Missing people and Familial Ties

[de Clare]

So, I'm noticing for the Visigoths, only Alaric II is mentioned in the title's history, but not Alaric I, who sacked Rome, who's a pretty big deal. There's another dynasty before the Balts, but that cuts off a bunch of the Balts alone. I find this weird cuz the much less important Vandals' history goes to their first ruler, and they stop existing before any others.

Also, Amalric, Alaric II's trueborn son is Theodoric the Great's grandson. Theodoric the Great had three daughters. Two were from concubines, but the last, youngest and only legitimate one was his daughter with the Frankish princess. His eldest daughters were married to the Visigoth king Alaric II and Burgundian prince Sigismund to secure peace. Because of the wars between the Franks and Burgundians versus the Visigoths, Theodoric actually stepped in to help his grandson and ruled for more than a decade alongside his grandson in Iberia. Theodoric is also known as 'the Great' for good reason.

On a side note, have you guys considered giving some of the Teuton founders bloodlines other than the Merovingians? Genseric and the majority of his successors were known for their persecution of Christians. Theodoric and Odoaecer implemented both Italian and Teuton customs. I think there are some figures who would have cool bloodlines.

 

[loup99]

So, I'm noticing for the Visigoths, only Alaric II is mentioned in the title's history, but not Alaric I, who sacked Rome, who's a pretty big deal. There's another dynasty before the Balts, but that cuts off a bunch of the Balts alone. I find this weird cuz the much less important Vandals' history goes to their first ruler, and they stop existing before any others.

Also, Amalric, Alaric II's trueborn son is Theodoric the Great's grandson. Theodoric the Great had three daughters. Two were from concubines, but the last, youngest and only legitimate one was his daughter with the Frankish princess. His eldest daughters were married to the Visigoth king Alaric II and Burgundian prince Sigismund to secure peace. Because of the wars between the Franks and Burgundians versus the Visigoths, Theodoric actually stepped in to help his grandson and ruled for more than a decade alongside his grandson in Iberia. Theodoric is also known as 'the Great' for good reason.

We are aware of that, those character are currently missing in history and we will add them in the future.

On a side note, have you guys considered giving some of the Teuton founders bloodlines other than the Merovingians? Genseric and the majority of his successors were known for their persecution of Christians. Theodoric and Odoaecer implemented both Italian and Teuton customs. I think there are some figures who would have cool bloodlines.

I presume that you mean "Germanic" when saying "Teuton", but the Teutons were just one Germanic people amongst many, and by 476 they are not present. Keep in mind that using the word Teuton when referring to Germans today is pejorative, so it is a bit confusing to see it here. We are always interested in adding new bloodlines, although I don't think Odoacer justifies a scripted one given his limited historical success, even if the player can always change that and found a custom one. The characters you cite would however not have any bloodlines at the start, but in later bookmarks.

 

[de Clare]

Yeah, Germanic people. In Charles Oman's The Dark Ages 476-918 A.D, he refers to them all as Teuton Kingdoms early on.

I don't think Odoacer would deserve one either, but just mentioned him as an example. Three I would say deserve bloodlines personally would be...

1. Alaric I: In 410, Alaric I led the Visigoths in the Sack of Rome, signaling the end to the Western Empire's hegemony and the surge of the Kingdom of the Visigoths.
   1. +5 Visigoth/Ostrigoth opinion.
   2. -10 Roman/Roman culture opinion.
   3. +10 Arian opinion.
   4. -10 Chalcedonian Opinion.
   5. +10 personal combat.
   6. +5 martial.
   7. Makes it more likely to uncover treasure in sieges (believe there is a Warrior Lodge Bloodline which has this ability).
2. Genseric: The third King of the Vandals and Alans, Genseric conquered the ancient city of Carthage. This ruler was known for his persecution of Chacledonians and his codification of seniority succession.
   1. +10 Vandal opinion.
   2. +5 Alan opinion.
   3. +10 Arian opinion.
   4. -20 Chalcedonian opinion.
   5. +5 intrigue.
   6. +5 personal combat.
   7. Makes Seniority Succession easier (essentially the tanistry thing with Niall of the Nine Hostages but for seniority.
3. Theodoric the Great: Theodoric the Great led his Ostrigothic tribesmen to the Italian Peninsula. Not only was this great king known for his just rule at home, but his ability at foreign politics.
   1. +5 Visigoth/Ostrigoth opinion.
   2. +5 Arian opinion.
   3. +5 Chacledonian opinion.
   4. +5 Roman opinion.
   5. +5 diplomacy.
   6. +5 personal combat.
   7. Makes it easier to gain marriage acceptance, non-aggression pacts and alliances.

The excerts/descriptions need work, but I think those three would be every deserving of bloodlines based on their accomplishments. When I rethink the descriptions, I’ll also explain the why too, if you’d like.

 

[loup99]

Yeah, Germanic people. In Charles Oman's The Dark Ages 476-918 A.D, he refers to them all as Teuton Kingdoms early on.

That is an rather old book at this point, so any terms or analysis you would find in that would be historiographically outdated. The term is not really in use today due to the pejorative connotation and the inexactitude.

Three I would say deserve bloodlines personally would be...

1. Alaric I: In 410, Alaric I led the Visigoths in the Sack of Rome, signaling the end to the Western Empire's hegemony and the surge of the Kingdom of the Visigoths.
   1. +5 Visigoth/Ostrigoth opinion.
   2. -10 Roman/Roman culture opinion.
   3. +10 Arian opinion.
   4. -10 Chalcedonian Opinion.
   5. +10 personal combat.
   6. +5 martial.
   7. Makes it more likely to uncover treasure in sieges (believe there is a Warrior Lodge Bloodline which has this ability).
2. Genseric: The third King of the Vandals and Alans, Genseric conquered the ancient city of Carthage. This ruler was known for his persecution of Chacledonians and his codification of seniority succession.
   1. +10 Vandal opinion.
   2. +5 Alan opinion.
   3. +10 Arian opinion.
   4. -20 Chalcedonian opinion.
   5. +5 intrigue.
   6. +5 personal combat.
   7. Makes Seniority Succession easier (essentially the tanistry thing with Niall of the Nine Hostages but for seniority.
3. Theodoric the Great: Theodoric the Great led his Ostrigothic tribesmen to the Italian Peninsula. Not only was this great king known for his just rule at home, but his ability at foreign politics.
   1. +5 Visigoth/Ostrigoth opinion.
   2. +5 Arian opinion.
   3. +5 Chacledonian opinion.
   4. +5 Roman opinion.
   5. +5 diplomacy.
   6. +5 personal combat.
   7. Makes it easier to gain marriage acceptance, non-aggression pacts and alliances.

The excerts/descriptions need work, but I think those three would be every deserving of bloodlines based on their accomplishments.

Yes, those could get bloodlines, although as you said the bonuses would need to be toned down slightly.

 

[de Clare]

I can see your point. I do think Oman is a great historian, even by today’s standards.

I can certainly understand that. I do think these three were forebears of their people, although ironically none of their lines survived quite so long as their rival Merovingians

 

[loup99]

I can see your point. I do think Oman is a great historian, even by today’s standards.

I'm not very familiar with his work, but since he seems to mainly have been a military historian and an active politician within the British Conservative Party I'm not sure his writings on the period covered by the mod are the most pertinent. If you like it and find it interesting though that is all good, but I just wanted to warn you that his conclusions can be questionable today. Even if you were a good historian at the time, any history you write is shaped by the time you live in and your views, so Oman's work might tell us a lot about his views in the context of pre-WW2 Britain but not as much about the period in question since newer works have since been published and it wasn't his domain of expertise. That doesn't mean everything he wrote should necessarily be rejected today, but when reading any of it you have to keep this in mind.