'Must not marry an infidel'

[Ramidel]

Muslims:
Heresies of same faith: moderate reluctance
Shia to Sunni and vice versa (including heresies): strong reluctance
Christians and Zoroasterians: strong reluctance
Pagans: extream reluctance / impossible

Muslims should have no problem marrying infidel women (it happened on a routine basis), but be strongly reluctant (if not outright unwilling) to marry their women to infidel/heretical men. Alfonso VI took a Muslim mistress (it's unclear whether Zaida of Seville actually married him or not), but even she was a refugee in his court and probably a convert.

Anyway, +1 to the idea. There were plenty of mixed marriages when political concerns trumped religion.

 

[cnafi]

Muslims should have no problem marrying infidel women (it happened on a routine basis), but be strongly reluctant (if not outright unwilling) to marry their women to infidel/heretical men. Alfonso VI took a Muslim mistress (it's unclear whether Zaida of Seville actually married him or not), but even she was a refugee in his court and probably a convert.

Anyway, +1 to the idea. There were plenty of mixed marriages when political concerns trumped religion.

Yeah Mohammad had at least one Christian and Jewish wife and dozens of Christian, Jewish and Pagan concubines/slaves so I don't think Muslims should be excluded from non-Muslim wives.

 

[Velorian]

It's also strange I've had a Christian refuse to let me marry a pagan from his court, because he thought she shouldn't marry an infidel. It wasn't even a fellow Christian, but I think they should mostly be reluctant to marry out their own family. Even better, just make it modable.

 

[Velg]

Also, I think that the must is that AI should EITHER still honour betrothals if it converts or outright break them. Because right now you can run into trouble if AI converts e.g. king whose daughter you wished to marry & betrothed suddenly converts to Christianity.

 

[unmerged(112259)]

This is a bug right? Introduced in the last patch? I can't find any mention of it in the v1.101 changelog.txt

So anyone know where to look in the file to change it? > It doesn't appear to be in '00_religions.txt' or '00_cultures.txt'

=====================
Edit: It appears to be a hard-coded thing, so i've submitted a Bug Report here:

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?696178-1.101-New-Interfaith-marriage-BUG.

 

[Nornin]

It's also strange I've had a Christian refuse to let me marry a pagan from his court, because he thought she shouldn't marry an infidel. It wasn't even a fellow Christian, but I think they should mostly be reluctant to marry out their own family. Even better, just make it modable.

I've had even worse, as a Norse I tried to marry off one of the Catholics in my court to another Catholic in a Catholic court, and I got the must not marry an infidel penalty for that.

 

[theKing1988]

I've had even worse, as a Norse I tried to marry off one of the Catholics in my court to another Catholic in a Catholic court, and I got the must not marry an infidel penalty for that.

Yeah, i've had that problem as well. This feature really takes the fun out of trying to challenge yourself by running a realm with a lot of counts/dukes/kings with a different culture and religion.

 

[Pte Baldrick]

If the idea is to stop people marrying each other on the other side of the continent, it's not quite doing a great job with that. An Irish count can still marry a princess from Ethiopia, for example, and yet we cannot marry between Norse and Catholic, or Tengri and Sunni, like what happened pretty often.

 

[MartinSWE]

If the idea is to stop people marrying each other on the other side of the continent, it's not quite doing a great job with that. An Irish count can still marry a princess from Ethiopia, for example, and yet we cannot marry between Norse and Catholic, or Tengri and Sunni, like what happened pretty often.

That´s why there should be a 'distance' malus instead. Rulers usually aimed for marrying away their children to neighbouring realms, to secure useful Alliances, and in places such as Iberia where catholics lived next to muslims it wouldn´t be that far fetched with interreligious marriages for political reasons.

This is why on the earlier start date it would make more sense for an irish Count to marry into the dynasty of a norse neighbour rather then marrying an ethiopian princess.

 

[Ruwaard]

That´s why there should be a 'distance' malus instead. Rulers usually aimed for marrying away their children to neighbouring realms, to secure useful Alliances, and in places such as Iberia where catholics lived next to muslims it wouldn´t be that far feteched with interreligious marriages for political reasons.

This is why on the earlier start date it would make more sense for an irish Count to marry into the dynasty of a norse neighbour rather then marrying an ethiopian princess.

If applied then the range should be tier and sometimes even realm specific. For instance the mother of king Philip I of France was a princess from Kiev and the wife of HRE Otto II was a Byzantine princess, even a dukes of Austria were married to relatives of the Byzantine Emperor.

 

[b_raven]

Well, are there any signs, that this will be fixed?

 

[Prince Michael]

Well, are there any signs, that this will be fixed?

No signs whatsoever. Paradox has not commented or given any explanation to this change. They even have not indicated if they have even acknowledged that many players are upset about the change.

 

[robin the red]

+1 Midevil multiculturalism makes me most magnanimous!

 

[thegreatjam]

This must be fixed

 

[b_raven]

The game loses much of fun, because of this new rules.

 

[Andrzej I]

Agreed entirely. There are simply too many instances of inter-religious marriages for this to really make sense. A distance modifier for counts and dukes would suit much better.

 

[Heyomif]

It was dumb and unhistorical before and instead of removing the modifier you just made it more restrictive and unhistorical

 

[theKing1988]

It was dumb and unhistorical before and instead of removing the modifier you just made it more restrictive and unhistorical

I'm not sure how you can claim that any of the suggestions in this thread are more restrictive and more unhistorical than the current complete ban on inter-religious marriages

 

[Heyomif]

I'm not sure how you can claim that any of the suggestions in this thread are more restrictive and more unhistorical than the current complete ban on inter-religious marriages

I should have been more clear. The "you" was paradox.

 

[praguepride]

I'm pretty sure I've looked at this before... I'll dig into it in a little bit and see if I can come up with a hot fix for people to expand their horizons a little bit.


A couple things to note though:
1) Remember that this isn't nearly as religiously free as we have today. Even Pagans hated other pagans because they worshipped radically different gods.

2) I'll try and include the empire distance logic used in the vassalization decisions but I don't know how it will work if you have a radically spread out empire (i.e. you're King of Ireland and Emperor of Russia). I think it is based upon capital city to capital city but if I find it I'll double check.

3) This was fixed because vanilla would have some very deviant behavior as the game went on so perhaps the solution is to lessen the penalty or make it case specific (for example make Romuva, Slavic, and Norse friendlier but Tengri would most likely still be 'barbaric'

Anyway, I'll dig through it and post what I find and then post a proposed solution if I can figure it out