Developer Diary 19 – Crusades
- Thread starter King
- 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.
Holy orders won't attack Catholics. Secular crusaders (oxymoron alert!) are free to attack who ever.
Edit: double ninja'd!
Edit: double ninja'd!
Speaking of CBs, is there a some sort of Subjugation CB that allows you to vassalize people?
Not subjugation per say. What you need to have a claimant to a title in your court and then advance thier claim. If you succeed they will be so grateful for your help that they will become your vassal.
How will the game reflect the fact that most of the crusaders (first crusade) were bastards, younger sons and so on, with no land in Europe? The mechanism applied in CK1 befor Deus Vult, where the county went to the character that besieged it, was a bit unrealistic, but had a realistic outcome, in the sense that the counties went to a bunch of fortune seekers who were lucky enough to lead an army at the right time.
Will it be possible to mod in som adjustment to which holdings the mercs can appear in? Like, if they are knights on crusade, they will appear in one of your provinces in the Holy Land? But still, as you can change the capital as you please, this shouldn't be a huge problem. But if it's possible to make them appear in any county you have, by changing your capital, wouldn't it then be simpler, if you can choose any of your counties as the arrival point of the mercs?
Will it be possible to mod in som adjustment to which holdings the mercs can appear in? Like, if they are knights on crusade, they will appear in one of your provinces in the Holy Land? But still, as you can change the capital as you please, this shouldn't be a huge problem. But if it's possible to make them appear in any county you have, by changing your capital, wouldn't it then be simpler, if you can choose any of your counties as the arrival point of the mercs?
Your question is stupid because it completely ignores the reality of the crusade. Not one of the major crusade leaders was a landless second son. The leaders of the first crusade were as follows:
Duke of Lower Lorriane - King of Jersualem
Count of Tarranto - Prince of Antoch
Count of Toulouse - Count of Tripoli
Duke of Normandy - Got nothing for some reason.
Only the County of Edessa was founded by a second son, but hell he was with his brother the Duke of Lower Lorriane. I wish people would do some basic research on this matter before demanding we add features to the game in the name 'historical reality'. Godfrey essentially destroys the Duchy of Lower Lorriane by his policy of mortgaging so many of the lands to pay for his contingent to the crusade. It is not difficult to see why the first crusade signaled the effective end of the Duchy of Lower Lorraine when you put it in that context. However, people continue to ignore these really obvious facts in favour of peddling myths.
well Bohemond who became Prince of Antioch was somewhat landless as he lost all the lands his father left to him to the Romans. still he had alot of Knight following him, most important of them was his nephew.
Baldwin Count of Edessa is a particular story, he convinced the local ruler to adopt him as heir. (later he became the King of Jerusalem) quite an interesting character If you ask me
Robert, son of the Bastard was somewhat unlucky if not incompetent. he didnt gain any lands in teh Crusade and lost the Kingdom of England to his younger brother.
edit: but the two most important leaders ware pretty powerful. Most of all the Count of Toulouse.
now something I read in the thread. a few DD back about Mercs it was said that you could give them land. Now I read its no longer possible? how so? I was looking forword to this.
The map became to ahisotrical due to this?
Baldwin Count of Edessa is a particular story, he convinced the local ruler to adopt him as heir. (later he became the King of Jerusalem) quite an interesting character If you ask me
Robert, son of the Bastard was somewhat unlucky if not incompetent. he didnt gain any lands in teh Crusade and lost the Kingdom of England to his younger brother.
edit: but the two most important leaders ware pretty powerful. Most of all the Count of Toulouse.
now something I read in the thread. a few DD back about Mercs it was said that you could give them land. Now I read its no longer possible? how so?
I was looking forword to this. The map became to ahisotrical due to this?
Are Crusaders protected while on Crusade? That is, would another Christian ruler who attacks his lands, or even plots against him, run a serious risk of excommunication?
Oh Grand Master of the Holy Game Design Order,
You mentioned that the Pope will badger rulers to take part in crusades, even offering to lift excommunications as a reward. Is this behavior also moddable?
Yours,
A Poor Fellow-Soldier of Code and of the Temple of Modding
You mentioned that the Pope will badger rulers to take part in crusades, even offering to lift excommunications as a reward. Is this behavior also moddable?
Yours,
A Poor Fellow-Soldier of Code and of the Temple of Modding
How can you vassalize Orders then? Or can characters actually have a claim on the Grandmaster title?
I've been wondering about this for a while. Does that mean Emperors can have Kings as vassals?
well Bohemond who became Prince of Antioch was somewhat landless as he lost all the lands his father left to him to the Romans. still he had alot of Knight following him, most important of them was his nephew.
Baldwin Count of Edessa is a particular story, he convinced the local ruler to adopt him as heir. (later he became the King of Jerusalem) quite an interesting character If you ask me
Robert, son of the Bastard was somewhat unlucky if not incompetent. he didnt gain any lands in teh Crusade and lost the Kingdom of England to his younger brother.
edit: but the two most important leaders ware pretty powerful. Most of all the Count of Toulouse.
now something I read in the thread. a few DD back about Mercs it was said that you could give them land. Now I read its no longer possible? how so?
The map became to ahisotrical due to this?
You still can, but first they must agree to become your vassal.
Last edited:
To decalre war on someone who is fighting a religious enemy you must pay a high price in piety to do so. You cannot go negative doing this so you must already have a good standing with the church.
Last edited:
The Pope badgerng you and offering to left excommunication are run through the event engine so very much modable.
Of course. The Byzantine Emperor has the Ecumenical Patriarch (head of the Orthodox church) as his vassal and the HRE has the King of Bohemia as his vassal in later dates. It is possible for the Holy Roman Emperor to have the Pope as his vassal. So if you want to put the Holy and the Roman back into you empire and you just happen to have an anti-pope kicking around, well you know what to do.
So you cannot declare war on someone who is crusading if that would take your piety below zero? Why not make it so that you'll be excommunicated if you declare war without enough piety? That way at least you will be able to declare war on your enemy when he's at his weakest, though with a consequence of excommunication.
Also, what prevents me from gaming the system by declaring war on some faraway sheikdom with only 1 county just so others will have to pay a lot of piety to declare war on me? Or is the piety penalty only when crusading?
Oh, and I was wondering about that: If we establish an antipope, can we give him a county to rule from, like the Papal Seat in Rome?