The "Fear Feature"

[AvroLancaster]

This thread highlights why common sense arguments are BS.

Your gut says "if I'm a tyrant people will fear me, and therefore won't try to hurt me."

But at the same time your gut also says "if I'm a tyrant people will hate me, and therefore will try to hurt me."

Both are intrinsically sound statements. Neither is "right."

 

[naisel]

Which is why we need retinue/levy revolts. They're people too, not just blindly loyal automatons, and as such if you've offended them too much (not paid them enough, lost too many troops/land/wars/etc) they should be liable to consider replacing you with someone more pliable.

I'd love to see that.

 

[buhite2]

This thread highlights why common sense arguments are BS.

Your gut says "if I'm a tyrant people will fear me, and therefore won't try to hurt me."

But at the same time your gut also says "if I'm a tyrant people will hate me, and therefore will try to hurt me."

Both are intrinsically sound statements. Neither is "right."

There is a point to be made that content characters would be even less likely to hurt you, that characters would be less likely to join in open rebellion but more likely to plot, and that characters would be less likely to take actions that could piss you off unless they have a lot to gain.

If your ruler is a tyrant you're less likely to risk plotting against random courtiers, other nobles, etc. unless you know the reward is worth the risk, since you know if you get caught you're losing your head, or worse. You may be more likely to plot to outright kill your liege, though.

 

[General Karthos]

I think this mechanic would work really well if factions were secret, and faction MEMBERS were secret. Of course, your spymaster could discover members of factions in his day-to-day operations, regardless of what his assigned task is, as he can discover factions regardless of if he's spying for you in Constantinople or in your land discouraging your most powerful vassal from joining factions against you.

The option should also exist if you are a member of a plot to "reveal faction" to your liege or the target of your faction. This would give you a major boost to relationship with your liege, and a major hit to your relationship with the leader of the faction, as well as a minor hit with other members of the faction.

Additionally, if we were to include Tyranny, the option should exist to specifically "reward loyalty". Just click the "reward loyalty" button and you have the options of "reward loyalty with gold", "reward loyalty with honorary titles", "reward loyalty with landed titles". Each of these would give a minor boost to the opinion of ALL vassals. Meanwhile there should also be a "punish disloyalty" for imprisoned vassals. "Punish with death", "punish with continued imprisonment", "punish with castration/blinding" (greeks/byzantines only), "punish with banishment", or "forgive disloyalty". The first three would increase fear and decrease opinion as per usual, the fourth would give you the usual gold bonus for banishment and decrease vassal opinion, and the fifth would DECREASE fear, but give a bonus to vassal opinion. (In addition to releasing the disloyal vassal from prison.)

Also, I think the addition of the "loyal" and "disloyal" traits wouldn't run amiss. A "loyal" character is likely to refuse to join factions, even if blackmailed into it, even if his opinion of the King is very low. "He may not be a great King, but he is my King," would be the response. Meanwhile, a "disloyal" vassal would be likely to join factions against you, even if his opinion of you is very high. "I like him, but he's not a great ruler," would be the response. This, of course leads to the "hidden" traits idea, or the following:
1) A vassal is neither loyal nor disloyal until such time as he is landed. (So you can't avoid landing disloyal nobles the way you can avoid landing ambitious nobles.
2) An event pops with a MTTH of 1 month where they can determine if they are loyal, neutral, or disloyal.
3) Should a vassal become someone else's vassal, their "loyal, neutral, disloyal" trait is removed, and the event is reset, again with a MTTH of 1 month.

Personally, I prefer the idea of hidden traits. You know certain traits of your vassals by reputation (and based on your realm intrigue), but you don't know everything about everyone on the map. Some of the traits you know may be false. (Ex. a noble is rumored to be a homosexual, but it turns out he isn't. Or a noble is said to be kind, but it turns out he's King Joffrey etc.) Again, the longer a noble rules, the more likely you are to learn their traits, as well as the higher ranking they are. An Emperor probably would not pay much attention to the traits of a mayor outside his demesne, but he would be likely to pay attention to the traits of a King.

I dunno... this would be complicated.... Maybe some of this could be implemented with CK3.

 

[Sforzesco]

Vassal relative power should be a factor in fear. Powerful vassal or faction of vassals would take tyrant down once they'd gain enough force. But single courtier would be heavily restricted by fear. So, tyrannic game would be useful if you would stay strong, but once you slip a bit, you should fall hard!

 

[VolitionNewlove]

You also get a large bonus for "subjugating" vassals, something they'd personally be none too happy about.

I'd say the tooltip should show relationship bonuses which concern fear or power in a blue colour (to distinguish it from bonuses which concern actually liking the ruler,) but this would be a purely cosmetic change.

In addition to the above, I suppose maybe those modifiers could affect the AI's willingness to plot (if they don't do so already.)

 

[Mods]

Something like this would be nice. It's especilly funny how fast you can plot to assassinate Joffrey in the GoT-mod since everyone hates the little c*nt

that's not the best example

 

[abel1717]

Rules in the game should use both dynamics of behavior "Fear Factor" and "Love Factor" not just the latter.

I am a 47-year-old strategy games fan (my love for games started with the first Atari). As a psychology student and with a hobby in history I wanted to suggest the following for CK2: The ideal peace preservation comes from compromise and subject’s appreciation. However, "fear" (although a short-lived) can also deter subjects from plotting or even forming factions. Using Fear as a default could bring long-term consequences and eventually people’s desire for change will outweigh their fears, but the game should reflect both forms of behavior conditioning.

For instance, at the early stages of a game, when a ruler might not have significant power to make everyone happy or ward off a faction, he could rely on scare tactics. As these tactics succeed, the fear factor increases balancing their dislikes (e.g., dislike -19, fear 19) reducing the probability of actions against the ruler. With enough fear factor, new abilities (diplomatic) could unlock: such as threaten a faction member.

Please keep this in mind. in medieval times both tactics were employed . For instance, "The most famous passage from The Prince is in an answer to the question 'Is it better to be loved than feared?' Machiavelli’s answer to this question is quite familiar to modern day readers. He writes, 'The answer is that one would like to be both one and the other; but because it is difficult to combine them, it is far better to be feared than loved if you cannot be both'" (Woodley, 2016, para. 6).

Peace,
Abel1717

Reference

Woodley, S. (2016). Machiavelli and the politics of fear. Retrieved from http://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/machiavelli-and-the-politics-of-fear

 

[Thure]

Rules in the game should use both dynamics of behavior "Fear Factor" and "Love Factor" not just the latter.

I am a 47-year-old strategy games fan (my love for games started with the first Atari). As a psychology student and with a hobby in history I wanted to suggest the following for CK2: The ideal peace preservation comes from compromise and subject’s appreciation. However, "fear" (although a short-lived) can also deter subjects from plotting or even forming factions. Using Fear as a default could bring long-term consequences and eventually people’s desire for change will outweigh their fears, but the game should reflect both forms of behavior conditioning.

For instance, at the early stages of a game, when a ruler might not have significant power to make everyone happy or ward off a faction, he could rely on scare tactics. As these tactics succeed, the fear factor increases balancing their dislikes (e.g., dislike -19, fear 19) reducing the probability of actions against the ruler. With enough fear factor, new abilities (diplomatic) could unlock: such as threaten a faction member.

Please keep this in mind. in medieval times both tactics were employed . For instance, "The most famous passage from The Prince is in an answer to the question 'Is it better to be loved than feared?' Machiavelli’s answer to this question is quite familiar to modern day readers. He writes, 'The answer is that one would like to be both one and the other; but because it is difficult to combine them, it is far better to be feared than loved if you cannot be both'" (Woodley, 2016, para. 6).

Peace,
Abel1717

Reference

Woodley, S. (2016). Machiavelli and the politics of fear. Retrieved from http://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/machiavelli-and-the-politics-of-fear

You should add that Machiavelli said that every ruler should AVOID to be feared AND hated at the same time too.

 

[Tempestra]

Is Machiavelli an authoritative source on medieval politics?

 

[Parafoudre]

This thread highlights why common sense arguments are BS.

Your gut says "if I'm a tyrant people will fear me, and therefore won't try to hurt me."

But at the same time your gut also says "if I'm a tyrant people will hate me, and therefore will try to hurt me."

Both are intrinsically sound statements. Neither is "right."

I don't really agree. People shouldn't think I'm an awful person because I mutilate invaders. And neighbours shouldn't be shocked by that, either.

 

[The Shacks]

Mega thread necro, but yeah. ASIOAF mod has long dealt with this mechanic rather deftly as far as I remember. You can either be feared or respect to various degrees. Your vassals that fear you may not love you but theyre hella less likely to try move against you unless they got enough friends etc. Kinda hope a fear feature is implemented in the upcoming DLC.

 

[Snow Crystal]

Necroing is bad. Especially when you open another thread for the topic at the same time.

For those who want to continue the discussion:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...e-both-behavior-conditioning-factors.1088518/