• 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.

CK2 Dev Diary #103 - Long live the King!

Greetings.

Today we will put Pagans aside, go back to good old Catholics, and explore one of the new features coming for them with Holy Fury: Coronation Ceremonies.

20180730085127_1.jpg


With this expansion, succeeding to the throne of a Catholic Kingdom or Empire will not be a simple matter of gaining the title itself. The new ruler will need to organize a Coronation Ceremony (via new intrigue decision) and be recognized as legitimate by a notable member of the Catholic Church.
If a Catholic ruler fails to be officially crowned, he will see his popularity slowly fade away each year, as his vassals grow more and more restless under what they perceive as an illegitimate King.

20180730085152_1.jpg


Coronation is divided into two phases: preparation and ceremony.
During the preparation, the ruler will decide whom he wishes to be crowned by, he will meet the Church’s demands, and invest money to organize the ceremony. In the second phase, the ruler will host the ceremony itself, interacting with guests and ultimately receiving his crown.

When organizing a ceremony, a Catholic King can choose between three possible options when it comes to officiant priests: he can be crowned by a low-status theocratic vassal within his realm, by a powerful theocratic vassal within his realm (such as a Cardinal, Antipope or Prince-Bishop), or by the Pope himself. Catholic Emperors who fail to enact the Free Investiture succession on the other hand will be limited in their selection only to the Pope.
While being crowned by a local Bishop is a lot less prestigious, it is also much cheaper, as higher-ranking members of the Church will be prone to make outlandish requests, especially if they dislike the ruler requesting them to officiate his coronation.

Coronation2.jpg


Requests may vary a lot, especially when it comes to the Pope: the Holy Father might ask you to change your realm’s Investiture laws, wage war against an Excommunicated ruler on behalf of the Papacy, or to restore some of the Central Italian provinces to the Holy See.
Be sure to be in good relations with the Pope before asking for a coronation if you wish to receive a more tolerable offer.

Once the demands of your chosen priest have been met, you will be able to select a budget for your ceremony which will determine the kind of coronation you will receive, the kind of flavor events tied to it and the number of guests participating in it.
An extravagant coronation is a prestigious event to which all your vassals, courtiers and even neighboring Christian rulers are invited, a secluded coronation is a private feast to which only your Council will have access to.

20180730091014_1.jpg


Once the ceremony has been concluded, your character will receive a specific trait tied to the priest that crowned him, as well as retain any additional perks granted by the flavor events experienced during the feast leading up to the coronation.

You might have noticed from the screenshots that this new mechanic affects character portraits as well: Catholic Kings and Emperors that have not been crowned will no longer wear the high-tier headgear in Holy Fury, defaulting to the Ducal band instead until their rank has been officially recognized by the Church (naturally, if you do not own Holy Fury, Catholic Kings and Emperors will wear the appropriate gear by default as before).

20180730091758_1.jpg


This is not the only portrait-related addition though: Holy Fury will bring to the game a series of special crown artifacts that will be visible on portraits whenever the characters are wearing them. Most of these artifacts can only be used when the character meets certain requirements and they are often tied to a specific title rather than a character’s dynasty.

Coronation6.jpg

Coronation7.jpg


And this should be about it for this week.
 
I don't think you can become a king while being a vassal in the AGOT mod either, but I haven't played it for a couple of years. You have to declare yourself independent and then become a king. You can do it while at war for independence, but that's it I think. You're locked in Lord Paramount status (king tier) while being a vassal. You aren't called king while being a vassal of the Iron Throne.

Nope, Dorne uses their king tier title which just happens to be "prince". So presumably other rulers could also be granted royal privilege and be called kings even though they're under the king of Iron Throne.
 
Nope, Dorne uses their king tier title which just happens to be "prince". So presumably other rulers could also be granted royal privilege and be called kings even though they're under the king of Iron Throne.
Dorne has a special treatment because of the way they joined. Certain terrotories have had different treatments through history, principalities and such, that's normal. Being called Prince is fine, but being called King is another thing entirely. In the HRE we have tons of princes, several king electors and a king, who happened to be the Emperor until 1439 (And then is how this unusual situation happened, but a duke declaring himself king... that's a big NO). A King would be an equal, an equal is a potential pretender, you as king can't have that, it's a threat to your power.

There is a quote from the, I don't know if it's from the books or from the show actually, if it's from the show only I wouldn't pay much attention to it, where Renly says to Catelyn "I don't care how your son calls himself as long as he swears fealty to him". But even then it comes from a king in a dire situation, very exceptional. (And ASOIAF is not a valid historical source either).
 
When are we going to see some Orthodox love, it is basically a weaker version of Catholicism in this game, no crusades no flavour and now no coronation events :/
 
A king is a king is a king. Just because the HRE was the only catholic empire in history does not mean that other ones cannot have vassal kings that are actual kings and not glorified dukes.

the HRE was not the only catholic empire in history, there was the Romanian Empire (know as the Latin Empire) within the CK2 time period and also a few other empires afterwards, like the Brazilian and French Empires

When are we going to see some Orthodox love, it is basically a weaker version of Catholicism in this game, no crusades no flavour and now no coronation events :/

I would not mind if Orthodox was just a weaker version of Catholicism, the Orthodox nations barely survived the CK2 time period and the Byzantines are too strong gameplay wise
 
No Byzantine coronation events? What heresy is this?

But I am sure that CK2Plus will fix this. At least they are not lazy.

The Devs aren't being lazy as much as I disagree with them being Catholic only they've stated the mechanic is meant to simulate the the rather unique Catholic state of having separated Secular and religious authorities. They are working on a time table, if it was between africa, pagan reforms, revamped crusades and coronations for all I'd take all the latter over the former
 
the HRE was not the only catholic empire in history, there was the Romanian Empire (know as the Latin Empire) within the CK2 time period

The Latin empire was not by any means an empire other rhan in name, Even the ever memed >H >R >E has more legitimate claims to being an empire than a state occupying the shattered heart of Byzantium for a few decades.

I would not mind if Orthodox was just a weaker version of Catholicism, the Orthodox nations barely survived the CK2 time period and the Byzantines are too strong gameplay wise

Do you forget the game starts scarcely 50 years after the pope stopped requiring the permission of the Byzantine emperor to become the pope and by the games end in 1453 Muscovy was an eastern superpower. Orthodoxy didnt barely survive, it thrived and went from the religion of the Caesars to the religion of the Czars.
 
the HRE was not the only catholic empire in history, there was the Romanian Empire (know as the Latin Empire) within the CK2 time period and also a few other empires afterwards, like the Brazilian and French Empires



I would not mind if Orthodox was just a weaker version of Catholicism, the Orthodox nations barely survived the CK2 time period and the Byzantines are too strong gameplay wise
It's the only one with an Emperor titled Emperor for the duration of the HRE. After its dissolution the word lost a bit of its meaning. The HRE wasn't just an empire, it was the Empire.
 
It's the only one with an Emperor titled Emperor for the duration of the HRE. After its dissolution the word lost a bit of its meaning. The HRE wasn't just an empire, it was the Empire.

Why did it lost of its meaning ? Only one emperor existed in the West until the end of the napoleonic empire ( If we consider the fact that the french empire ignored the austrian one and considered François II after the dissolution of the HRE not as the titular emperor , claiming to be the last heir of the translatio ) . Napoleon himself destroyed the HRE and so became (in the napoleonic political economy ) the only western european emperor . The political theory during that era in France was that the translatio imperii have passed from germany to return in a latin country governed by "virtus" ( in it's antic meaning defined by Cicero or Caton who have been the inspiration of many revolutionnary theories ) . Napoleonic propaganda called France and annexed provinces "The Great Empire" and conceived all it's diplomatic theme as France was the successor of roman and Carolingian empires (what is true in some extent) but also the heir of the HRE (what is wrong without the idea of translatio imperii) . Napoleonic theories ignored austrian pretentions of François II to the imperial title for exemple . And from a technical point of view France was the only Empire in western Europe . So in m'y opinion the imperial title lost its signification with the austrian Congress of 1814/15 by the fact that the HRE or the french empire wich both clame the translatio imperii for the West have not been restored. The translatio is broken with the defeat of Waterloo and the fact that François II von Habsburg refused to take back the title of holy roman emperor . For the term of "empire " if we consider it's only a designation of a vast territory (or the land under a unic power like the german word "Reich" or the hindi-english word "Raj") and was used by the romans without connexion with the political regime (it was already used under the republic ) we can say that it never lost it's meaning ; there is still some "empires" today .
 
Last edited:
Why did it lost of its meaning ? Only one emperor existed in the West until the end of the napoleonic empire . Napoleon himself destroyed the HRE and so became (in the napoleonic political economy ) the only western european emperor . The political theory during that era in France was that the translatio imperii have passed from germany to return in a latin country governed by "virtus" ( in it's antic meaning defined by Cicero or Caton who have been the inspiration of many revolutionnary theories ) . Napoleonic propaganda called France and annexed provinces "The Great Empire" and conceived all it's diplomatic theme as France was the successor of roman and Carolingian empires (what is true in some extent) but also the heir of the HRE (what is wrong without the idea of translatio imperii) . Napoleonic theories ignored austrian pretentions of François II to the imperial titles for exemple . And from a technical point of view France was the only Empire in western Europe . So in m'y opinion the imperial title lost its signification with the austrian Congress of 1814/15 by the fact that the HRE or the french empire wich both clame the translatio imperii for the West have not been restored. The translatio is broken with the defeat of Waterloo and the fact that François II von Habsburg refused to take back the title of holy roman emperor . For the term of "empire " if we consider it's only a designation of a vast territory (or the land under a unic power like the german "Reich") and was used by the romans without connexion with the political regime (it was already used under the republic ) we can say that it never lost it's meaning ; there is still some "empires" today .
Napoleon didn't destroy the HRE, he wanted to take it, so Francis II dissolved it and Napoleon crowned himself. Self-crowned. After that being called emperor didn't mean much anymore. Still the German and Russian Empires didn't called themselves Emperor, they were called derivatives from Caesar. Russians did it for hundreds of years, but they claimed the ERE, not the WRE. Victoria did it, but she was Empress of India. And so on. It became a bit cheap to become an Emperor.
 
release date is N+1 days

N being the the number of times any person on the forum asks for a release date
 
Napoleon didn't destroy the HRE, he wanted to take it, so Francis II dissolved it and Napoleon crowned himself. Self-crowned. After that being called emperor didn't mean much anymore. Still the German and Russian Empires didn't called themselves Emperor, they were called derivatives from Caesar. Russians did it for hundreds of years, but they claimed the ERE, not the WRE. Victoria did it, but she was Empress of India. And so on. It became a bit cheap to become an Emperor.
Napoléon crowned himself in 1804 after a senatus-consult wich proposed him the title of "emperor of the Republic" . His title was not linked to a desire to became Holy roman emperor ; the HRE is disolved in 1806 two years later . The holy empire was dissolved after the battle of Austerlitz. France imposes the treaty of Presbourg and Napoleon creates the kingdom of Bavaria he says then; "I will, however, have arranged the part of Germany which interests me: there will be no more diet at Regensburg, since Regensburg will belong to Bavaria; there will be no more Germanic Empire, and we will stick to it there » . He saw at that point the third coalition as a treason from Austria and considered that his offer to François II ( To take the title of austrian emperor and not the HRE) was over after that . The translatio was claim since 1804 and even before by some republicans wich sax France as the heir of the roman Republic .
 
I don't think you can become a king while being a vassal in the AGOT mod either, but I haven't played it for a couple of years. You have to declare yourself independent and then become a king. You can do it while at war for independence, but that's it I think. You're locked in Lord Paramount status (king tier) while being a vassal. You aren't called king while being a vassal of the Iron Throne.

My example was precisely that, the Duke of Brandenburg became more and more influent as time went by and even after being King in Prussia he was like in a personal union status. Duke of Brandemburg and King in Prussia, with Prussia being outside of the Empire. He wasn't a vassal king of the Emperor, he was a duke vassal in the Empire and king outside of it. If someone as powerful as the Duke of Brandenburg had to wait until the Empire dissolution to be a full king I don't see vassal kings happening in this time period.
I was thinking about how if an emperor-tier subjugates a king-tier, they have the option to let them retain the king title and crown, or to swap it out with the lord paramount title which I believe gives an opinion malus.
 
I don't know why people care so much about "historicity" of Empires. If someone irl held a territory consisting of Iberian peninsula, British isles, France and Scandinavia, there wouldn't be a living person standing to dispute his authority. He would call his realm Empire, and himself an Emperor. Neither the HR Emperor nor the Pope could utter anything against him.
Sure, current de iure Empires are perhaps too small to be considered as such.
Carolingian realm consisted of nearly 3 CK2 de iure empires.
That's the only issue I can see with current setup. Honestly, I'd prefer most de iure Empires disabled, only leaving us with custom ones, which would need to have higher required province amount to form.

But the argument how "any Christian Empire which isn't a Roman remnant is fantasy" is just silly.
Because, as one smart guy once said:
"Might makes right."
 
I don't know why people care so much about "historicity" of Empires. If someone irl held a territory consisting of Iberian peninsula, British isles, France and Scandinavia, there wouldn't be a living person standing to dispute his authority. He would call his realm Empire, and himself an Emperor. Neither the HR Emperor nor the Pope could utter anything against him.
Sure, current de iure Empires are perhaps too small to be considered as such.
Carolingian realm consisted of nearly 3 CK2 de iure empires.
That's the only issue I can see with current setup. Honestly, I'd prefer most de iure Empires disabled, only leaving us with custom ones, which would need to have higher required province amount to form.

But the argument how "any Christian Empire which isn't a Roman remnant is fantasy" is just silly.
Because, as one smart guy once said:
"Might makes right."

Agree . The fact is that empires or emperors always have seen themselves as legitimate . It is a "what if ?" Game . We can guess that an emperor of Britania would have been so famous that everyone would have seen him and his empire as legitimate .
 
Agree . The fact is that empires or emperors always have seen themselves as legitimate . It is a "what if ?" Game . We can guess that an emperor of Britania would have been so famous that everyone would have seen him and his empire as legitimate .
Cnut the Great?
 
Cnut the Great?
Cnut claimed the imperial title ? And cnut had not de jure or custom empires options to unite his empire during centuries and centuries :p. I was more thinking about the carolingian empire or serbian empire where rulers claimed an imperial title and transmitted it based only on their own legitimacy . There is also a large number of kingdoms created from a new situation : england is a good example : created in the context of a divided island only on the basis of a common antic and ethno-geographic history. France is created by the legacy of a conqueror : Clovis or by the division of a pre-existant empire ; the carolingian empire . Spain is created by unification and mariages . What is fantastic in CK II is that the game let us chose our favorite way to unify a territory .
 
Last edited: