so I might not have been 100% correct, my bad. However the idea is still there. (I mean no offense to the sir or lady saying that of course)
The thing is, that's at the low end of estimates for the real proportion anyway. (I was arguing for 85% straight, 5% each gay, bi, and ace, as the default setting since that's easy to adjudicate and close to a generous but not ridiculous real-life estimate.)

nd
 
You can find it on page nine.
EDIT: It wasn't perhaps meant to advocate multiplying it necersarilly for political reasons, so I might not have been 100% correct, my bad. However the idea is still there. (I mean no offense to the sir or lady saying that of course)
I'm sorry, could you quote which post you mean, or at least mention who has posted it? We probably have different page settings and I can't see anything you claim to be on the page 9
 
I'm sorry, could you quote which post you mean, or at least mention who has posted it? We probably have different page settings and I can't see anything you claim to be on the page 9
I did quote it in the reply where I mentioned the page, it is above the text I wrote :)
I can't seem to find out how to quote it now, strange, please forgive my inexperience with the forums.

EDIT: You will have to find the exact quotation in my previous message, my internet did something funny which didn't allow me to put the quotation in here, the content was, however, this:
If we take the heterosexual ratio as the example default I would say non-hetero sexualities will likely make fifteen to twenty percent at a guess. That feels like the kind of range where it seems rare but you can still come across it, even if most characters don't act on their sexuality.

I'd say the real life range of 1.5% - 4% would be too small to be impactful for gameplay purposes, and I would guess that that would feel too much like tokenism as a opposed to a meaningful mechanical choice,
-HighChanceOfRai
 
Last edited:
The thing is, that's at the low end of estimates for the real proportion anyway. (I was arguing for 85% straight, 5% each gay, bi, and ace, as the default setting since that's easy to adjudicate and close to a generous but not ridiculous real-life estimate.)

nd
I just hope they'll make their decisions with a primary interest in realism. Or perhaps make a more conservative estimate game rule and a more generous estimate game rule, so that the player can experience the game in the way he or she wants.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I just hope they'll make their decisions with a primary interest in realism. Or perhaps make a more conservative estimate game rule and a more generous estimate game rule, so that the player can experience the game in the way he or she wants.
You're carefully avoiding saying what you regard as realistic.

nd

ETA: Ah, I see you've edited it in further back.

You and I fundamentally disagree about this, not least because, when presented with a relatively low estimate for the number of LGBT people, you regard it as much more plausible that the real figure is even lower, rather than higher.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
You're carefully avoiding saying what you regard as realistic.

nd

ETA: Ah, I see you've edited it in further back.

You and I fundamentally disagree about this, not least because, when presented with a relatively low estimate for the number of LGBT people, you regard it as much more plausible that the real figure is even lower, rather than higher.

I avoid saying what I consider realistic, because I don’t know what exactly is realistic, You’ve said the numbers listed on Wikipedia are a lower estimate, so in that case I would personally favour it to follow an estimate more in the middle, not an extreme on either end of the spectre.
And I mean no disrespect, but had You read my edit more carefully, You would have seen that I used those numbers only in an example explaining how I want them to stick to the real numbers, whatever they might be. I am not saying they should use those numbers, I even aknowledged they come from Wikipedia and as such must be taken with a grain of salt.
 
I do hope we see the Romansh/Friuli/Ladins, aka Raetians, as a distinct group in CK3!

I agree. I also want to see the Sorbians/Sorbs of the Central European Lusatia region represented. They are from in-between Germany and Poland, and their ethonym indeed points to a distant relationship with the Serbian people, who migrated to the Balkans.

Vepsian and Ingrian cultures would be welcome additions to fill out the pre-Slavic holdings of Ingermanland and Vepsia, in-between the Estonians and the Finnish tribes, and culturally filling out the land before the game has Norse or Slavic characters taking their place, representing the Rus.

The Ket culture, of the Yeniseian culture group, should be along the eastern central Siberian lands, east of where the Khanty culture dwells, and north of the Mongolians, Uyghurs, and other Turko-Mongolic peoples. They are a very unique culture group that is proposed to have once served as the ruling elite of the ancient Xiongnu Empire, and genetically, said to even have distant yet traceable connections to Native Americans, with some historians believing that they represent a backwards migration to Siberia from across the Bering Sea bridge that once existed to unite Asia and North America, or paradoxically, next to the Chukchi tribes, the Yeniseians were simply the next in line to be the latest, most closely-related groups of people to the Native Americans left in Asia, with other ethnic groups representing even further distanced genetic and linguistic relationships.

Paradox were nice to add in the Meshchera culture in CKII, which I appreciate. More Finnic and Ugric cultures, as well as Paleo-Siberian cultures would be welcome, to add more variety to those lands in Russia and Siberia, as well as reasonable non-Russian names for these lands if held by Uralic characters, or possibly with something extrapolated from the Yeniseian language, further east.

Do we not have Indian Nestorians anymore?

I hope they are represented, in some fashion. It is difficult to come up with any more historical ruler characters than Crusader Kings II had, I am sure. If they were not the province majority religion, then at least, I hope that there is a holding that is held by Saint Thomas Christians, as the Indian Christians were historically named, due to the possibility of the Apostle Thomas' arrival, himself. I am also hoping that Central Asia and Mongolia, as well as the Middle East, will have have representations of the Nestorians/Church of the East through as many characters as could be made possible to reasonably have them appear, without just seeing the culture or religion of a province, and no character in actuality to be seen, other than a Patriarch. These more eastern Christians are interesting, also because they are outside of the usual Roman Catholic or Greek Orthodox frameworks and dynamics.
 
Do we not have Indian Nestorians anymore?
Comparing it to the CKII 867 start map, there appears to one small area of Nestorianism (literally one county) in India on the CKII map, under the control of a Hindu Tamil ruler.

Elsewhere I can find a Ugyhur duke, a Bedouin duke in Socotra, a Khan up on the steppes, a couple of mayors, a bishop, and the Patriarch of the East.