• 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.
It's time for another cycle of developer diaries on Crusader Kings II and I thought I'd begin by talking about the new start date and giving you a broad overview of the upcoming expansion; The Old Gods. Yes, we're pushing back the earliest possible start date to 867 AD. This is a special bookmark that comes with the expansion (and you will not be able to start at dates between 867 and 1066 without modding.)

Europe is a very different place in 867... Many of the familiar countries have not yet come into being. There is no Hungary, no Poland, no Russian principalities and the British Isles and Scandinavia are full of petty kingdoms. The Carolingians still rule the Franks, but the great Empire of Charlemagne has been divided between four of his descendants. In the Byzantine Empire, a new dynasty has just risen - the House of Makedon - destined to restore some of its former glory. The Muslims are in the middle of a drawn-out crisis as the once enormous Abbasid Caliphate has fractured, with a succession of Caliphs being murdered by their own Turkish generals.

CKII_ToG_DD_01_Europe_867.png

Most importantly, however, the North and East are completely dominated by bustling tribes of unrepentant heathens who remain less than impressed with the White Christ. Why debase yourself before a dead man on a cross when you can loot the riches of his fat clergy instead? Just as the fury of the Northmen descends on the undefended shores of Europe, other, equally pagan threats are on the rise in the steppes of Tartaria. Like the Avars before them, the feared Magyar horse lords are pushing into Europe from beyond the Carpathians. Why is all this more important than the affairs of Christians and Muslims? Because with The Old Gods, all these heathens are finally playable! (But you probably knew that already. :D )

CKII_ToG_DD_01_Magyar_Invasion.png

Playing a pagan chieftain is at least as different as playing a Muslim. Not only that, there are significant differences between the various heathen religions. Some are aggressive in nature, like the Norse and Tengri beliefs, and some are more defensive, like the Finno-Ugric faith. For example, the warlike Norse will suffer a prestige loss for being at peace for too long, and will need to wage war or set sail to pillage and loot. The Finns don't have this problem, but on the other hand, their vassals will dislike having their troops raised (like Christians). Some faiths get defensive bonuses and larger garrisons in their homelands, some don't, etc. However, they can all potentially be reformed to withstand the allure of the new religions.

CKII_ToG_DD_01_The_Great_Heathen_Army.png

In the coming weeks, I will explain the different religions in detail. I will, of course, also talk about other new features, like traversible rivers, new cultures, Zoroastrians, Adventurers, and much more. Stay tuned, and here are some more screenshots to tease and titillate!

CKII_ToG_DD_01_Loot_and_Pillage.pngCKII_ToG_DD_01_Varangians.pngCKII_ToG_DD_01_The_Last_Zoroastrians.png



[video=youtube;V-edUnWQgyM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-edUnWQgyM[/video]

Web page: http://www.crusaderkings.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/Crusaderkings
Twitter: http://twitter.com/Crusaderkings
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok here is a biblography on the subject. Still looking for better examples.

Bibliography

Historical texts

Bede (circa 731). Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum (Ecclesiastical History of the English People).

Books

Ackerman, John Yonge (1855). Remains of Pagan Saxondom. London: John Russel Smith.
Atkinson, John C. (1891). Forty Years in a Moorland Parish.
Branston, Brian (1957). The Lost Gods of England. London: Thames and Hudson.
Chaney, William A. (1970). The Cult of Kinship in Anglo-Saxon England: The Transition from Paganism to Christianity. California: University of California Press.
Ewing, Thor (2008). Gods and Worshippers in the Viking and Germanic World. Tempus. ISBN 0-7524-3590-6.
Griffiths, Bill (1996). Aspects of Anglo-Saxon Magic. Anglo-Saxon Books. ISBN 1-898281-33-5.
Herbert, Kathy (1994). Looking for the Lost Gods of England. Anglo-Saxon Books. ISBN 1-898281-04-1.
Hutton, Ronald (1991). The Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles: Their Nature and Legacy. Oxford: Blackwell. ISBN 0-631-18946-7.
Hutton, Ronald (1996). The Stations of the Sun: A History of the Ritual Year in Britain. New York: Oxford University Press.
Jones, Prudence and Pennick, Nigel (1995). A History of Pagan Europe. London and New York: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-09136-5.
Macleod, Mindy. Mees, Bernard (2006). Runic Amulets and Magic Objects. Boydell Press. ISBN 1-84383-205-4.
Pollington, Stephen (2011). The Elder Gods: The Otherworld of Early England. Little Downham, Cambs.: Anglo-Saxon Books. ISBN 978-1-898281-64-1.
Kemble, John (1849). The Saxons in England Vol. I. London.
Wilson, David (1992). Anglo-Saxon Paganism. London and New York: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-01897-8.

Academic Articles

Carver, Martin (2010). "Agency, Intellect and the Archaeological Agenda". Signals of Belief in Early England: Anglo-Saxon Paganism Revisited (Eds:Carver, Martin; Sanmark, Alex and Semple, Sarah), Oxford and Oakville: Oxbow Books, pp. 01-20. ISBN 978-1-84217-395-4.
Carver, Martin; Sanmark, Alex and Semple, Sarah (2010). "Preface". Signals of Belief in Early England: Anglo-Saxon Paganism Revisited (Eds:Carver, Martin; Sanmark, Alex and Semple, Sarah), Oxford and Oakville: Oxbow Books, pp. ix-x. ISBN 978-1-84217-395-4.
Crawford, Sally (2004). "Votive Deposition, Religion and the Anglo-Saxon Furnished Burial Ritual". World Archaeology Vol. 36. No. 1, 87-102.
Halsall, Guy (1989). 'Anthropology and the Study of Pre-Conquest Warfare and Society: The Ritual War in Anglo-Saxon England' in Hawkes (editor) (1989). Weapons and Warfare in Anglo-Saxon England.
Semple, Sarah (2010). "In the Open Air". Signals of Belief in Early England: Anglo-Saxon Paganism Revisited (Eds:Carver, Martin; Sanmark, Alex and Semple, Sarah), Oxford and Oakville: Oxbow Books, pp. 21-48. ISBN 978-1-84217-395-4.
Wormald, Patrick (1978). "Bede, Beowulf and the Conversion of the Anglo-Saxon Aristocracy". Bede and Anglo-Saxon England (Ed: Farrell, R.T.) British Archaeological Reports, British Series, 46.
Wormald, Patrick (1983). "Bed

This is quite decent too

From Pictland to Alba: Scotland, 789-1070 Alex Woolf
 
I want to know how adventurers are going to work, and will they create new Kingdoms(that we could make) or will they make kingdoms that would be around in 1066?
 
ah...No if that was true anthropology would not have a leg to stand on. Oral tradition, is valid. and Anthropological and Archeological evidence has backed up a lot of Oral evidence. Your assumption that it has to be written down to have existed has not been accepted in the field since the late 60s, much research has moved foward when we started to recognize the importance of the oral histories of many peoples
Oral tradition is a valid medium for the transmission of history and knowledge in societies which are structured in such a way that there actually is a class of people who dedicate themselves to it. Bards, druids, priests, etc. But when societies adopt writing, they usually do away with those classes, or they "reform" those classes so that their new job is to write the knowledge down and maintain the institutions charged with the record keeping. At that point on the oral tradition stops being reliable, because it regresses into story telling by entertainers who are no longer required to take this "job" seriously.

British societies adopted christian culture, writing and historiography more than 1000 years ago, and the job of keeping records of annals, genealogies and history fell to the monks. It's silly to assume any sort of oral tradition could possibly transmit stuff across the centuries past that point. What you have after that, is folksy stories and hearsay, transmitted by story tellers whose goal was to entertain peasant audiences at fairs and earn themselves drinks and food in taverns. Not oral history transmitted by bards or druids who take professional pride in their ability to accurately recount super detailed histories and tell the high and mighty how they are related (in detail) to the legendary kings of old.
 
That all looks awesome!!
And alot more pics than would be expected which is awesome!

Will the pagan mechanics be tied to one religion group and religions [like the moslem ones] or will they by a dynamic, being able to be modded to new religions in multiple groups as with invesiture or autocephaly with a pagan = yes / norse = yes etc?
 
Regarding the Frankish states, due to regnal number problems and such we've always pretended that the King of Germany is the HRE. So, no, it's not formally correct. The West Frankish "Empire" will usually degrade into a kingdom through events. This is all subject to change before release though.

Oh man I hope you change it. This is basicly what I was looking most forward to. At this point in time the emperor title was not fixed to any part of the former frankish empire. It could have been the whole thing. Or either west francia, italy or by some miracle Lotharangia. I hope you find a workable solution to make Louis II the emperor.
 
Regarding Brittany, Salomon styles himself a king, but it's a "Petty", or Duke-tier kingdom. We've put the viking Hastein in Nantes at the start with a large force. A very challenging position for a player. Mortain should perhaps be given to Salomon.

How come no Irish kings are given duke-tier titles?

There was, of course, a recognised high-king at this time too.
 
I'm a little hurt that the Holy Roman Empire is already there in the new start date. IMHO it should be Kingdom of Germany and the HRE should be substituted by Empire of Francia comprising of Germany, Italy, Burgundy, Lotharingia, Bavaria and France.

This Empire should be more unstable that HRE and all titles constituting it should have Gaveling succession so, if not player controlled, with 99% chance split in the subkingdoms automatically.

The title of Holy Roman Empire should be created only via event for a King of Germany that the Pope likes a lot if Francia is destroyed :p

I don't like the aspect of Satrap, too!

He seems too much "Arabic" to me, but as he is of the religion of Aura Mazda that is he is an ancient Persian and should be more "whitish" and similar to a Viking that a Arabic in that date.

I find fun that the Magyars fight the King of Bulgaria (that should be really an Empire in that date) for a Kingdom called Hungary that well should not exist yet: they will found it!
 
Oral tradition is a valid medium for the transmission of history and knowledge in societies which are structured in such a way that there actually is a class of people who dedicate themselves to it. Bards, druids, priests, etc. But when societies adopt writing, they usually do away with those classes, or they "reform" those classes so that their new job is to write the knowledge down and maintain the institutions charged with the record keeping. At that point on the oral tradition stops being reliable, because it regresses into story telling by entertainers who are no longer required to take this "job" seriously.

British societies adopted christian culture, writing and historiography more than 1000 years ago, and the job of keeping records of annals, genealogies and history fell to the monks. It's silly to assume any sort of oral tradition could possibly transmit stuff across the centuries past that point. What you have after that, is folksy stories and hearsay, transmitted by story tellers whose goal was to entertain peasant audiences at fairs and earn themselves drinks and food in taverns. Not oral history transmitted by bards or druids who take professional pride in their ability to accurately recount super detailed histories and tell the high and mighty how they are related (in detail) to the legendary kings of old.

Agreed, to a point, First Nations cultures around the world who have adopted written record keeping still have a rich Oral tradition, it is true that many are attempting to now record there stories as elders are dying off. Still have the problem of sparse sources and I've been looking. JSTOR has decided to be uncooperative
 
Agreed, to a point, First Nations cultures around the world who have adopted written record keeping still have a rich Oral tradition, it is true that many are attempting to now record there stories as elders are dying off. Still have the problem of sparse sources and I've been looking. JSTOR has decided to be uncooperative

I may have to concede, do to at the moment can't find the sources I was looking for.
 
However, they can all potentially be reformed to withstand the allure of the new religions.
Smells like new mechanics, especially if it's indeed for every pagan on the map. I wonder if there will be any flavor for these reformed pagans, like temples not looking like a shack. I know it's too fictional, but still think it would be cool.
 
This is GREAT! What really would make my day, also, would be to know that three features would be included:

1) Þing system, where a King can't simply (legally) kill anyone he wants or banish anyone he wants, nor any lord for that matter, without subjecting them to the þing. Executions shouldnt be legal, but Outlawry yes. Then you could have a plot to find and kill the outlaw in a duel (or ambush). Outlawry would be equivalent of "banishing", but you'd have the plot option to search him and kill him without entailing any further possible lawsuits in the þing(see point number 2). You should also be able to get blood money for the killing of your kin in a þing, instead of asking for full outlawry to the guy.
2) Blood Feuds : If a guy kills some kinsman of yours illegally, you'd have the right to put him up in the þing and ask for his outlawry or payment of blood money. You should also have the option to act behind the law and kill him by plot, although that would give his kinsmen the right to try and kill you if it is found out, creating a blood feud.
3) Fostership : Your tutor should be your foster-father, and his sons your foster-brothers. They'd have no right of inhertance from you, but would have a bonus in relationship and generally be loyal to you. They would also permit for non-marriage alliances :). I think it would be a great addition.

Hope these things appear in the game! If they dont, this will still be great, but with them it would give a lot more of a Norse Feel, I believe :)
 
Regarding British Christianity:

- In terms of the remains of pagan belief systems in the isles, while Oral traditions do have their uses, inferring demographic statistics is not one of them.

- In terms of Orthodoxy vs Catholicism, there's no question they should anything but Catholic. Orthodox doesn't make any sense, as they would then be under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarch (a silly notion). Maybe, *maybe*, you could make an argument for a third branch f Celtic Christianity. However, one very important matter that people are not addressing is that this was another Rite, among many, in the Catholic Church. From its earliest days to the present, the Church has had many different Rites, coexisting fairly easily. Admittedly, most non-Latin Rites died out in Western Europe during the period covered by the game, but some continued (the Mozarabic being the most notable). The Celts were not alone in their particular fashion of worship, but they, like the rest of Western Europe, still considered the Pope to the be head of their faith.
 
Looks very promising, can't wait for the next Dev Diaries... :)

Oh yeah! Exactly the same!

So much things to see, to comment, to approve. I decided to put titles in...


About the Nile and boat on the Red Sea

Does this mean we can finally have navies in the Red Sea, with portage over to the Nile?

Would be so cool to see boats in the Red Sea and trade posts along its coast.
Maybe with a value representing navigability for rivers it would permit to have:
- a low feature (so easy to navigate) rivers as a rule;
- very very high value making a 'Nile canal' impossible to navigate but permitting the AI to 'connect' Red and Mediterranean Seas?
Just a suggestion to try to find a problem for the Indian Ocean.


About polygamy

Good catch, but where have the marriage icon gone then ?

Will (some) pagans practice polygamy?

Yeah again!
Look at the characters view: 'Concubines'! Maybe that will permit alliances between chieftains and kings? Would be so cool! Doomdark will have to explain about this!


Imperial titles AND pre-feodality AND protection against Vikings (AND troubles for everybody!)

Reserving a fate similar to West Francia to Italy, though? It seems strange that the real emperor is not, even if the argument in favor of HRE is solid.

Regarding the Frankish states, due to regnal number problems and such we've always pretended that the King of Germany is the HRE. So, no, it's not formally correct. The West Frankish "Empire" will usually degrade into a kingdom through events. This is all subject to change before release though.

As Paradox are you planning to orchestrate the founding and collapse of certain Kingdoms via scripting and events so that eventually at 1066 A.D campaign started from 867 A.D will look familiar give or take? Mind you I'm fine either way.

Charles the Bald ordered in 864 the counts to build fortified bridges to block the rivers and so prevent the Vikings from going upstream. But this wasn't approved by vassals, which prefered to build castles for themselves instead of thinking to uprestream territories.
This permitted those counts to collect taxes, to defend by themselves their counties, and so the king had less power, permitting finally the transformation of Francia Occidentalis as an amount of nearly independant counts and lords, over which the dukes managed to impose their rule: this is the beginning of classical Middle Ages, with feodality we see in 1066.

This could be implemented in the game by doing this:
* Fortified bridges (permitting defense against Vikings, so more challenging against most of the heathan barbarians currently writting in this thread :rolleyes:).
There could be something like 3 levels of fortified bridges (iron chain, wooden bridge, stone bridge), each permitting a better defense (for example one bridge by county; the longer the river, the hardest to go upstream to loot the better protected--so wealther counties). Each Viking navy managing to cross the bridge would destroy it, like in Pîtres.
From a strategy point of view, chain would be unexpensive but, when destroyed, would do nothing to the king's prestige. On the other hand, a stone bridge would be very expensive, very well defended, and woudl create a severe lost of prestige for the king, so allowing progressively:

* Something like a 'too low' crown authority, permitting for example: a) a downgrade of an Empire to a kingdom; b) lower taxes and levies; c) still the obligation to send levies to the liege.
This would permit to transmit the imperial authority to another king in the family (or the greatest/most powerfull king in the former Carolingian Empire, maybe formable?), solving this problem about Italy, Francia occidentalis, Burgundy/Lotharingia?

I sincerely think this would be much more satisfying than hard-coded events, and totally holding with Paradox spirit:

Unpause. Forget history. LIVE history!
(c) Elfryc
:rofl:​


About Brittany, Vikings and Franks (so much want to beat those Bretons!)

Regarding Brittany, Salomon styles himself a king, but it's a "Petty", or Duke-tier kingdom. We've put the viking Hastein in Nantes at the start with a large force. A very challenging position for a player. Mortain should perhaps be given to Salomon.

Good idea, that would meet the camp in Noirmoutier. I also would personnaly approve for Mortain. After all, they had it.

Is that a Viking controlled Nantes I see in Brittany? A lone pagan county next to the biggest blob on the map: truly a challenge worthy of the sagas.

Speaking of Brittany, I am quite surprised that in 867, at the top of King Salomon's rule, it is a represented by a duchy and not a kingdom, that it is missing Mortrain and even Nantes...

I thought about that this week-end. Situation in the area was quite messy, between Bretons, Vikings, Frank counts and Charles the Bald. I would suggest to make this by giving
would here suggest something representing a greater challenge, promising lot of de jure/de facto quarrels: give to the Breton petty king Salomon these baronies--if these are in the game yet in 867:
- Mayenne, Craon, Montenay;
- Laval maybe (but founded at some point around 1000);
- Le Mans, Évron and Sablé to Gozfrid, the count of Maine.
A real pain for me to give this to Britons, but the truth is that also would be a magnificient casus belli to loose Hell in Brittany. :happy:


Great work I am looking forward to this dlc as ever. :)

Again: the same!
And, like I said this morning (first one!!!):

Thank you, Doodmdark!