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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
only in game terms, the kingdoms would be game-term-empires no? Just cause its called King doesnt mean its fulfills the role of the mechanic called King in game, thats all just localisation.
The declaration of a King is setting him as equal in authority with the Iron Throne, not as one step below it.
Well no. The Iron Throne was created by conquering all the Kingdoms of Westeros. It's not just really one localized area of the continent.
For reference in CK 1, earliest start, the Emperor is holding Burgundy/Italy King titles and Bohemia hasn't been created. You could do a similar setup in the mod at game start where the North Kingdom (and the Vale/Reach etc) can be created and Robert/Joff holding Stormlands/Lannister King titles. Of course this will depend on what time frame the mod starts.
Not necessarily, the king of the Andals, Rhoynar and the First Men (Iron Throne) could be imperial and the other Westerosi kingdom titles could (and IMHO should) be royal. Kings don't have to be vassals of an emperor, in fact most won't be and those who are will want it to be theoretically as possible.
The creation of the regional king title will lead to independence from the Iron throne. Ideally the Iron throne should not be able to create these royal titles, but independence should lead to a claim.
I agree on the Iron Throne not being able to 'create' those titles. But IT should be able to revoke them at the risk of civil war if they are created. Agreed also on the independence part BUT, they should be able to choose to be a vassal of the Iron Throne or not. So in the event of say the Tyrells creating a Kingdom, they could marry and scheme their way into the Iron Throne while still fighting the Iron Throne's enemies and ruling as the King of the Reach under the Iron Throne's protection.
Dagda, have you played Grells mod? the 1st or 2nd version based on Robert's Rebellion?
Starks/Tyrells etc can't be on Duke-level. Its just not doable and you'd have to make the map like 50% smaller. or Dukedoms would have to be 12 provinces or more.
how would you solve that problem? if you want to convince us, show us the set-up you'd do (don't have to be for the whole westeros) just do Dorne or the North
And im talking about the whole set-up. Provinces, who is their owner, who is who's liege etc
My proposal:
Emperor: The Iron Throne
Kingdoms: Strong Lords with loads of vassals: The North, The Iron Islands, The Riverlands, The Vale, The Westerlands, The Reach, Dorne, The Stormlands, The Crownlands (title could be held by Stannis, title could be held by Stannis, but most lords direct vassals of the Iron Throne). Not the best model but I got nothing else.
Duchies: Lords we know have many vassals: Hightower, Royce etc.
Counties: Lords and some landed knight with much land (Clegane)
Baronies: Petty lords and landed knights
My proposal:
Emperor: The Iron Throne
Kingdoms: Strong Lords with loads of vassals: The North, The Iron Islands, The Riverlands, The Vale, The Westerlands, The Reach, Dorne, The Stormlands, The Crownlands (title could be held by Stannis, title could be held by Stannis, but most lords direct vassals of the Iron Throne). Not the best model but I got nothing else.
Duchies: Lords we know have many vassals: Hightower, Royce etc.
Counties: Lords and some landed knight with much land (Clegane)
Baronies: Petty lords and landed knights
My proposal:
Emperor: The Iron Throne
Kingdoms: Strong Lords with loads of vassals: The North, The Iron Islands, The Riverlands, The Vale, The Westerlands, The Reach, Dorne, The Stormlands, The Crownlands (title could be held by Stannis, title could be held by Stannis, but most lords direct vassals of the Iron Throne). Not the best model but I got nothing else.
Duchies: Lords we know have many vassals: Hightower, Royce etc.
Counties: Lords and some landed knight with much land (Clegane)
Baronies: Petty lords and landed knights
Dagda, have you played Grells mod? the 1st or 2nd version based on Robert's Rebellion?
Starks/Tyrells etc can't be on Duke-level. Its just not doable and you'd have to make the map like 50% smaller. or Dukedoms would have to be 12 provinces or more.
IMO a 50-province Duke-tier Lord Paramount of the North is a lot closer to what we see in the books then a 50-tier King-tier of the North.
In the books almost all noble Houses are equal. They're all Lords. This means it's impossible to tell whether a house should be Duke-tier or Count-tier. We're already gonna have to fudge this by making some of them Baron-tier, or creating a lot more landed Knights then exist in the books.
More importantly a lot of the shit people are talking about with King-tier vs. Emperor-tier is stuff they're pulling from their asses. We don't know whether there will be a Decisions feature in CK2. We don't know whether there will be a way to make a King-tier Greyjoy swear loyalty to the Iron throne after rebelling.
We do know Dukes will swear to their King, and that if you usurp a title you'll immediately get all the benefits of that title, but you'll have to attack the title-holder to get those benefits.
IMO a 50-province Duke-tier Lord Paramount of the North is a lot closer to what we see in the books then a 50-tier King-tier of the North.
In the books almost all noble Houses are equal. They're all Lords. This means it's impossible to tell whether a house should be Duke-tier or Count-tier. We're already gonna have to fudge this by making some of them Baron-tier, or creating a lot more landed Knights then exist in the books.
More importantly a lot of the shit people are talking about with King-tier vs. Emperor-tier is stuff they're pulling from their asses. We don't know whether there will be a Decisions feature in CK2. We don't know whether there will be a way to make a King-tier Greyjoy swear loyalty to the Iron throne after rebelling.
We do know Dukes will swear to their King, and that if you usurp a title you'll immediately get all the benefits of that title, but you'll have to attack the title-holder to get those benefits.
Officially, Westeros has only three tiers of landed nobility - royalty, lords, and landed knights. But since lords can be sworn to other lords, there are de facto higher tiers of nobility. The chains of lords-sworn-to-lords go about three tiers deeps (for example, the Lord of Honeyholt is sworn to the Lord of the Hightower who is sworn to the Lord of Highgarden) so we need three tiers to model this properly. So, in practice, there's five tiers of nobility - royalty, lords paramount, major lords, lords, and landed knights.
We actually know an awful lot about which lords are sworn to which other lords, and which lordships are considered to be prestigious and which ones aren't, since Martin is kind enough to provide us with lots of exposition and appendices, so figuring out which tier each house fits into won't be difficult at all. Lords Paramount are particularly easy to spot, since they tend to get all the Warden titles and like to string extra titles after their lordships signifying their power over their regions - Mace Tyrell, for example, is fully styled "Lord of Highgarden, Warden of the South, Defender of the Marches, and High Marshall of the Reach," but it's the Lord of Highgarden title that actually gives him power over all of the Reach. I do agree that we'll probably need to come up with a lot more landed knights than are named in the books, since we don't see the majority of them.
Note that in later books
the Lannisters start monkeying with the Lord Paramount titles to replace those houses who joined Robb. So one of the Freys gets to be Lord of Riverrun, but to his shock and dismay Littlefinger gets to be Lord Paramount of the Riverlands in his capacity as Lord of Harrenhal. Similarly, while "Warden of the North" is supposedly a military title not linked to Westeros's feudal system, the Lannisters' decision to name Roose Bolton as Warden of the North is pretty clearly equivalent to saying "You can have the Starks' old job." So while the Lord Paramountcies are unofficial, the concept of a Lord Paramount is pretty clearly an important part of Westeros's administration.
Ok Ill make it even easier for you Nick. Let's see the Reach. Tyrells are the Lords in Highgarden. Check teh map of westeros here.
House Hightower of Oldtown is sworn to the Highgardens. so that means that Tyrells are at the least at Duke level. BUT and its a big but (Kardashian big)
Hightowers have Houses sworn to them aswell! Wiki link.
Sworn Houses:
- Beesbury of Honeyholt.
- Bulwer of Blackcrown.
- Costayne of the Three Towers.
- Cuy of Sunflower Hall.
- Mullendore of Uplands.
Now look back at the map I linked in the beginning. You can see Uplands, Three Towers etc all there. The way you see it you should make all of those houses Baron level. That means that we would get a map of about 25 provinces.
One province or maybe 2 or 3 Count level given to Hightowers and all others are small Baron level.
The problem with that scenario is that Three Towers, Uplands etc etc all had Houses sworn to them also looking at the map its more logical to make them Count Level. Hightowers DuKe Tier and Tyrells King tier.
I hope you finally understand it. and the discussion is now officially closed as it's useless. so please no more posts about it. How we fill in and work out the King in the North shall be seen when we have the game.
You can see Uplands, Three Towers etc all there. The way you see it you should make all of those houses Baron level. That means that we would get a map of about 25 provinces.
One province or maybe 2 or 3 Count level given to Hightowers and all others are small Baron level.
The problem with that scenario is that Three Towers, Uplands etc etc all had Houses sworn to them also looking at the map its more logical to make them Count Level. Hightowers DuKe Tier and Tyrells King tier.
I hope you finally understand it. and the discussion is now officially closed as it's useless. so please no more posts about it. How we fill in and work out the King in the North shall be seen when we have the game.
What source is telling you that any of these Hightower vassals have vassals?
I've looked in the wiki several times. I've clicked on all Hightower vassals. None of them have a sworn Houses list.
Which means Hightower works fine as a Count-tier House, and Tyrell works fine as a Duke-tier.
We know Tyrell won't work as a King-tier House because there's no game mechanic to make them swear vassalage to the Iron Throne if they become independent. And when's the last time you had a succession in CK where everybody immediately pledged themselves to the new King?
Therefore they cannot be King-tier. Which means the other Wardens/Lords Paramount/Prince of Dorne cannot be King-tier.
What source is telling you that any of these Hightower vassals have vassals?
I've looked in the wiki several times. I've clicked on all Hightower vassals. None of them have a sworn Houses list.
Which means Hightower works fine as a Count-tier House, and Tyrell works fine as a Duke-tier.
We know Tyrell won't work as a King-tier House because there's no game mechanic to make them swear vassalage to the Iron Throne if they become independent. And when's the last time you had a succession in CK where everybody immediately pledged themselves to the new King?
Therefore they cannot be King-tier. Which means the other Wardens/Lords Paramount/Prince of Dorne cannot be King-tier.
I think your idea is the best one, but I'm sure the game mechanics will bite us in the ass. I don't think the Imperial Titles have "territories", and thus the rebelling kings won't swear fealty to The Iron Throne if they revolt. Still your idea is the best.
I don't actually think that House Hightower's vassals have any known vassals, but a province containing Old Town, Three Towers and Blackcrown would just be too big.
I think your idea is the best one, but I'm sure the game mechanics will bite us in the ass. I don't think the Imperial Titles have "territories", and thus the rebelling kings won't swear fealty to The Iron Throne if they revolt. Still your idea is the best.
we dont know that. we dont know how Kingdom of Bohemia is in CK2. so its wait and see if its hard-coded or not.
@ Nick. im really open to any situation still your scenario would leave us 10x less provinces and houses. IMO a waste of a mod and playability. nobody wants to play with so little provinces and houses.
I'm for a Grell based scenario set-up with dozens of houses playable. not only a handful. your set-up is actually doable in CK1. and frankly I tried that. it's no fun as to the source I posted it above.
no there are no sworn knightly houses know to vassals of Hightowers. Hell how many do we know anyway. but the territory is vast so they should be there. so the vassals of Hightowers should be Counts (look at the freaking map * kuch* source)
I think your idea is the best one, but I'm sure the game mechanics will bite us in the ass. I don't think the Imperial Titles have "territories", and thus the rebelling kings won't swear fealty to The Iron Throne if they revolt. Still your idea is the best.
@ Nick. im really open to any situation still your scenario would leave us 10x less provinces and houses. IMO a waste of a mod and playability. nobody wants to play with so little provinces and houses.
I'm for a Grell based scenario set-up with dozens of houses playable. not only a handful. your set-up is actually doable in CK1. and frankly I tried that. it's no fun as to the source I posted it above.
And how many provinces do you think are gonna exist under Grell's plan?
At the moment it looks like each Kingdom, plus the Crownlands, would end up with 20-25 each regardless of what happens to the Duke-tier. Which means the number of playable Houses remains about the same.
As for using it with a CK1 mod, keep in mind CK1 has no Baron-tier titles.
no there are no sworn knightly houses know to vassals of Hightowers. Hell how many do we know anyway. but the territory is vast so they should be there. so the vassals of Hightowers should be Counts (look at the freaking map * kuch* source)
Just because something appears on a map that doesn't mean it's Count-level. It would make just as much sense to make the Hightowers Counts of 2-3 Counties.
In a pinch you could probably make same-tier vassals. This worked fine in CK1. The disadvantage would be that they wouldn't go back to where they belonged after rebelling. But IMO it's preferable to have Hightower and similar houses messed up by rebellions to the Iron Throne itself.
We know Tyrell won't work as a King-tier House because there's no game mechanic to make them swear vassalage to the Iron Throne if they become independent. And when's the last time you had a succession in CK where everybody immediately pledged themselves to the new King?
Therefore they cannot be King-tier. Which means the other Wardens/Lords Paramount/Prince of Dorne cannot be King-tier.
Nick
its in the appendix at the back of one of the books. Hightowers are evidently dukes they control a large and important area, have large count-sized vassals. Common sense says it has to be duke, or else they would control too much land and lose it to their liege when having to grant it owing to limits.
Whats the obsession with making the map tiny? with making everyone barons and abstractions isntead of playable counts? how would it make anything better? Especially given everyone else disagrees.
AND why is there no mechanic to make King-tier's swear alliance to Emperor-tiers? there is no evidence behind that claim. But common sense seriously suggestions that its not true.
your whole argument is built around something you made up, that kings will despise being ruled by emperors and that no king will bow before an emperor. IF kings would never be vassals of emperors then why is Emperor a new tier and not just a fancy king level title as in CK? it is a new level so it will have kings as vassals.
its in the appendix at the back of one of the books. Hightowers are evidently dukes they control a large and important area, have large count-sized vassals. Common sense says it has to be duke, or else they would control too much land and lose it to their liege when having to grant it owing to limits.
Whats the obsession with making the map tiny? with making everyone barons and abstractions isntead of playable counts? how would it make anything better? Especially given everyone else disagrees.
AND why is there no mechanic to make King-tier's swear alliance to Emperor-tiers? there is no evidence behind that claim. But common sense seriously suggestions that its not true.
your whole argument is built around something you made up, that kings will despise being ruled by emperors and that no king will bow before an emperor. IF kings would never be vassals of emperors then why is Emperor a new tier and not just a fancy king level title as in CK? it is a new level so it will have kings as vassals.
