The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.
This thread is more than 5 months old.
It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose. If you feel it is necessary to make a new reply, you can still do so though.
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?
(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.
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.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.
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.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
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.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.
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.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
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 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?
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,
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.)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 9You 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 did quote it in the reply where I mentioned the page, it is above the text I wroteI'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
-HighChanceOfRaiIf 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,
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.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're carefully avoiding saying what you regard as realistic.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.
I do hope we see the Romansh/Friuli/Ladins, aka Raetians, as a distinct group in CK3!
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.Do we not have Indian Nestorians anymore?