I was wondering if paradox planning to add new religious mechanics for pagans too as doctorine or anything in future. normally they make a dlc and dont touch its features unless its most required. so I was wondering whats case for pagans?
will we see updates to pagan reformations? or its over with holy fury?
- Thread starter makaramus
- Start date
-
We will be taking the forums down for scheduled maintenance on Tuesday, May 22nd 2023 at around 8:00 CDT / 13:00 UTC for up to an hour hour.
-
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.
If they can add the 3rd decotrine slots, I still think the pagans are lack of decotrines...
Maybe they think the raiding and mulit waifu are the decotrine too.
Maybe they think the raiding and mulit waifu are the decotrine too.
While I think that adding 3rd doctrine to choose in reformation would make pagans OP and each pagan playthrough would be the same (choose 3 best doctrines and reform), I wouldn't mind slight improvement (adding one or two additional doctrines, changes in current ones).
The idea behind having to select two doctrines out of many useful ones is to make every kind of reformed religion viable to play as. I have to say, I like it a lot- being able to just pick an additional doctrine would rob the flavour, as mentioned it'd end up with warfare+polygamy+flavour in 9/10 games, where currently I'm actually forced to define my religion, in a fitting way for whatever I am doing and ruling in a game.
Additional doctrines could be added, however the current spectrum covers most aspects of the faith.
If anything, I'd suggest to add a "playful" doctrine that allows the reformed believers to use all kind of festive events from tribal over hunt to grand tournament a,d of course in combination with bloodthirsty gods blood games
Additional doctrines could be added, however the current spectrum covers most aspects of the faith.
If anything, I'd suggest to add a "playful" doctrine that allows the reformed believers to use all kind of festive events from tribal over hunt to grand tournament a,d of course in combination with bloodthirsty gods blood games
I don't expect any more DLC focused on pagan reformations, but we may get another doctrine or two that PDX staff worked on in their free time as part of a free patch.
The main thing they need to do with doctrines though is to prevent having multiple doctrines that provide the same sort of bonus from overwritting each other's effects. For example Unrelenting gives you +10% offense for all unit types which is a unit bonus. And Animism gives you +5% morale which is also a unit bonus. If you have both you do not get both effects. Instead the one that gets applied last overwrites the first one. So if you take Animism and Unrelenting you have the offense bonus and if you take Unrelenting and Animism you get the morale bonus.
What is worse, both will overwritte the levy bonus provided by Unyielding nature (because doctrines are applied after the nature) as well as any sort of unit bonus included in the religion itself, such as the reformed Norse +30% levy size or reformed Tengri +30% Light Cavalry offense and defense.
The main thing they need to do with doctrines though is to prevent having multiple doctrines that provide the same sort of bonus from overwritting each other's effects. For example Unrelenting gives you +10% offense for all unit types which is a unit bonus. And Animism gives you +5% morale which is also a unit bonus. If you have both you do not get both effects. Instead the one that gets applied last overwrites the first one. So if you take Animism and Unrelenting you have the offense bonus and if you take Unrelenting and Animism you get the morale bonus.
What is worse, both will overwritte the levy bonus provided by Unyielding nature (because doctrines are applied after the nature) as well as any sort of unit bonus included in the religion itself, such as the reformed Norse +30% levy size or reformed Tengri +30% Light Cavalry offense and defense.
I believe that one proposed addition is already being considered/implemented which is autocephalous temporal leadership where each king is a religious head of his own realm
Reformed paganism has better mechanics than real historical religions like Orthodox and Miaphysite. Holy Fury has taken a niche fantastical what-if scenario and made it arguably the best content in the game. I really don't think it needs any more major additions this late in CK2's life.
Firstly, the devs have repeatedly said that development will continue as long as people keep buying and given the success of HF that’s at least for a little while.
Secondly, any additional content for underdeveloped religions would probably make its way into pagan reformations as new doctrines/whatever anyway!
I don't think new doctrines need to be added, though I would like some doctrines to be buffed (especially the unique doctrines for Slavic, Romuva, and Suomenusko) and for more natures to proselytize other than Proselytizing. I know these can be fixed with mods but I'd like for Paradox to do it "officially". I am more interested in updates to existing religions.
Orthodox is nice that it's more stable than Catholic in some ways but it lacks flavor.
Miaphysite is the same as Orthodox except it can't mend the schism.
Nestorian has a religious head like the Catholic pope but without as much interaction and no Crusades.
Ibadi is basically Shia but without the connection to the Assassins.
Judaism is hated by everyone, does not proselytize unless Zealous, and lacks flavor other than creating the Third Temple. They get a religious head but not until after they already hold Israel. If I ever play a Jewish character I might edit the files to add Judaism to the Christian religious group just so I can have some potential allies and marriage material.
This does not even get into the discussion of heresies.
Orthodox is nice that it's more stable than Catholic in some ways but it lacks flavor.
Miaphysite is the same as Orthodox except it can't mend the schism.
Nestorian has a religious head like the Catholic pope but without as much interaction and no Crusades.
Ibadi is basically Shia but without the connection to the Assassins.
Judaism is hated by everyone, does not proselytize unless Zealous, and lacks flavor other than creating the Third Temple. They get a religious head but not until after they already hold Israel. If I ever play a Jewish character I might edit the files to add Judaism to the Christian religious group just so I can have some potential allies and marriage material.
This does not even get into the discussion of heresies.
The alleged stability of Orthodox only stems from small scale peasant uprisings being the single one thing an AI Emperor will still reliably handle in most cases (and due to starting size he's in a better position against these then most other major realms, given his army is usually large, marching back through the realm from the borderwar for peasants will replenish it.
Where for example 867 Aquitaine can get crippled early on by a religious revolt spawning an additional stack, to succeed in the ERE , peasants usually need to have much more luck on additional spawns- even when the Imperial army suffers defeat at the border, as mentioned, marching back will replenish them, not enough to fight off the rebels mayhaps, but enough for a religious peasant mob any day.
Furthermore, the amount of orthodox churches is much smaller, and the vikings and their ships far, thus their MA is less likely to be raided into oblivion.
Their religious head might revolt occasionaly and get blinded or castrated by a vengeful emperor, but unlike the Pope in Rome, the Patriarch is rather well protected from outside threats, unless the realm as a whole fails and falls incredibly fast.
Last but not least, lacking an Antipope mechanic, there's never a risk of an emperor trying to take down a patrirach in a war and such, where on the catholic side, setting up his Antipope is literally the thing Heinrich IV does even more reliably than pressing the de jure claim on Zeeland, as soon as he has enough piety.
Legacy of Rome is ages old by now, and while the Byzantines did get some cosmetics too in Holy Fury, as already mentioned elsewhere playing them as Orthodox Christian currently just feels unrewarding, opposed to use catholicism for crusades and nice items (and the gooold), or of course their very own pagan religion.
And while the later certainly is nice and does add a lot of flavour (try it with bloodthirsty gods, people, I tell you lol), it currently feels less like "an alternate option" to approach ruling the Byzantine Empire (or reformed Rome, for that part), and much more the go-to way as it has simply so many benefits.
I mean, even as Christian they might declare a crusade on you. So why even bother?
Lots of seeming off topic to express I basically agree with Dragatus as usual- Bugfixes I'd expect, as lined out above, additional content for specifically for pagan reformation rather not.
This is not to be confused with culture-specific flavour in general, I'd expect a handful of that in the form of culture or religion tied wonders in the upcoming patch, for instance.
Oh and before anyone else says it this year what we need to give orthodox unique flavour, besides GHW's that can be included in such, is a grand schism dlc.
Not mend it.
Cause it, stupid
Where for example 867 Aquitaine can get crippled early on by a religious revolt spawning an additional stack, to succeed in the ERE , peasants usually need to have much more luck on additional spawns- even when the Imperial army suffers defeat at the border, as mentioned, marching back will replenish them, not enough to fight off the rebels mayhaps, but enough for a religious peasant mob any day.
Furthermore, the amount of orthodox churches is much smaller, and the vikings and their ships far, thus their MA is less likely to be raided into oblivion.
Their religious head might revolt occasionaly and get blinded or castrated by a vengeful emperor, but unlike the Pope in Rome, the Patriarch is rather well protected from outside threats, unless the realm as a whole fails and falls incredibly fast.
Last but not least, lacking an Antipope mechanic, there's never a risk of an emperor trying to take down a patrirach in a war and such, where on the catholic side, setting up his Antipope is literally the thing Heinrich IV does even more reliably than pressing the de jure claim on Zeeland, as soon as he has enough piety.
Legacy of Rome is ages old by now, and while the Byzantines did get some cosmetics too in Holy Fury, as already mentioned elsewhere playing them as Orthodox Christian currently just feels unrewarding, opposed to use catholicism for crusades and nice items (and the gooold), or of course their very own pagan religion.
And while the later certainly is nice and does add a lot of flavour (try it with bloodthirsty gods, people, I tell you lol), it currently feels less like "an alternate option" to approach ruling the Byzantine Empire (or reformed Rome, for that part), and much more the go-to way as it has simply so many benefits.
I mean, even as Christian they might declare a crusade on you. So why even bother?
Lots of seeming off topic to express I basically agree with Dragatus as usual- Bugfixes I'd expect, as lined out above, additional content for specifically for pagan reformation rather not.
This is not to be confused with culture-specific flavour in general, I'd expect a handful of that in the form of culture or religion tied wonders in the upcoming patch, for instance.
Oh and before anyone else says it this year what we need to give orthodox unique flavour, besides GHW's that can be included in such, is a grand schism dlc.
Not mend it.
Cause it, stupid
While I would like more doctrines what I really want to see is more synergies and more events along with those synergies.
The idea of a third slot I wouldn't mind, but I'd have to agree with the concerns of it being overpowered by the same token- you would have to think of a way to balance that. What immediately comes to mind is having say, two wildcard slots and one slot dedicated to a succession law. At least then you pick Eldership or one of the Clan doctrines as a succession law (which is probably a default pick for many players) and you could pick two fun/flavor things like having incestous marriages, Haruspicy, Bloodthirsty Gods, etc. which you often have to pass up on.
What I'd like is if instead of choosing a nature and two doctrines we just get to choose 3 doctrines and all the natures are converted to doctrines. Though PDX already made a decision on that, so it's unlikely to change.
I just don't see how these doctrines are op; personally what you wrote I think is a design problem. I'd never *not* take ancestor veneration for example. It's not only flavorful but it's useful for succession and vassal control. I would take astrology because sometimes I want to do something other than warrior lodge.
What I've been doing lately is use mods that give more doctrines.
I'm curious what people who are opposed to my 0 natures, 3 doctrines, natures converted to doctrines idea find objectionable about it. I voiced it once before, it got rated down, but nobody ever explained why they don't like it.
Just see what you've said: succession doctrine is a must. Add astrology, so you have 3rd useful society. If you have 3rd slot, you could take another useful doctrine, say stability (no penalty and heir improvement) or monasticism (put all potential heirs but one the best in chapel). This way you not only put yourself ahead of everyone in terms of succession (no gavelkind, yay!) and get access to hermetics, but also eliminate competition for your heir.
Clasrify, please. If there are no natures, how can you choose doctrines?
Last edited:
Maybe it's my playstyle but I'm still not seeing how this is op. Now that I've played around with NK mode, I can see how that's op. None of this other stuff even comes close to that. The no malus penalty from stability is nice early game but with AV (assuming temporal) it's redundant mid/late. Even while playing Catholic I never bothered with "take the vows" and with eldership there seems little point in doing so. In terms of succession yes (elective) gavelkind sucks but I figured out how to get around that pre HF. With just one extra doctrine personally I'd take equality to land my kinswomen, with two I'd take Sea Bound + Daring (I like the events and the bloodline).
What I meant is that Nature and Doctrine would not be two separate classes of religious features, but you would instead draw 3 from a common pool of both. Something like this:
I don't see any major updates happening any time soon, extra doctrines here and there perhaps, but historically Paradox rarely comes back to flesh out paid content, see how under-developed, but full of potential concepts like retinues have been treated.
So to be potentially able not to choose any nature at all? What's the point?What I meant is that Nature and Doctrine would not be two separate classes of religious features, but you would instead draw 3 from a common pool of both. Something like this: