CK3: The Royal Court - The Vision

  • 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.
Cultures may have Cultural Centers as Faiths have holy places. Cultural Center could be the most developed province of the culture (modified perhaps by cultural and historical buildings, runestones etc.). Owning a Cultural Center may give the same-culture owner Prestige, and if the Culture Center of the culture is owned by a non same culture ruler than it may make every same culture independent ruler to lose Prestige. Owning the Cultural Center may be necessary to change your culture's exisiting character.
The holy places mechanics is criticized enough, especially dependence of reformation/head creation on holy places. Doing the same for cultures is not a good idea.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Cultures may have Cultural Centers as Faiths have holy places. Cultural Center could be the most developed province of the culture (modified perhaps by cultural and historical buildings, runestones etc.). Owning a Cultural Center may give the same-culture owner Prestige, and if the Culture Center of the culture is owned by a non same culture ruler than it may make every same culture independent ruler to lose Prestige. Owning the Cultural Center may be necessary to change your culture's exisiting character.
It’s bad enough that we need holy sites for religion at all, and culture and religion despite having similarities don’t have the same importance to people back in the day. Religion was significantly way more important to people.
 
Has it been confirmed they can't? I thought the Pope title was King-tier, and so would have a court?

Though, I guess they might exclude the Pope from this and have a different set of "Religious Head" mechanics further down the line?
I'm guessing that they'll wait for a theocracy-focused expansion in order to tackle religious courts since the latter should be quite distinct both in looks and functions from their noble counterparts.
 
I'm guessing that they'll wait for a theocracy-focused expansion in order to tackle religious courts since the latter should be quite distinct both in looks and functions from their noble counterparts.
I don’t think theocracies will ever get an expansion, since many religions don’t have dynastic inheritance for clergy.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Cultures may have Cultural Centers as Faiths have holy places. Cultural Center could be the most developed province of the culture (modified perhaps by cultural and historical buildings, runestones etc.). Owning a Cultural Center may give the same-culture owner Prestige, and if the Culture Center of the culture is owned by a non same culture ruler than it may make every same culture independent ruler to lose Prestige. Owning the Cultural Center may be necessary to change your culture's exisiting character.
The most developed province is not necessarily a fount of culture. Just giving prestige also seems to be a very poor game mechanic for having that cultural center.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I don’t think theocracies will ever get an expansion, since many religions don’t have dynastic inheritance for clergy.
Eh, there's enough content for a religious-themed expansion (e.g. synods, common heads for several faiths, a rework of how heresies function, religious responsibilities for temporal rulers and interactions between feudal lords and their clerical counterparts).
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Hopefully the population is hidden behind the mechanics of dynamic cultures. Please, please, let it be the population. After all, if cultures do not give any bonuses, then why should they? So that the player can make an Indo-Icelander?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Has it been confirmed they can't? I thought the Pope title was King-tier, and so would have a court?

Though, I guess they might exclude the Pope from this and have a different set of "Religious Head" mechanics further down the line?
Courts are limited to Feudal and Clan governments and the Pope isn't either of those.
 
  • 5
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I don’t think theocracies will ever get an expansion, since many religions don’t have dynastic inheritance for clergy.

This argument was never convincing. Republics or even feudal elective titles also don't have dynastic inheritance, and you could still play them just fine in CK2. I think theocracies should eventually be playable.
 
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
This argument was never convincing. Republics or even feudal elective titles also don't have dynastic inheritance, and you could still play them just fine in CK2. I think theocracies should eventually be playable.
Based on the CK3 vision I doubt we'll ever get playable republics. I'm almost certain we won't get playable theocracies.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Really? What makes you think that? I've assumed they're 100% guaranteed to happen - with the only question being when.
IIRC they stated that they wanted greater focus on dynastic gameplay, and that theocracies are not coming. In terms of merchant republics they said they were interested in them as a concept, but didn't like the way they were implemented in CK2, so they'd have to redevelop them from the ground up.

Unfortunately I don't remember exactly where I read these things, so I may just be hallucinating.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
In terms of merchant republics they said they were interested in them as a concept, but didn't like the way they were implemented in CK2, so they'd have to redevelop them from the ground up.
Yeah, I read this as well - but took it as "definitely coming after a rework, but not there at launch"
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Yeah, I read this as well - but took it as "definitely coming after a rework, but not there at launch"
Hehehe, I guess beauty is not the only thing that's in the eye of the beholder. :)
 
  • 3Haha
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Honestly, on the topic of merchant republics and theocracies, I wouldn't mind if they developed them as non-playable governments, with focus on the interactions between them and feudal/clan/tribal rulers. They could still have in-depth on-map presence and mechanics, without a player sitting at the helm. Ideally, all government types should be interesting even when you aren't playing as them.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions:
Honestly, on the topic of merchant republics and theocracies, I wouldn't mind if they developed them as non-playable governments, with focus on the interactions between them and feudal/clan/tribal rulers. They could still have in-depth on-map presence and mechanics, without a player sitting at the helm. Ideally, all government types should be interesting even when you aren't playing as them.
This is a really good point. I don't necessarily need to play as a theocracy, but it'd be nice if they didn't feel like a bregrudgingly retained fossils from CK2's history files. Right now you can't even re-create a bishopric if one is lost, and it doesn't feel like there's any particular gameplay reason they exist. Hopefully a future patch/expansion will make it interesting to engage to with them, and makes it feel like there are different reasons to have secular and theocratic vassals.
 
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions: