Thank you, Numahr, for the comment, I will most probably follow your advice. I imagined graeco-roman civilization was significantly more liberal in terms of gender law compared to abrahamic, but I may be wrong.
[MOD] Lux Invicta
- Thread starter riknap
- 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.
By the way, most of this localization work was already done in the SWMH mod, maybe you can just ask Aasmul if you can borrow it from there.
You're right about words like "boyar" or "imperator", but I can't agree with you about "tsar". As you say, this region was more influenced by Greek culture. And even in Empire Basileos was used as a name, so was taken by Bulgars - and further by other Slavs. Yet, "Caesar" was still used in Empire as an important title. And like OTL, it should spread in similar way, and maybe even further - just because of more influence of Romans, could spread also to other Slavic nations.
Have you got any idea about other titles we could 'borrow' for western and southern Slavs? "Graf", "Despot", "Konoung" (check Baltic "Kuningas")? The only native term we can use for rulers is "Wojewoda" ("Voyevoda") as a translation for Greek term "Doux" (same practises were quite common), but I' not sure about this...
Yes, I know and I'm aware of that. But I thought rather about placing "-ski/-sky" suffix for localization instead of "z ...". Mostly for Bohemians and Slovakians, as they don't actually use such form, but the suffix.
I'd consider that OCS is far more common here in Slavic nations than was OTL. But yet Russians are much more influenced by Varangian, so I'd say, as even historically the first split in Slavic unity was between eastern and other Slavs, so here we should think this process gone further.
Mentioning it, maybe we can mix some Norse titles for Russian? They seem to don't have that Greek influence, as there seems to be no Christianity, it might be legit.
without the Slavic peoples being torn apart by religion (...) and foreign influence (...), differences would be much smaller than OTL. Of course, I'm not preaching for a unified Slavic culture or anything like that - I'm totally satisfied with having an option to create a unified western Slavic empire. Just don't spread the hate.
Of course, but as I stated above, it's quite sure for western and southern Slavic countries, but Russians should be differed though.
...But he wasn't the first one who used it. He actually took it from Serbians and Bulgarians (who were first in use), who used it for their rulers. Also in there the word "tsar" lost it imperial meaning and became rather king-tier title.
Yes, but in Rus it never lost it's imperial meaning; see also my comment about mongolian Great Khan.
Maybe for Russian was still valued, but not for the rest of Europe. Even Peter the Great had seen it, turning "Tsarstvo" into "Imperium"... while he didn't drop the title of tsar IIRC (seen in use; heir to the Empire was called "cesarevich", while other children were called "tsarevich/tsarevna").
Well, Peter the Great tried to westernize everything he could, so it's not completely clear whether he decided to be "Emperor" as opposed to "Tsar" because he thought that "Emperor" was higher, or just out of general westernization policy.
By the way, what do you think about including my other changes, like "dyak", "tiun" and so on, see above?
Frankly, the argument "he wasn't recognised as emperor by the rest of Europe" doesn't make much sense. Should we then degrade HRE to king-tier since the Byzantine empire was still around there until 1453? I'd say Russia should have a possibility to become a tsardom.
Despot seems fine to me. I have no idea about the etymology of Konung or Graf, so I'd prefer some Lithuanian or German took the scene and soke his mind. Wojewoda is already a title for marshal, besides Slavic wojwództwa were usually much larger than CK2 counties. I've once heard about the word "wojewoda" being used by the Pommeranians as their equivalent to knyaz - maybe that's the place to put it?
Tsar Monarchist said:
Despot seems fine to me. I have no idea about the etymology of Konung or Graf, so I'd prefer some Lithuanian or German took the scene and soke his mind. Wojewoda is already a title for marshal, besides Slavic wojwództwa were usually much larger than CK2 counties. I've once heard about the word "wojewoda" being used by the Pommeranians as their equivalent to knyaz - maybe that's the place to put it?
Ban? Pan? Zhupan? Knyaz? All are possibilities.
Zvonimir, Gostomysl, P(e)resvet, Ostromir, etc. are all Slavic names with the very common dithematic nominal construction, meaning "sound+peace", "guest-mind", "over-light", and "sharp-peace" respectively... you'll find they're uncommon in later times, but very par for the course in earlier, pre-Christian Slavic names.
Kriv, Zhaba, Baran etc. are more like nicknames, also popular in pre-Christian times, for individuals with certain traits, in these cases looking bent, like a frog, and like a ram.
Lesyar and Mestyatka sound like similar nicknames though I don't know their meaning, the second has a dimunitive at the end.
EDIT: Actually, I think I can guess their meanings after a bit of thinking: "Les" is forest in East & West Slavic and "yar"/"er/"ar" is an agentative suffix... this seems like a peasant name to me, though. "Mest"/"Miest"/"Myast" means place, I can't figure out "yat", and then a dimunitive... hm. But this also seems like a peasant name.
In fact, single-part names were much more common among the Slavic lower and free classes than among the nobility, who favored dithematic constructions; the same is seen among the Germans (Athala+wulfiz > Adolphus "noble wolf", Theode+riks > Dietrich "people king", etc.) and Greeks (Peri+cles, Alex+ander) to an extent and I would not doubt that this is an ancestral Proto-Indo-European system of forming names.
Last edited:
Mestyatka is actually a name from a birch bark manuscript unearthed in Novgorod. He lived in Novgorod, so it's unlikely that he was a peasant, but he wasn't from nobility either. But we do have Lowborn chracters in the game, right?
Unlike more autocratic societies, Novgorod saw widespread literacy, not just among the rich but among children and women too, even of the lower classes - no doubt a consequence of being a merchant republic (and the Slavs' only true experiment in democracy for 700 years).
One should keep in mind, Novgorod and its counterpart dialect of East Slavic were highly influenced by the Finnish, much less by the Church Slavonic prevalent in all other Slavic langs, and many forms are present in the Old Novgorod dialect that are absent elsewhere, being new constructions of a Finnish grammatical tint or innovations ... Reflexes of many sounds are different from what we see in Russian, Polish, or any other Slavic language, thus using Novgorodian names as a source for Russian names can pose problems.
EDIT: I've taken a look at the culture file in question (http://pastebin.com/qwJaYFM9) and I think it looks good for the most part. Igor should be tied with an underscore to Ingvar, Mestyatka, Tverdyata, Vyshata & Putiata, being Novgorodian are out of place, Rostih should be Rostikh for consistency, Ruslan should not be there (it's Old Turkic and didn't enter Russian until much later), Svetozar ought be "Sviatozar" and Ludislav "Liudislav" and... I think that's it.
One should keep in mind, Novgorod and its counterpart dialect of East Slavic were highly influenced by the Finnish, much less by the Church Slavonic prevalent in all other Slavic langs, and many forms are present in the Old Novgorod dialect that are absent elsewhere, being new constructions of a Finnish grammatical tint or innovations ... Reflexes of many sounds are different from what we see in Russian, Polish, or any other Slavic language, thus using Novgorodian names as a source for Russian names can pose problems.
EDIT: I've taken a look at the culture file in question (http://pastebin.com/qwJaYFM9) and I think it looks good for the most part. Igor should be tied with an underscore to Ingvar, Mestyatka, Tverdyata, Vyshata & Putiata, being Novgorodian are out of place, Rostih should be Rostikh for consistency, Ruslan should not be there (it's Old Turkic and didn't enter Russian until much later), Svetozar ought be "Sviatozar" and Ludislav "Liudislav" and... I think that's it.
Last edited:
This is fine in theory, but in practice causes lots of problems. Particularly when you consider heresy mechanics in CK2. If you're following a primary religion, it is possible that at any time, at complete random, one of your provinces will convert over to a heresy belief, and gain that 50 year negative modifier. Even if you manage to convert it back right away, you still have to wait at least another 50 years for that modifier to disappear. If you ignore the heresy, then it gets even worse, since adjacent provinces will start converting over too. Since heresies are already widespread around the world, it is even easier for those to start spreading around your nation.
At the very least, I think it should be changed so that either heresies cannot spring up or spread to adjacent provinces at all, or when converting between religions within the same religious group the conversion modifier isn't applied or is a weaker version with shorter duration.
EDIT: If nothing else, could you please tone down the revolt risk? 50% seems rather excessive, when you only get like 5% for having the wrong religion in the first place.
Last edited:
Actually I think both your suggestions are valid in their own rights:
- most of these religions have been entranched in their little province for centuries, if not for millenia. Therefore religious change should be very slow -> slower spread of "heresies" (which are actually not "heresies" in LI in the sense of Vanilla, but rather different inter-related creeds)
- the modifier should be made significantly milder when the change is within the same religious group, or even non existent. I will implement this.
I'm assuming this is a bug. Upon remarrying, my new wife was granted "King" title. Using version 0.6d with CK 1.8.
Quick report:
-The new trait events do not check to see if the ruler is on a pilgrimage or not and can fire even if you're away from home.
-The switch event that changes a Norse religion holding controlled by a male to a Volva does not check what the religion of the holder is. So Catholic priests can be replaced by Catholic Volvas if the holder of the province is Norse.
-The new trait events do not check to see if the ruler is on a pilgrimage or not and can fire even if you're away from home.
-The switch event that changes a Norse religion holding controlled by a male to a Volva does not check what the religion of the holder is. So Catholic priests can be replaced by Catholic Volvas if the holder of the province is Norse.
He has a point. In Lux Invicta, there are so many creeds and religions that it just makes no sense to be so incredibly intolerant and narrowminded. It makes no sense, when most of your neighbours are heretics and infidels, when trade comes in from all corners and it bears the mark of Christ, Sol Invictus, Christ-Sol, Rodnovery or Mithras, when no matter where you look, you find at least three faiths different than yours at the other side of the valleys and plains...
That's the thing: people in this Europe would need to be more open-minded, and so would rulers. Belonging to a different creed should not be such a strong differential issue.
The religious change modifier will be changed:
- not affecting changes within a religious group
- revolt risk reduced otherwise (this is a typo which remained for long actually, it is supposed to be 5%)
... and maybe mtth for heresy spread x2 to make this world more religiously conservative?
As for tolerance, it already depends on the creed's modifiers, actually. Open the map in relations mode as non-communitarian and non-sectarian religion: you will see big differences depending on whether each ruler is communitarian / sectarian or not. Ahrimanists, Yahyianists and the such are really intolerant... but the calmer Mesopotamia with various versions of Islam is quite tolerant. Now load the game as a sectarian leader (an Ahrimanist for example) and open the relations map. You will see, surprise, that while you hate every one, every one also despises you - except other Ahrimanist areas who then really love you.
We could, of course, decrease somehow the base/default religious intolerance, and increase proportionally intolerance caused by communitarian and sectarian religions. That would make a sharper distinction between the majority of rather indifferent religions, and the vocal minority of militant, intolerant religions.
- not affecting changes within a religious group
- revolt risk reduced otherwise (this is a typo which remained for long actually, it is supposed to be 5%)
... and maybe mtth for heresy spread x2 to make this world more religiously conservative?
As for tolerance, it already depends on the creed's modifiers, actually. Open the map in relations mode as non-communitarian and non-sectarian religion: you will see big differences depending on whether each ruler is communitarian / sectarian or not. Ahrimanists, Yahyianists and the such are really intolerant... but the calmer Mesopotamia with various versions of Islam is quite tolerant. Now load the game as a sectarian leader (an Ahrimanist for example) and open the relations map. You will see, surprise, that while you hate every one, every one also despises you - except other Ahrimanist areas who then really love you.
We could, of course, decrease somehow the base/default religious intolerance, and increase proportionally intolerance caused by communitarian and sectarian religions. That would make a sharper distinction between the majority of rather indifferent religions, and the vocal minority of militant, intolerant religions.
Just remember that it was a different time when Ivan IV took the title of tsar - it's 16th century, a period used in EU games. Feudal chains were loosed, there didn't matter what title you hold, nor in diplomacy or vassalization issues.
Yet in Serbia and Bulgaria in 13th and 14th century were indentified by other (western) rulers as kings.
Well, both "kniez" and "wojewoda" were similar, both interfered with position of martial leader. While it happened that the first one stayed as rulers, and second as commanders only (and later as a title of regional office we use until now).
As I don't think we should consider then other splits in Slavic localization but Russian/Western and Southern Slavic, so we might have to make some compromise. I guess we don't have any other titles for a martial leader at the court...?
Zhupan might be an idea. Knyaz is already and we won't drop it. Bans are southern slavic only... Maybe "Pan", as similar and more common form could work. What do you think, Jedrek?
Dithematic names are of course typical Slavic names, but there's a matter of each lexeme they are built from. "Svet" is usually used as a prefix, and used as a suffix in "Peresvet" was the first I've met such. About "Ostry" I've found two names use that prefix - mentioned Ostromir and Ostrogniew (-gniew means "rage").
While speaking of single-lexeme names - yes, they were also used by nobles, even if not that common as dithematic. It was a matter of meaning of each and it's popularity. Włost/Vlast, Rosti(k)h, Przemko, Gniewosz... Some of them are used now as dimunitives, but they were used as single names back then.
Also, there's a rule for names - noone else used names of ruler's dynasty. So if you hear that someone was called "Bolesław" in medieval Poland, you might guess he was from Piast dynasty (or Premyslid, as they used it too). But they could be named "Rościsław/Rostislav", which was used by rulers in Moravia and Rus though. Polish nobles started to use traditional Piast names in the end of CK2 period.
Well of course we can't do anything about it, CK2 will give names from the file to characters of each culture, no matter who they are.
Actually, Slavs (at least western) almost never used animal lexemes in names (exceptions I know are names derived from 'wolf' -> Vlkon, Wilkan, Vuk). So they must be nicknames, commonly in use, so they've sound like a name.
Think it can be, I'm not specialist in Russian issues
Last edited:
only about a quarter of the coats of arms for counties/duchies/kingdoms/empires are actually coloured, all others are fully black... any fix for this?