DLC idea - Qabila - Desert tribes, Slaves, Cadet branches and enhanced islam

[elvain]

What the Muslims desperately need is a feature which simulates their control over the non muslim population since that was a major part of early Muslim realms. For example, Egypt remained majority Christian for hundreds of years following conquest. Some leaders oppressed some, some were tolerant. Something like this would be great when combined with other features.

Yes, the muslim rulers of certain government(s) should not require conversion and even automatic conversion should take longer time to happen. It would offer them to use the locals as ministers (council members), who, since being still non-muslims, would be much more dependent on their power and thus more loyal, once hired.

The already existing system of traits (ashari/mu'tazili) could be further developed in this aspect providing more depth to the muslim governance of non-muslims.

 

[technowhiz]

I would honestly like more "crusader" dlc, focusing on Muslims, Christians, and people who actually fought religious wars in Europe instead of stuff in India. I would also like a rework of theocracies for more historical accuracy. I may post some of my ideas tomorrow if I have time.

 

[CaptainPolyp]

Religious wars did not really take place in the middle ages tho. Except if you talk about the crusades (Middle eastern and North eastern), in which case Holy Fury should come up soon.

(edit: unfortunately there is not much about Muslims in Holy Fury, from what we know at this point)

 

[white army]

Fortunately, the next dlc will give modders the possibility to make reformation mechanic work for Christian and Muslim heresies, so for example if in alternate history Lollard/Waldensian or even Cathar succeeded to gain large influence in Europe and moral authority above a certain number, they'll have the ability to reform it to whatever they want with the new mechanic regarding their own special traits, and perhaps make an early Protestant religion. Such system I believe can work when we speak about Sunni/Shiite heresies take over the Islamic world and reform it to become very peaceful or very intolerant and aggressive, take for example the Mahdist rebellion in Morocco. Since the options are almost numberless, this maybe one day come into a mechanic of its own for such heresies and this particular DLC idea.

 

[TheCreator901]

Fortunately, the next dlc will give modders the possibility to make reformation mechanic work for Christian and Muslim heresies, so for example if in alternate history Lollard/Waldensian or even Cathar succeeded to gain large influence in Europe and moral authority above a certain number, they'll have the ability to reform it to whatever they want with the new mechanic regarding their own special traits, and perhaps make an early Protestant religion. Such system I believe can work when we speak about Sunni/Shiite heresies take over the Islamic world and reform it to become very peaceful or very intolerant and aggressive, take for example the Mahdist rebellion in Morocco. Since the options are almost numberless, this maybe one day come into a mechanic of its own for such heresies and this particular DLC idea.

You remind me of the concept of the mahdi. It should be possible for mahdis to rise up or for the player and characters to claim themselves to be the mahdi starting major religious wars between different muslim nobles since the mahdi would be a truly important individual.

 

[elvain]

I would honestly like more "crusader" dlc, focusing on Muslims, Christians, and people who actually fought religious wars in Europe instead of stuff in India. I would also like a rework of theocracies for more historical accuracy. I may post some of my ideas tomorrow if I have time.

Sure, go ahead! Looking forward to see your ideas.
To be honest, the religious part of this concept is the weakest. I have always focused on social or general system of those societies and that is what the mechanics outlined here are about. Religion is included only to a level where it works with these aspects, but I'm no expert on medieval islam. Many proved to be much more educated in this respect... so I'm looking forward to see your ideas.

Fortunately, the next dlc will give modders the possibility to make reformation mechanic work for Christian and Muslim heresies, so for example if in alternate history Lollard/Waldensian or even Cathar succeeded to gain large influence in Europe and moral authority above a certain number, they'll have the ability to reform it to whatever they want with the new mechanic regarding their own special traits, and perhaps make an early Protestant religion. Such system I believe can work when we speak about Sunni/Shiite heresies take over the Islamic world and reform it to become very peaceful or very intolerant and aggressive, take for example the Mahdist rebellion in Morocco. Since the options are almost numberless, this maybe one day come into a mechanic of its own for such heresies and this particular DLC idea.

What we have seen so far shows that there will be a lot new stuff for Christians and some/many pagans. Concerning Islam, IIRC, one of the devs clearly stated that Jihad or muslim holy wars are NOT affected by this.
And honestly, I don't think the biggest weaknesses of Islam in this game are not religious heresies etc., but that the game totally fails to describe "muslim feudalism" or government. After all this game is about various levels of rulers and the ruling class and that is what this DLC concept tries to elaborate, because it is what I know best.
If somebody could enrich this with fitting concept of muslim heresies and religious movements, it would be nice.

But like in the part where I outlined "religious movements", I always keep in mind to design the mechanic so it could at least partialy be used also for other religions. Find some systematic generalities, which could be used also outside Islamic world. Thus the mechanic used to depict Almoravid and Almohad movements was generalized so it could also be used for Christian heretic movements such as Cathars, or even Monastic orders.

You remind me of the concept of the mahdi. It should be possible for mahdis to rise up or for the player and characters to claim themselves to be the mahdi starting major religious wars between different muslim nobles since the mahdi would be a truly important individual.

Yes, that concept is very interesting. It would be nice to have something which could allow various mahdist movements across the map to rise to power (and fall)

 

[TheCreator901]

If somebody could enrich this with fitting concept of muslim heresies and religious movements, it would be nice.

I was a Muslim so I could help out in this regard. Just to start off, Berber Muslims should have the chance for marabouts to spawn and preach a heresy or be very skilled court physicians. Sometimes, these marabouts will rise and try to form a dynasty like the Almoravids did in OTL. Marabouts are essentially the closest thing in Islam to a saint but it remains something cultural to the Berbers. Infact the Berbers were a centre for Islamic heresy the same way they were a centre of Christian heresy. One interesting fact is that the first non-Arab Caliph was declared by the Berbers, I'll leave a link behind since he is an interesting figure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salih_ibn_Tarif

 

[jim198913]

The first option would be the worst, but easiest compromise... though I would still prefer the tribal mechanic of this suggestion to be implemented somehow...if possible...
The biggest issue I see is thst not all muslim states were based on tribal armies... so maybe this should at least be also tied to the culture of those rulers so i.e. the Bedouinsand most other Arabs, Berbers, the Baloch and some others would use it, while the Persians wouldn't (that would at least create different gaming experience for various muslims).

On the other hand it would prevent one of main motivators for this whole concept: to make the decadence mechanic work with its counter-force - the Asabiya/tibal coherence.

As for the other possibility you suggested - it would definitely require some deeper overhaul of tribal mechanics...and again I would prefer to base it on culture rather than religion

Yeah I know what you mean about it now. It wouldn't work for all the arab cultures since they were not all tribal based, particularly the Persians and the Andulusians since they had proper established governments and were not known to have any influencial tribes there. I also thought of your counter idea though, that to base the tribal idea on culture rather than religion wouldn't work too well either that as far as I know, wasn't the first arab ruler in Spain a Bedouin for example?

However with that said, another simple idea of mine and to maybe reflect the historical tribes across the middle east and north Africa in the game is perhaps maybe have non upgraded tribal holdings in most of the provinces around the region at the beginning of the game? although these tribes will obviously be unplayable since they will be vassals to the current rulers being at the barony tier level.

 

[Baron of Red]

With all the catholic (and more importantly african) improvements and focus in Holy Fury, It would be interesting to see how this dlc idea would mesh in.

 

[elvain]

Yeah I know what you mean about it now. It wouldn't work for all the arab cultures since they were not all tribal based, particularly the Persians and the Andulusians since they had proper established governments and were not known to have any influencial tribes there. I also thought of your counter idea though, that to base the tribal idea on culture rather than religion wouldn't work too well either that as far as I know, wasn't the first arab ruler in Spain a Bedouin for example?

This is meant to work for all Arab cultures, even though not all of them had strong tribal sentiments, just like Andalusians you mention (btw Persians are not Arab, for a Persian it would be a big insult to call him Arab, like for a Czech or Pole to be called Russian).

The idea of cultural affiliations and basing this on cultures is tricky, you're right. But I believe I wrote somewhere, that Tribal confederations (Qabilas) should be able to include both characters as well as tribes from other cultures, at least temporarily. Unlike the hordes, who are limited to the same culture. This has historical precedents. The Arab Fatimids based their power on coalition with Kutama Berbers. Like you mentioned, the muslim conqueror of Spain - Tariq ibn Tiyad was not Arab, but Berber and actually in his army the Berbers were the majority over Arabs. But you are right tha this might be too complex to code, when most or everything else is tied to culture
This leads to another idea, based on Ibn Khaldun's theories: Tribal confederations should be still based on culture and its members (be it characters or tribes) should all be of the same culture or cultural gruop. But if Tribal confederation founds some religious movement (that is typical for Almohads and Fatimids, but applies also for early muslims), it can accept members of other cultures aswell.

Not sure what you mean with your last part:

simple idea of mine and to maybe reflect the historical tribes across the middle east and north Africa in the game is perhaps maybe have non upgraded tribal holdings in most of the provinces around the region at the beginning of the game? although these tribes will obviously be unplayable since they will be vassals to the current rulers being at the barony tier level.

Not sure if I understand. Do you mean to have empty tribal holdings there? or have tribal holdings in provinces which are feudal or iqta? To have barony-level tribals under iqta couts, for instance the capital of the province is castle, and the other holdings are a temple and tribe?
With the way the game now is I fear this wouldn't be possible. But we are speculating about possible changes to the game, so in this case I agree this might be interesting if something like this would be enabled.

 

[Ksiendzu]

Currently, all Muslim countries seem to be the same, and this is absurd. The ruler should be able to support one of the religious movements (as it often was in North Africa), strive to became "the leader of the faithful" or leave matters of faith to the scholars and tariqas (sufi brotherhoods).

EDIT: grammar, my english is bad

 

[elvain]

Currently, all Muslim countries seem to be the same, and this is absurd.

While I of course agree, I have to note that this is not limited only to Islam,
Unfortunately, there aren't very big differences inside either of religions. The biggest downfall of Islam (but that is the same in case of unreformed pagans) is that you are basically limited to one and only succession law, which determins a lot in this game.

The ruler should be able to support one of the religious movements (as it often was in North Africa), strive to became "the leader of the faithful" or leave matters of faith to the scholars and tariqas (sufi brotherhoods).

This sounds interesting. It would indeed make Islam much more dynamic

 

[jim198913]

Not sure if I understand. Do you mean to have empty tribal holdings there? or have tribal holdings in provinces which are feudal or iqta? To have barony-level tribals under iqta couts, for instance the capital of the province is castle, and the other holdings are a temple and tribe?
With the way the game now is I fear this wouldn't be possible. But we are speculating about possible changes to the game, so in this case I agree this might be interesting if something like this would be enabled.

Yes, having tribal barony tier vassals under feudal or Iqta lieges is what I meant. I have seen this in many of my games all over the map, particularly under nomad ones, and I thought this could be possible to the added into the game, especially for the Iqta governments in the middle east and thought it could represent the arab tribes there more visibally. I do also feel it should be done same for the kingdom of Scotland for the game as well as it would properly represent the tribal Scottish Clans there too for that period.

 

[BeyondExpectation]

Why did you remove two of your posts on June 6?

 

[DmUa]

Will insert my 5 cents. IMO ingame islam should be singular religion broken apart by traits. After all during much of the period generic population of the muslim world frequently was changing its "owners". Shias, sunnis, kharijites... who cares, farmer has a work to do and mouths to feed. Commoners had no say and no interests in affairs ( at least not religious one ) of muslim aristocracy. Making them whole will solve current issue with muslim anachronistic "heresies" and open up possibilities for certain character to rise up with their own branches of islam ( various mahdis ) or claim to be caliph of existing branch ( umayads vs abbasids ). After all various muslim sects in most of the cases were rivaling each other either because of power disputes ( who is the real caliph? ) or because of petty theological differences. Islamic shcisms unlike christian ones did not sported different power structures and islam itself never had church like vertical organization.

 

[elvain]

Will insert my 5 cents. IMO ingame islam should be singular religion broken apart by traits. After all during much of the period generic population of the muslim world frequently was changing its "owners". Shias, sunnis, kharijites... who cares, farmer has a work to do and mouths to feed. Commoners had no say and no interests in affairs ( at least not religious one ) of muslim aristocracy. Making them whole will solve current issue with muslim anachronistic "heresies" and open up possibilities for certain character to rise up with their own branches of islam ( various mahdis ) or claim to be caliph of existing branch ( umayads vs abbasids ). After all various muslim sects in most of the cases were rivaling each other either because of power disputes ( who is the real caliph? ) or because of petty theological differences. Islamic shcisms unlike christian ones did not sported different power structures and islam itself never had church like vertical organization.

Concerning the bolded part:
1) How is in this aspect Islam different of Christianity? The farmers etc. didn't really care in neither religion. They just did what was the custom. That's why they were often reluctant to convert to either religion, be it christianity from paganism, islam from paganism, islam from christianity and vice versa or any other situation.
2) Anyway, this isn't really relevant at all since this game isn't really about farmers and commoners, but 90% of the characters are nobility. So?

OTOH I you are indeed correct that the theological differences weren't that big between various muslim branches (though I'm not really expert on religious affairs), definitely not as big as between christian branches. Concerning what you wrote, the situation was very similar in Europe - the farmers usually didn't really care.
The division was largely driven out by political reasons and concerns and was a case of rulers and nobles. There were of course exceptions and I would say (to oppose both your and my own claim) that the city craftsmen, minor nobility etc. were often very pious followers of whatever religion, because it was what bore their ethical code.

But while this game is mainly about nobility and the changing religious affiliations were often a political, rather than theological issue, it is perfectly fine that both Islam and Christianity are divided.
How it is done and that it should be done much better, especially in case of Islam, is another thing.

BTW this concept is mainly about social and cultural ways to enrich islam, since I'm not an expert on religious issues. However I can only repeat that I welcome all inputs about how also religious aspect of Islam could be improved. But to be honest, I don't really think that making it a monolith would be actual improvement.
Islam had more and deepr differences which can barely be simulated by personal traits. It had specific mechanisms which were different in each branch. The game could actually somehow have some mechanics which would simulate the differences between various madhabs etc.

Why did you remove two of your posts on June 6?

There were quite a few factors playing role in it and some of them should better remain secret. So while I believe it would be better not to comment your question at all, I believe you deserve some answer. Unfortunately I can't say much about it, sorry

 

[BeyondExpectation]

Part/Chapter 8 - Inside the Qabila tribe (Ashira) and differences between Qabila and Horde

How would it work in Highland Qabilas? What holding type would they use, and would they gain levies from empty holding slots?

 

[moscal]

OTOH I you are indeed correct that the theological differences weren't that big between various muslim branches (though I'm not really expert on religious affairs), definitely not as big as between christian branches. Concerning what you wrote, the situation was very similar in Europe - the farmers usually didn't really care.

It isn't whole true. Antifeudal heresies had often great interest and popularity by low classes. Free farmers, serfs and even townspeoples - when antifeudal movement was born close, religious apathy decreased. Look at eg. english Lollards or russian Old-Believers.

 

[DmUa]

Concerning the bolded part:
1) How is in this aspect Islam different of Christianity? The farmers etc. didn't really care in neither religion. They just did what was the custom. That's why they were often reluctant to convert to either religion, be it christianity from paganism, islam from paganism, islam from christianity and vice versa or any other situation.

- power structure of organised religious institutions is the difference. Simply put the reason is the same as why Orthodox and Catholics are split in two earlier start date. Islam unlike Christianity's main branches had no so distinct difference in power structure between its branches. Also during game timeframe some of the areas completely switched back and forth between different branches without any wide scale unrest. So obviously although orthodox peasant would be as ignorant as his catholic counterpart, game needs to have this distinction between religions to represent difference in their leading organizations. This clearly is not the case for Islam.

2) Anyway, this isn't really relevant at all since this game isn't really about farmers and commoners, but 90% of the characters are nobility. So?

- so, hence why i would prefer a system which would represent Islam better? A singular body religion that is driven apart by character traits and is aggressive to itself. Think about it as ingame anti-hinduim/jainism/buddhism. Also dont you think that such character driven system would represent game were 90% characters are nobility a bit better? Current Islamic system is just... not so Islamic, especially in concern with "heresies".

But while this game is mainly about nobility and the changing religious affiliations were often a political, rather than theological issue, it is perfectly fine that both Islam and Christianity are divided. How it is done and that it should be done much better, especially in case of Islam, is another thing.

- well, as i said game can perfectly represent Islamic division with unique traits system that would work similarly to indian and sunni branching and tolerance traits. Current system is simply atrocious at representing medieval Islam.

BTW this concept is mainly about social and cultural ways to enrich islam, since I'm not an expert on religious issues. However I can only repeat that I welcome all inputs about how also religious aspect of Islam could be improved. But to be honest, I don't really think that making it a monolith would be actual improvement.
Islam had more and deepr differences which can barely be simulated by personal traits. It had specific mechanisms which were different in each branch. The game could actually somehow have some mechanics which would simulate the differences between various madhabs etc.

- my post is rather confusingly put together ( and in very subpar english also ) so i understand reaction. I should probably make different thread, maybe even in suggestions sub forum were i would better describe my thoughs/views on how Islamic religion could be better and more distinctfully represented. But i disagree that trait driven singular body Islam would be worse than it is now.

There were quite a few factors playing role in it and some of them should better remain secret. So while I believe it would be better not to comment your question at all, I believe you deserve some answer. Unfortunately I can't say much about it, sorry

- so Victoria 3 confi...

 

[elvain]

It isn't whole true.

Of course it is not. And I admitted it just two lines below the sentence you quoted.

The context of the quoted post was difference between muslim and christian heresies. And I tried to point out that they were usually not driven by theological, but other reasons.

Antifeudal heresies had often great interest and popularity by low classes. Free farmers, serfs and even townspeoples - when antifeudal movement was born close, religious apathy decreased. Look at eg. english Lollards or russian Old-Believers.

Yes, and as you yourself call them, those were primarily social movements with some religious backing and reasoning - as it is inevitable in all religious societies.

The point is that the lower classes took part in those movements and heresies, but not due to theological disagreements (Holy Trinity, divine nature of either Christ, Koran or anything else), but due to other reasons.

I marginalized the importance of peasantry because peasantry isn't what this game is about and emphasized nobility. Your point is of course right and in the right context only validates what I wrote