Lowborn female courtiers
- Thread starter unmerged(623008)
- 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.
I'm pretty sure they stay lowborn, seems like I saw this one time and that's what happened lol, that is if you don't legitimize the thing.
No, the stats of those Lowborns vary but are often horrible. At the same time, purpleborn princesses of BYZ and genius courtiers from countless principalities in Italy and the HRE are readily available to anybody. It's basically the matter of the AI character not looking outside its own court.
This is off-topic but I would like to warn you guys that when a lowborn, bastard or not, succeeds to a duchy (not sure about lower titles), he will receive a random name and shield. Learnt it the hard way when I betrothed one matrilineally to a young daughter and he succeeded in the meantime.
Well, most of us are lowborns ourselves, we just care for our blue-blooded petlings in CK2.
French and English nobles cared little about the mother's nobility (noble quarters etc.), focusing on the father but in other European countries it tended to be more important. Thus, it's far less surprising to see somebody male from France or England marry down a few notches. Or even somebody female, as proper nobility is tightly restricted anyway (just to the actual peers).
Plus, Kate's dad was technically made a courtier with a generic dynasty before the wedding. (Although I'd say they had a strong working class background.) Not only she herself but her dad, actually, mind you, allowing the status to descend on the daughters in second generation as opposed to being a new grant specifically made to Kate.
The English system is a mess these days anyway, not like it was ever clear before (may've been even messier in the past centuries). In late middle ages and afterwards, "gentility" was to them what the continent or even Scotland regarded nobility as. Therefore, the only nobles in the realm are peers and not even their wives or children (including eldest sons). It's debatable whether royals and by this I mean sons of a king, before they receive a peerage (which is when they marry, at least typically), are actually proper nobles under their bizarre rules. At the same time, the requirements for "gentility" have relaxed over centuries, changing from old families (landowners going back to William the Conqueror etc.) through anybody with land or education or some noble occupation, to anybody who could avoid manual labour (with some vagueness as to merchants), eventually "gentleman" (tied to "mister" before surname) being any lowest clerk or similar figure, and finally any man.
Also, if you graduate from a posh university with one of the qualified degrees (including MA), get admitted to the bar or rise to captain (army, not navy), you're not even a simple gentleman but an esquire just like a knight's eldest son. Esquire corresponds to basic nobility ranks in continental Europe, especially the French ecuyer (base rank for any noble) or German edle. Doctors and colonels get even higher than that (technically being serjeants).
So, they manage to blend a hardcore restrictive aristocratic system with a democratic approach in their own twisted way.
For the record, Kate doesn't have strikingly bad stats or traits, ugly portrait or 10 years of age on William. This makes him already much better off than many royal heirs in current CK2.
Last edited:
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge share an ancestor who was a noble in Guernsey who married Elizabeth's cousin, and since lowborns in the game cannot pass on their lowborn-ness, Kate wouldn't be a lowborn unless there was some bastardness going on
True, but the game's rule about matrimarriage of lowborns is completely alien to England. In fact, it's alien to about most of Europe, just a device invented for this game only. There is such a thing as uterine nobility, meaning that female nobles can pass nobility on to their offspring born from a non-noble husband, but that's like just some parts of France maybe. There were still restrictions on that nobility (e.g. being unqualified to become a knight). In England and in many other countries, engaging in working class occupations also changed your noble status dramatically, meaning that a younger son becoming an artisan in the city would not really initiate a cadet noble line. Only a somewhat loftier sounding surname would remain.
Of course, I just mean that in the game it wouldn't be the case. You don't refer to real people as lowborns in a CK forum, in a serious way that is. But thanks for the extra info about how succession laws actually worked, since this game is the first I'd ever heard of primogeniture something something.
I don't know about this. I've been on a quest to make my liniage 'genius' status and most of the genius women tend to be lowborn. Which is great for me because I can easily get them to marry some of my courtiers - then they have kids with genius's status that I can marry to my children.
Obviously it is random.
Also a reminder that certain traits give better opinion bonus's when parred with other traits. Husband and wife both have zelous. Or if the wife is ambitious there is a negative unless the husband has content. Cruel vs Kind. And theres a whole bunch more.
I think the AI factors alot of these in.
To the OP-citizen20: In regards to your second question. I remember when I sent my spymaster out to research technology there was a tooltip that said the distance doesn't affect things like being with the wife. Otherwise I wouldn't have sent him because his intrigue was over 20 so I married him to a wife that had a very high intrigue too so I could get children in my court with high intrigue for the next generation.
I could be wrong, but the only thing sending people off does game wise is cause them to be occupied. From what I have seen this only affects the ability to lead an army.
I have noticed the only thing that affects trying to have a kid is being imprisoned.
unfortunately this is not a problem, but it should be. the location of a character appears to have little impact on what sorts of events you receive.
Well, my heir while being in his son's court after his landed wife died married the sole lowborn woman in that court (which, I think, was also the sole adult and unmarried woman there), who had not a single positive trait (he was honest, brave and gregarious or whatever it was but something positive) and poor stats. I'm not sure whatever made the king of England&Jerusalem's heir marry a lowborn woman 15 years his senior but I'd have noticed if she'd been particularly remarkable. Or the Kaiserin from Mali. The kingling was an OPM count and the AI may have forgotten who his dad was. The Kaiser I'm sure could marry anybody.
When I played as France, the king's brother being mighty powerful duke of Normandy decided to marry a lowborn too. Same happened with my heirs when I played as Poland, although there were some generic courtiers (Queen Shakira of Poland among them). Otherwise my heir as Duke of Cornwall broke betrothal with a Welsh noble to marry a lowborn from his court at the barony. Not only does the AI pick Lowborns with often horrible stats, it also breaks betrothals with decent brides.
It's actualy not. By normal rule you're right, but history saw many exceptions to the norm especially in England in the middle ages. Happened pretty often also for princes all the way from William to the HYW period.
While most of the beforementioned have been sons and daughters of barons, the game allows only a limited number of those. I believe we have to think of lowborns as lower barons who are imaginary landed, but can't be ingame as
we have limited numbers of baronies while there were many more in real life. Another point as has been mentioned before is that most, not all though, lowborns have a higher fertility rate than most high ranking nobles, that's not real life
plausible but an important balance feature to keep fertility higher as landed nobles seem to get a lower fertility level overall.
Well, the Lowborns can't really be lower barons if you consider that random courtiers have their own generic dynasties despite not having land. If you use the "invite steward" option, you'll get such a courtier: no family, no nothing, random name and shield. That's the low barons and simple knights and the like. Lowborns by necessity must be closer to complete and utter commoners.
Before Kate, I can't really imagine any British heir who'd married somebody who could be termed a Lowborn in game terms (not 100% sure about Kate, either, though over the last centuries there seems to be a working class background, which would generally make you considered a Lowborn regardless of previous ancestry; however, like I said, they made her a second generation random courtier before the wedding
). Maybe the various royal brothers but that's more because I don't have it in my head whom all those guys married, so I can't really guarantee anything but I'd be surprised. A hedge knight's daughter would count as a generic courtier.
Last edited:
I only see this in the beginning of the game, once i get 50-100 years into a game it almost never happens anymore.
Just because the files have a limited number of generic noble names doesn't mean that the lowborns don't have a dynasty existing. Its just not fully recognised as an important dynasty yet.
Just like their baronies we don't see ingame as they are not important enough.
I just try to imagine something beyond the game mechanics to apply sense to them.
:laugh: