Ageing (with dignity?)

[unmerged(84239)]

Basically I want events to remind you that your charachter is getting old. So what do you think about this?

Some events would be cool, but honestly the examples are awful, almost always bad ones...

As a count, duke, a 60-70 year old should be better then a 30 y/o one. In general, except for like personal combat skill or bed acrobatics, a experienced guy is almost always a winner...



The problem with the idea is that bad things related to aging (like an aching back, or the inability to climb stairs) is NOT effecting martial/stewardsihp/diplo/intrigue/prestige/piety at all.
These would make sense in a game with a different scope, and these work very bad in a grand strategy.

 

[unmerged(99452)]

Some events would be cool, but honestly the examples are awful, almost always bad ones...

As a count, duke, a 60-70 year old should be better then a 30 y/o one. In general, except for like personal combat skill or bed acrobatics, a experienced guy is almost always a winner...



The problem with the idea is that bad things related to aging (like an aching back, or the inability to climb stairs) is NOT effecting martial/stewardsihp/diplo/intrigue/prestige/piety at all.
These would make sense in a game with a different scope, and these work very bad in a grand strategy.

So having dementia wouldnt affect your intelligence? The thing is, we see all these healthy 60-70 year olds all around us today, but this wasnt the case in the Middle Ages. If you survived into your 60s in the Middle Ages, you probably had all kinds of age related symptoms like toothache, muscle soreness impaired hearing and vision and so on. And dont tell me that you would reign perfectly as a King when you suffer from advanced Rheumatoid arthritis even if your mind is perfectly fine, when the slightest movment you make cause horrible pain and basically suck the life out of you. How well could this King reign if he had to stay in bed, day and night, constantly complaining about his pain? How easy do you think it would be to sign papers with a hand like this http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Rheumatoid_Arthritis.JPG ?

 

[TempestDK]

I just checked the danish line of kings in the era ...from Gorm the Old (died around 958) until the start of the Kalmar union in 1412 .. and only two kings managed to reach 60 years of age. Most died in their 30s or early 40s.

Interesting, and unrelated fact, the 5 kings following Svend Estridsen (King of Denmark in 1066) were all bastards of his

 

[Nick B II]

So having dementia wouldnt affect your intelligence? The thing is, we see all these healthy 60-70 year olds all around us today, but this wasnt the case in the Middle Ages. If you survived into your 60s in the Middle Ages, you probably had all kinds of age related symptoms like toothache, muscle soreness impaired hearing and vision and so on. And dont tell me that you would reign perfectly as a King when you suffer from advanced Rheumatoid arthritis even if your mind is perfectly fine, when the slightest movment you make cause horrible pain and basically suck the life out of you. How well could this King reign if he had to stay in bed, day and night, constantly complaining about his pain? How easy do you think it would be to sign papers with a hand like this http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Rheumatoid_Arthritis.JPG ?

For one thing your King isn't signing anything. He's not reading anything. He's illiterate unless you went an ahistorical route and made the kid with a church education your heir. The King may be sealing documents, but he's probably not doing that personally. He's got a Keeper of the Great Seal to do that crap.

What he's doing is talking. People tell him things, then he tells them what to do. As long as the King's mind is sound, and he can talk, he's just as good at the job at 60 as he was at 30. His Stewardship, Intrigue, and Diplomacy scores should be fine unless he's picked up some trait that specifically impacts them (ie: dementia). Martial is different beast because a big part of your martial score is your ability to fight personally.

As for candles and similar, I doubt we'll get them. A RL Midieval King wouldn't be able to tell which son was likely to drop dead of a heart condition at 35, why should a CK one?

Nick

 

[unmerged(99452)]

For one thing your King isn't signing anything. He's not reading anything. He's illiterate unless you went an ahistorical route and made the kid with a church education your heir. The King may be sealing documents, but he's probably not doing that personally. He's got a Keeper of the Great Seal to do that crap.

What he's doing is talking. People tell him things, then he tells them what to do. As long as the King's mind is sound, and he can talk, he's just as good at the job at 60 as he was at 30. His Stewardship, Intrigue, and Diplomacy scores should be fine unless he's picked up some trait that specifically impacts them (ie: dementia). Martial is different beast because a big part of your martial score is your ability to fight personally.

As for candles and similar, I doubt we'll get them. A RL Midieval King wouldn't be able to tell which son was likely to drop dead of a heart condition at 35, why should a CK one?

Nick

So if your King is constantly bedridden, in pain, and tired, do you really think that he could run the country in the same way as when he was young and healthy? We are not talking about being in bed due to some minor cold or something. Do you think he can communicate and issue orders with the same status as when he was younger?

 

[the_legion]

As for candles and similar, I doubt we'll get them. A RL Midieval King wouldn't be able to tell which son was likely to drop dead of a heart condition at 35, why should a CK one?

Heart attacks are "events" in CK-terms (you don't know them previously) and have nothing to do with the general health status. Those would be in anyway so you won't be able to say "I prefer son XY because he will survive the longest".

What he's doing is talking. People tell him things, then he tells them what to do.

... and the appointed guy fullfills the things the king said but with adding some things to his own favour.
Not beeing able to leave the bed is a thing that leads to a loss in power most times. Also some deseases where
seen as punisment by god (like lepra) and if you lost your right hand (for example in battle) this was considered
as fact that you cannot rule anymore even if you are mentally fit as before...

 

[unmerged(28803)]

Hygiene was pretty much the same. Nobles had a bit more

And fishermen. But seriously, I was only really trying to say that a perfectly healthy 70 year old wouldn't be ahistorical. That person would simply have lived in better circumstances than average.

Otherwise, interesting ideas!

 

[Trax-3]

Meh, the bad hygiene is more of a renaissance/early modern thing, not medieval.

 

[the_legion]

Meh, the bad hygiene is more of a renaissance/early modern thing, not medieval.

The romans some centuries before cared for such things, yes, but not the average medieval guy. And even the nobles not really.

But seriously, I was only really trying to say that a perfectly healthy 70 year old wouldn't be ahistorical. That person would simply have lived in better circumstances than average.

Barbarossa did a crusade with 68 years of age, so it was really possible but it was
very rare. But then he died by a stupid random event

 

[unmerged(84239)]

So having dementia wouldnt affect your intelligence? The thing is, we see all these healthy 60-70 year olds all around us today, but this wasnt the case in the Middle Ages. If you survived into your 60s in the Middle Ages, you probably had all kinds of age related symptoms like toothache, muscle soreness impaired hearing and vision and so on. And dont tell me that you would reign perfectly as a King when you suffer from advanced Rheumatoid arthritis even if your mind is perfectly fine, when the slightest movment you make cause horrible pain and basically suck the life out of you. How well could this King reign if he had to stay in bed, day and night, constantly complaining about his pain? How easy do you think it would be to sign papers with a hand like this http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Rheumatoid_Arthritis.JPG ?

How would a toothache influence your overview on international affairs (diplomacy skill)? Or were you more pious/prestigous or less wealthy because you lived with rheuma or lumbago?

The romans some centuries before cared for such things, yes, but not the average medieval guy. And even the nobles not really.

Since bathing also meant spiritual cleansing it was quite common.
If we consider thermal baths (Hungary) or steam bath (scandinavia) or simply part of the culture (Byzzie or Moor influence) it was quite common to have bath more then once a week.

 

[Trax-3]

And cities were full of bathhouses, only in later times times there was an active attempt to close them down as places of sin and disease.

The bad hygiene belongs to a long list of things that are common knowledge about the middle ages and like most of other common knowledge it bears little resemblance to reality.

 

[unmerged(226921)]

Well, medieval life expectancy was low for many reasons, not the least diet, hygiene and diseases. And varied, accordingly, in different stratas of life. Consider Enrico Dandalo, for instance. 90 yrs old, blind and still rocking during the fourth crusade.

The diet of the middle ages was in many ways superiour to our own, at least if we're talking about nobles and royals. I recall reading about a mass grave from a battle they found in England and almost all of the skulls had much better teeth then the Hollywood stereotypes would have you believe due to a lack of excessive sweet foods that their descendants (and us today) would munch on.

As for hygiene, just remember The Dung Ages are no more accurate than Ye Goode Olde Days, as hygiene in the period was actually superiour to the hygiene of say, Louis XIV's period. It's a shame that the middle ages get this label compared to a time that actually did have horrendously poor hygiene (The Renaissance and "Enlightenment").

While I agree aging would be wonderfully represented by these events, seeing a Lord age to 70 shouldn't be absurdly uncommon. You'll find quite a few examples of Nobles and Kings living well into their 70's .


The Great

 

[unmerged(99452)]

The diet of the middle ages was in many ways superiour to our own, at least if we're talking about nobles and royals. I recall reading about a mass grave from a battle they found in England and almost all of the skulls had much better teeth then the Hollywood stereotypes would have you believe due to a lack of excessive sweet foods that their descendants (and us today) would munch on.

As for hygiene, just remember The Dung Ages are no more accurate than Ye Goode Olde Days, as hygiene in the period was actually superiour to the hygiene of say, Louis XIV's period. It's a shame that the middle ages get this label compared to a time that actually did have horrendously poor hygiene (The Renaissance and "Enlightenment").

While I agree aging would be wonderfully represented by these events, seeing a Lord age to 70 shouldn't be absurdly uncommon. You'll find quite a few examples of Nobles and Kings living well into their 70's .


The Great

Well even though the foods did not contained excessive sugars, you would still get dental plaque from the lack of brushing your teeth. As for the hygenie, it may have been better than during The Renaissance but it was still not good, it would take until the discovery of bacterias and how they can infect you in the 19th century before the hygiene and medicine really improved.

 

[unmerged(226921)]

Well even though the foods did not contained excessive sugars, you would still get dental plaque from the lack of brushing your teeth. As for the hygenie, it may have been better than during The Renaissance but it was still not good, it would take until the discovery of bacterias and how they can infect you in the 19th century before the hygiene and medicine really improved.

Dental hygiene certainly has improved massively, of this there can be no doubt, but my point wasn't on tooth decay, but that the diet of their period wasn't bad by any means, being quite well rounded. Again, this is a class relative thing and I'm unsure of how poor or good a peasants diet would be, but I would assume if he had a good harvest it'd be reasonable and certainly enough.

As well, I wouldn't call anyone before the middle half of the 20th century squeaky clean, so I'm not trying to say they were on par with modern society, but the middle ages often is portrayed far worse than it really was as a reaction to the Victorians portraying it far better than it actually was.


The Great

 

[tretii_sleva]

What about the fact that in middle ages most kings died at old age of 35? Not a lot lived to say 73 to acquire all interesting perks and things proposed by OP.

 

[unmerged(226921)]

What about the fact that in middle ages most kings died at old age of 35? Not a lot lived to say 73 to acquire all interesting perks and things proposed by OP.

If by fact you mean absolute myth. Please study the period before making such remarks.


the Disappointed

 

[unmerged(243793)]

Once you're gone you can't come back <--- that should be changed! allow the shamanist tribes too resurrect their glorious leaders!

 

[vwclaymore]

Ways I can think of people to die in CKII:
-Sudden illness/health attack/hunting accident/battle/choking on dinner be it a heart attack, stroke, or appendicitis. Event happens suddenly with no warning. Most likely outcome death right away. Perhaps with something like a stroke or infected wound the leader gets an incapacitated trait for a couple weeks that lowers all his traits severly and potentially causes political intrigue events to occur depending on succession laws and possible heirs.
-illness or severe/mortal wound. lasts 1 week to 3 months. Event happens without warning. If it is a disease that is almost gaurenteed death, then political intrigue events are possible or event where king declares his chosen heir the next ruler and has him crowned before the king dies to limit succession crisis.
-chronic but not deadly malady such as blindness, RA, gout (very common then), leprousy, dementia, etc. that comes with limitations and may spawn certain events that cause the ruler to be bedridden and lose health and possibly other stats depending on illness.

Whatever happens there should be a wide array of lifespans from stillborn to 90 and a wide array of ways to die. I like the hidden health stat from CK and that should play a huge factor is how much health/illness events happen. I think there just needs to be more flavor and specifics to things than we had in CK. I don't want someone to just die of a random illness. Use medieval terms for different illnesses and just have "You are dying of the bloody flux, your chancellor is prompting you to have your eldest son crowned king before you pass on..."

 

[Nick B II]

So if your King is constantly bedridden, in pain, and tired, do you really think that he could run the country in the same way as when he was young and healthy? We are not talking about being in bed due to some minor cold or something. Do you think he can communicate and issue orders with the same status as when he was younger?

"Bedridden and in pain"? Sounds like a trait.

I'm not arguing old people shouldn't be vulnerable to bad health traits. I'm arguing an old person who has no disease traits is as good a ruler as a 30-year-old.

Nick

 

[unmerged(84239)]

it would take until the discovery of bacterias and how they can infect you in the 19th century before the hygiene and medicine really improved.

Well I am going off topic, but you should also take into account that today there are drugs, smog, pollution, crowed cities with lots of cars, genetically manipulated plants to make food from, smokes, etc.