.png){kind=avatar}
I don't know if anyone posted it yet, but here are the effects of every base stat in the game:
- 14
- 4
Character stat effects
- Thread starter SJ24
- Start date
-
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.
The effect of Learning seems a bit weak - when you have already a stable realm and aren't looking to change laws, having low learning doesn't seem to put you at any kind of disadvantage, unless there's significantly more need for piety than there was in CK2 and the Learning stat is the most significant source of it.
- 2
learning will also be used to make it easier to create your own custom faiths
Which is not actually useful most of the time, so you are not really refuting the argument. Like, even if you want to create a faith in one playthrough, you probably don't want to do so with every single character.
That said, if I am not mistaken piety (and prestige) is supposed to be more useful this time around. So I guess the passive piety gain will be useful enough, even if the other bonus are all fairly situational.
Well new faiths will be something that is built up to over a few rulers and can be used to give new bonuses to players, and to either restrict or ease restrictions on what the player and NPC's can get away with when ruling their nations.
Piety doesn't carry over between characters, though, and being unable to create a new faith is only a negative consequence when you specifically want to make a new faith - so whenever you are comfortable with your faith, what exactly is the consequence of a ruler having very low learning? Poor diplomacy makes it more difficult to manage your vassals (making you more vulnerable to malcontent vassals), poor martial makes your army weaker (making you more vulnerable to foreign forces and domestic factions), poor stewardship hurts your income and may force you to give out part of your demesne (making your centralized rule weaker), and poor intrigue makes you more vulnerable to hostile plots. All of these are distinct vulnerabilities that the state suffers because of a weak ruler - so how is a realm with a 0-learning king vulnerable compared to a realm with a 20-learning king?
- 1
The low learning king/queen will stunt the innovation rate of their culture, to the extent that it would be better off with nobody of that culture landed. This could slow that realm's progress towards cruicial MAA types, succession laws, etc. Heresy mechanics being what they are, it will be difficult to reach a peaceful solution with them, as you will have like no chance of converting them back, it will have to be an unjust war. Interestingly, keep in mind that only "Fundamentalist" religions can remove "Hostile" religions without tyranny, most Christian and Muslim realms look like they start as "Righteous" so you will only be able to remove "Evil" infidels. This means you get no legal right to remove most heretics or Muslims with Christian syncretism, so that conversion issue could leave you with angry vassals.
Still, just like CK2, it doesn't look like learning is a huge issue. However, the learning trees are quite nice for an established kingdom. Boosts to cultural progress, ignoring cultural opinion malus, buying claims with piety w/o going through the Pope, etc. Probably, learning will be interesting in that it's easier to stack it up for some cool bonuses rather than being a stat that you *must* keep high enough like stewardship or diplomacy.
- 4
- 1
Learning affects innovations only in regards to the cultural fascination, only for the cultural head. For any character that is not a cultural head, learning has no bearing on innovations.
It's not really great design for one stat to lack a distinct universal cost as a weak stat when every other stat has one - it makes them greatly unbalanced as choices. All landed characters face difficulties for weak diplomacy, martial, stewardship or intrigue, but for great many landed characters, there just is no consequence to weak learning.
- 1
Learning affects innovations only in regards to the cultural fascination, only for the cultural head. For any character that is not a cultural head, learning has no bearing on innovations.
It's not really great design for one stat to lack a distinct universal cost as a weak stat when every other stat has one - it makes them greatly unbalanced as choices. All landed characters face difficulties for weak diplomacy, martial, stewardship or intrigue, but for great many landed characters, there just is no consequence to weak learning.
I'm aware of how that works, cultural fascination is very important for progress, and I figured people have seen the DD. Edit: and to clarify, with the way culture is split up now, many, if not most, kings will be a cultural head.
And low intrigue isn't all that big of a deal if you have a good, loyal spymaster protecting you. Low martial? Who cares if your vassals are supplying most of your levies? Low Diplomacy? You're probably rolling with high intrigue, so ... people liking you isn't going to be a thing anyways as you kidnap, torture, and extort them. Low stewardship? Always annoying, but then again it's usually been best to have a "moderate" stewardship because other stats are more useful when very high.
Also, note that learning *gives* you piety that you can spend. Diplomacy *no longer* gives you prestige. So the lack of piety to spend on various things could be limiting. If you are playing a temporal religious head, you could wreak all sorts of havoc with your religion if your learning was low in CK2, I'll wager we will have something like this in CK3.
Finally, I think they are devaluing raw stats and shifting the balance towards the lifestyle system, where you get some pretty meaty bonuses. (note that all of these have much less impact than CK2, in fact, learning is *buffed* for piety gain 0.1 vs .02 here while martial is reduced that would be -25% in CK2 not -6%). This *is* good game design IMO, as it gives the player more options, and represents the experience rulers gain over their lifetimes.
Last edited:
- 2
- 1
And in the very examples you give, you mention ways to counteract those weaknesses, because they are significant weaknesses. You might argue that the martial example isn't, but having weaker martial than your vassals gives your vassals an edge in factions that you have to counter in some other way. Piety may potentially be significant enough, depending on the numbers in play (sources, uses), but as for cultural fascination, again, only relevant if the character in question is a cultural head - which most landed characters won't be. The stats are relevant for more than just players, they're also relevant for other landed characters (and some of them for unlanded characters, as well, but landed characters are the primary concern here) - what significance is there for a vassal duke having learning of 1 or 20?
As it is, I can only cautiously hope that a landed character with very poor learning will be hampered enough by weaker piety gain, on par to how another landed character might be hampered by weak martial score.
Yea, my apologies here, I should have emphasized this more, but the personal stats are not worth as much anymore anyways. I don't think these weaknesses are actually significant. This is likely due to state values no longer being a thing. Council members do *not* add to your stats any longer (with the exception of a few lifestyle perks).
Piety gain from learning is double that of CK2, while martial is greatly reduced in effectiveness (-6% should be -25%, in CK2, for example). So low values don't matter as much as they did before, although the game is still in development, so the numbers could change. And with the low intrigue, my point was you just need *someone* helping you with good intrigue, you don't really need it yourself.
Probably the most interesting to me is that martial doesn't seem to be such a big deal for smaller lords. To be honest, it's probably *better* to trade some 'innate' martial for a higher martial education, as such a character will more rapidly progress through the various bonuses in the martial lifestyle trees.
Low diplomacy is going to be a problem for everyone, it's still clearly the 'king' of stats, general opinion works for both provinces *and* characters! Thankfully the intrigue and overseer lifestyles offer some alternatives.
Even stewardship is still giving +1 domain limit and only -4% taxes, this would have been 0 domain limit and ... well if we assume a target of 10, as with martial, we would have -8% taxes in CK2.
All in all, my main point here is that all of the personal stats seem to be not as big of a deal when low, with only minor penalties, all easily overcome with an advisor or unlanded spouse, if it bothers you at all. Piety is probably situationally useful, although buying up claims like crazy as a learning lifestyle character could make the stat *quite* handy.
I think I have an idea to make low (read: poor) learning a potentially game-ending factor. I need some time to articulate, though.
As it stands per release, poor learning seems to just make it more problematic when you need all those piety-based actions, instead of being a looming threat in the background like having poor martial.
As it stands per release, poor learning seems to just make it more problematic when you need all those piety-based actions, instead of being a looming threat in the background like having poor martial.
Even if learning was a bit weak compared to other stats (which is something I disagree with - situational isn't the same thing as useless), is it really a problem?
In RPGs, there are always stats like that. Learning could be to CK what wisdom is to D&D. It's not useful for most checks, and even when you use it it's easy to circumvent a bad wisdom score, but sometimes it will help you tremendously.
And I believe that it's somewhat realistic. During the middle ages, rulers didn't really need to be very learned themselves, they had all kinds of people to do that for them. Still, it could be a neat advantage in some cases.
In a similar way, martial is useless if you never need to go to war, just like strength is useless in a D&D diplomacy-focused scenario.
CK isn't a linear map painting game. It's all about situations. Learning will come into use in several ways, which include managing your faith, but also events and relationships with the clergy. And probably other stuff too. IMO that's the great success of CK: how everything interacts with everything.
In RPGs, there are always stats like that. Learning could be to CK what wisdom is to D&D. It's not useful for most checks, and even when you use it it's easy to circumvent a bad wisdom score, but sometimes it will help you tremendously.
And I believe that it's somewhat realistic. During the middle ages, rulers didn't really need to be very learned themselves, they had all kinds of people to do that for them. Still, it could be a neat advantage in some cases.
In a similar way, martial is useless if you never need to go to war, just like strength is useless in a D&D diplomacy-focused scenario.
CK isn't a linear map painting game. It's all about situations. Learning will come into use in several ways, which include managing your faith, but also events and relationships with the clergy. And probably other stuff too. IMO that's the great success of CK: how everything interacts with everything.
- 3
Eventually (or hopefully )they will realise that the cultural head system is a bit flawed and replace it with a system where all rulers of a culture can decide, weighted by their dev. Then learning might be a little bit more important for every one who wants technology to advance.
Apart from that, I like the idea from AGOT, where learning doubled as some kind of meta stat for education. So, for example your learning you aquired during your early years might affect the quality of your education trait a little bit. Then, while learning itself has no direct benefit you want your children to have high learning in order to be more likely to get the level 5 education.
)they will realise that the cultural head system is a bit flawed and replace it with a system where all rulers of a culture can decide, weighted by their dev. Then learning might be a little bit more important for every one who wants technology to advance.Apart from that, I like the idea from AGOT, where learning doubled as some kind of meta stat for education. So, for example your learning you aquired during your early years might affect the quality of your education trait a little bit. Then, while learning itself has no direct benefit you want your children to have high learning in order to be more likely to get the level 5 education.
- 1
Low Wisdom in DnD gives you a bad WIS (or Will, in older editions) save, which is a major weakness that can be exploited. But DnD aside.
I never said Learning is useless - that wasn't the point. The point was that it's safe to have low learning, as opposed to the other stats. You say low martial is useless if you never need to go to war, but war can come to you, and if you have a weak army, it's more likely that you will be acted against in war - this includes faction wars. And having vulnerabilities to be covered makes for more interesting gameplay - I don't know where you get off talking about linear map painting game, when I've been strictly talking about characters.