I originally posted a thread in this forum for the inclusion of nomadic culture and lifestyle in CK3 back in July of 2021. Since then we’ve gotten confirmation from the devs that this will, indeed, happen. Great news and thank you so much, devs!
This thread ponders one way of representing nomadic cultures in CK3, primarilly with a new ‘unit’ and a corresponding map filter. This is because of how different the nomadic culture/society/economy was compared with the vast number of sedentary cultures in CK3. In fact, currently CK3 is a game of sedentary cultures and societies as it stands.
What is so different about nomadic societies during the time period of CK3? Probably the nomadic viewpoint on land. It was not owned but utilized as a finite and renewable resource. Ownership of land wasn’t relevant to nomadic society. It was merely used to sustain the very thing that mattered most: their herds. This was their ‘holdings’ in a nutshell. Land had great value but only within the seasonal cycle of their migrations. Land that was pristine and lush with grass and other flora was what the herds needed to thrive, along with readily available water.
The typical sedentary settlements of CK3, from village to castle to city, were viewed by nomads as blotches upon the land, populated by people who preferred to cultivate ‘grass’ or agriculture for food. These settlements were mostly seen as weak because only a small group of people actually fought in times of conflict, the rest not knowing anything about fighting or combat. Because the nomadic economy was not completely self-sufficient they would exploit their combat advantage with bribes or raids of these settlements to fill those gaps.
A nomadic lord might decide that a sedentary settlement provides tribute on a regular basis and enforce this with threat of attack. Said settlement would have to weigh their chances of defending themselves, then decide to respect this demand or not. If tribute was given then that settlement was considered under the control of that nomadic lord.
Such a settlement could likely develop any way it wished as long as it wasn’t preparing for rebellion (ie, ceasing payments of tribute). The nomadic lord would not be very interested in these developments except maybe from a dilatant’s perspective. All the lord would be concerned with was payment of tribute, delivered on time.
Alterations to this tribute might come about, but only after delicate negotiations and a very good reason for it. If a settlement wanted to lower the payment of tribute but provide better arms or armor or specialized goods, something like that might be agreeable.
The point I’m hammering to death here is that nomadic societies saw settlements as something foreign and highly undesirable from a personal perspective. It could provide some pretty neat stuff for the clan/tribe to make use of, but on the whole a settlement was a rather bizarre arrangement of people living in a way that somewhat resembled a herd of cattle all in a fenced, sometimes fortified, pen. The place stank and was packed with people living on the same patch of ground year in and year out. It was not normal, not to a nomad. The whole thing looked like self-inflicted misery.
The herds and the nomads who followed the herds were the actual holdings of a nomadic lord, at least a fully nomadic one. These assets or holdings were not bound to a piece of land but followed migratory routes, sometimes more than one depending on seasonal weather changes.
Migratory routes had a winter destination and then an ideal pasturage route for the remaining seasons. The winter destination was usually a ‘protected’ mountain valley, some place that provided a fair amount of natural shelter for both herds and herders. And it had pasturage. Spring was the dangerous time when herds were at their weakest, so finding pasturage meant leaving the confines of the mountain valley and making for the most lush fields around to bring the herds back up to health. After that it was a series of movements from one locale to another. A reliable water source and sufficient foliage to sustain the herds was the criteria during this time. Pasture was a renewable but finite resource, so once the pastures were near depletion at one location, the herds moved on to the next location. As the time swung around to late summer the herds would make their way back toward the protection of the mountain valleys for winter.
That’s the background of nomadic society during the timeline of CK3. How can that fit in a game designed for sedentary cultures and societies? One way would be an additional unit, the herd, and a map filter change, specifically for a nomadic lord.
First off, you’ll need to represent the herds of a nomadic lord. That’s the center of a nomadic lord’s power: the herds and the herders. My idea is a map filter that shows migration routes of herds. These would encompass the counties on CK3 that provide a wealth of grassland and mountain refuge for a given herd. The size of a nomad lord’s actual mounted army would be determined by the size of the herd, which in turn would determine how many counties would make up a herd’s migratory route. Maybe one big herd and route or a few smaller ones.
The herd or herds could be represented as a unit but this would be an approximate location since the herds would be moving along a route over the year. Except during winter, of course.
This map of counties within the migratory route would essentially be the original counties said nomadic lord had ‘title’ to–though the idea of ‘title’ would not be used in nomadic culture.
Sedentary settlements in counties part of a herd’s migratory route would all be paying tribute to the nomadic lord and therefore the lord’s subjects. Any rebellion by the settlements in a migratory county would have some impact on the health of the herd itself. Consider that nomadic armies are borne from their herders, however. Herds would have considerable, if diminished, military capacity. Still, such a disruption would affect the health of the herd for sure.
Enemy armies in migratory counties? Same thing, and even more disruptive if those enemy armies are also nomadic. Control of the herds as resources should be the object of an enemy nomadic army. Any nomadic battles resulting will affect the health of the herds within those counties. This would include a transfer of a percentage of the herd to the enemy if they won in battle.
What’s the herd? It’s where the people and their livelihood are. It’s where all the warriors are when they aren’t being called up into an army or garrisoned somewhere. It’s the core of nomadic welfare and survival. It’s everything they own that matters to them.
Sedentary settlements subject to a liege nomadic lord would likely be left to develop themselves, so maybe the AI handles them like they do the other non-player factions. Coin for tribute to the nomadic lord would matter most, then any left over would be used by the AI to best develop holdings in a county. But, only if sedentary settlements exist there already and the nomadic lord hasn’t razed it to the ground. Historically, most sedentary settlements were left standing except as a punitive response. Nomads understood trade and coin easily enough and saw the value in settlements as coin/trade ‘factories.’
For counties not within the nomadic migratory route, a nomadic lord could claim a county or counties simply by declaring it their own. Of course, this would result in war if the county or counties in question were already owned by someone else. What follows would be normal fare in CK3.
The interesting part is when a nomadic dynasty becomes semi-nomadic. At this point I would say the lord is no longer purely nomadic but sedentary as well for all effective purposes, and with a nomadic clan as part of his holdings. That nomadic clan is the very same one the ruling dynasty hails from but still is nomadic with its own migratory route and everything. At this point, then, a semi-nomadic lord is now controlling both the sedentary and nomadic sides of the realm. The nomadic clan will have its own internal leaders subject to the ruler, but the nomadic clan will have significantly different interests and objectives from the sedentary side of the realm.
Alright, that’s the gist of the idea I had. I wanted to pass it on for the devs as such and I have. Hopefully it makes sense.
Cry havoc!
This thread ponders one way of representing nomadic cultures in CK3, primarilly with a new ‘unit’ and a corresponding map filter. This is because of how different the nomadic culture/society/economy was compared with the vast number of sedentary cultures in CK3. In fact, currently CK3 is a game of sedentary cultures and societies as it stands.
What is so different about nomadic societies during the time period of CK3? Probably the nomadic viewpoint on land. It was not owned but utilized as a finite and renewable resource. Ownership of land wasn’t relevant to nomadic society. It was merely used to sustain the very thing that mattered most: their herds. This was their ‘holdings’ in a nutshell. Land had great value but only within the seasonal cycle of their migrations. Land that was pristine and lush with grass and other flora was what the herds needed to thrive, along with readily available water.
The typical sedentary settlements of CK3, from village to castle to city, were viewed by nomads as blotches upon the land, populated by people who preferred to cultivate ‘grass’ or agriculture for food. These settlements were mostly seen as weak because only a small group of people actually fought in times of conflict, the rest not knowing anything about fighting or combat. Because the nomadic economy was not completely self-sufficient they would exploit their combat advantage with bribes or raids of these settlements to fill those gaps.
A nomadic lord might decide that a sedentary settlement provides tribute on a regular basis and enforce this with threat of attack. Said settlement would have to weigh their chances of defending themselves, then decide to respect this demand or not. If tribute was given then that settlement was considered under the control of that nomadic lord.
Such a settlement could likely develop any way it wished as long as it wasn’t preparing for rebellion (ie, ceasing payments of tribute). The nomadic lord would not be very interested in these developments except maybe from a dilatant’s perspective. All the lord would be concerned with was payment of tribute, delivered on time.
Alterations to this tribute might come about, but only after delicate negotiations and a very good reason for it. If a settlement wanted to lower the payment of tribute but provide better arms or armor or specialized goods, something like that might be agreeable.
The point I’m hammering to death here is that nomadic societies saw settlements as something foreign and highly undesirable from a personal perspective. It could provide some pretty neat stuff for the clan/tribe to make use of, but on the whole a settlement was a rather bizarre arrangement of people living in a way that somewhat resembled a herd of cattle all in a fenced, sometimes fortified, pen. The place stank and was packed with people living on the same patch of ground year in and year out. It was not normal, not to a nomad. The whole thing looked like self-inflicted misery.
The herds and the nomads who followed the herds were the actual holdings of a nomadic lord, at least a fully nomadic one. These assets or holdings were not bound to a piece of land but followed migratory routes, sometimes more than one depending on seasonal weather changes.
Migratory routes had a winter destination and then an ideal pasturage route for the remaining seasons. The winter destination was usually a ‘protected’ mountain valley, some place that provided a fair amount of natural shelter for both herds and herders. And it had pasturage. Spring was the dangerous time when herds were at their weakest, so finding pasturage meant leaving the confines of the mountain valley and making for the most lush fields around to bring the herds back up to health. After that it was a series of movements from one locale to another. A reliable water source and sufficient foliage to sustain the herds was the criteria during this time. Pasture was a renewable but finite resource, so once the pastures were near depletion at one location, the herds moved on to the next location. As the time swung around to late summer the herds would make their way back toward the protection of the mountain valleys for winter.
That’s the background of nomadic society during the timeline of CK3. How can that fit in a game designed for sedentary cultures and societies? One way would be an additional unit, the herd, and a map filter change, specifically for a nomadic lord.
First off, you’ll need to represent the herds of a nomadic lord. That’s the center of a nomadic lord’s power: the herds and the herders. My idea is a map filter that shows migration routes of herds. These would encompass the counties on CK3 that provide a wealth of grassland and mountain refuge for a given herd. The size of a nomad lord’s actual mounted army would be determined by the size of the herd, which in turn would determine how many counties would make up a herd’s migratory route. Maybe one big herd and route or a few smaller ones.
The herd or herds could be represented as a unit but this would be an approximate location since the herds would be moving along a route over the year. Except during winter, of course.
This map of counties within the migratory route would essentially be the original counties said nomadic lord had ‘title’ to–though the idea of ‘title’ would not be used in nomadic culture.
Sedentary settlements in counties part of a herd’s migratory route would all be paying tribute to the nomadic lord and therefore the lord’s subjects. Any rebellion by the settlements in a migratory county would have some impact on the health of the herd itself. Consider that nomadic armies are borne from their herders, however. Herds would have considerable, if diminished, military capacity. Still, such a disruption would affect the health of the herd for sure.
Enemy armies in migratory counties? Same thing, and even more disruptive if those enemy armies are also nomadic. Control of the herds as resources should be the object of an enemy nomadic army. Any nomadic battles resulting will affect the health of the herds within those counties. This would include a transfer of a percentage of the herd to the enemy if they won in battle.
What’s the herd? It’s where the people and their livelihood are. It’s where all the warriors are when they aren’t being called up into an army or garrisoned somewhere. It’s the core of nomadic welfare and survival. It’s everything they own that matters to them.
Sedentary settlements subject to a liege nomadic lord would likely be left to develop themselves, so maybe the AI handles them like they do the other non-player factions. Coin for tribute to the nomadic lord would matter most, then any left over would be used by the AI to best develop holdings in a county. But, only if sedentary settlements exist there already and the nomadic lord hasn’t razed it to the ground. Historically, most sedentary settlements were left standing except as a punitive response. Nomads understood trade and coin easily enough and saw the value in settlements as coin/trade ‘factories.’
For counties not within the nomadic migratory route, a nomadic lord could claim a county or counties simply by declaring it their own. Of course, this would result in war if the county or counties in question were already owned by someone else. What follows would be normal fare in CK3.
The interesting part is when a nomadic dynasty becomes semi-nomadic. At this point I would say the lord is no longer purely nomadic but sedentary as well for all effective purposes, and with a nomadic clan as part of his holdings. That nomadic clan is the very same one the ruling dynasty hails from but still is nomadic with its own migratory route and everything. At this point, then, a semi-nomadic lord is now controlling both the sedentary and nomadic sides of the realm. The nomadic clan will have its own internal leaders subject to the ruler, but the nomadic clan will have significantly different interests and objectives from the sedentary side of the realm.
Alright, that’s the gist of the idea I had. I wanted to pass it on for the devs as such and I have. Hopefully it makes sense.
Cry havoc!
- 2
