• 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 #89 - Mass Conversion, or how I learned to stop my Pagan ways and love God

Greetings!

Note that this is the last DevDiary before vacations start. Until they are over we will not post any diaries, or post them very sporadically. We will resume the normal schedule on the 10th of August.

Today we’d like to talk about Mass Conversion, the flip side of what we talked about in the last DD (Dynamic Pagan Reformation). While Reforming a Pagan faith is a very epic feat, it’s also a fairly hard one to pull off in many cases. Historically, pagan rulers often turned to their neighbours religions in order to solidify their rule - and now so can you!

It used to be quite a suicidal affair to convert to a non-Pagan religion as a Pagan ruler, your provinces would stay pagan and your vassals would often be upset with you and immediately start a faction to install a pagan claimant. With Holy Fury it’s much more reliable, and carries great benefits to both you and your people. Depending on your strength as a leader, and the respect you have from your subjects, you can now convince your realm to join you in a Mass Conversion. A Mass Conversion will see you, your subjects and your lands adopt a new religion - except for particularly rebellious subjects, of course. Note that only Tribal Pagans will have access to this mechanic.

To Mass Convert your realm you first need to find a so called ‘Sponsor’. You can either look for a sponsor manually, by looking at the interactions menu with landed independent characters, or you can access a list of anyone who would be willing to go through the trouble by clicking a new button in the religious interface:
MassConversionDD_InterfaceValues.png


As said before, this list contains a list of everyone who will accept to convert your realm, and in the bottom right corner you can see that the AI reasoning is now exposed! The acceptance will not just be a bunch of pluses and minuses, instead you’ll be able to see exactly how they reason. If you, for example, want Byzantium to be your sponsor, you can enter the character sheet of the Basileus and check the interaction tooltip to see his reasoning if he says no, which will give you actual hints on what you could do to improve the chances of him accepting.
MassConversionDD_Accepted.png


After you’ve found a sponsor that accepted your offer, the Mass Conversion events will begin!
MassConversionDD_mainEvent.png

Note that the event image is a placeholder.

If you’re a tribe with low organization, you will actually gain a level of organization upon performing a Mass Conversion, in addition to you and your land switching to the new religion. The downside to doing one when you have low organization is, as mentioned earlier, that fewer subjects are likely to go along with it.

It doesn’t end here though, you and your sponsor will continue to keep in touch - and your sponsor will keep on helping your realm by providing you with money, building churches in your realm and many other things. Examples:
MassConversionDD_SponsorEvent.png
MassConversionDD_SponsorEvent2.png


In addition, the priest that your sponsor will send you will also help you out. He will attempt to modernize your realm and ensure that you act in accordance to your new faith. For example:
MassConversionDD_PriestEvent.png


So, as you can clearly see, this system stands in stark contrast to the Dynamic Reformation we talked about in a previous Dev Diary - by reforming you gain absolute control of your future, but it’s a difficult path to walk that also require you to conquer vast territories. A Mass Conversion, on the other hand, is a fairly easy thing to accomplish that also comes with temporal benefits - but you’ll have to submit to a faith that might not represent you or the people you rule...
 
This is all great but why are only tribals allowed to use it? Reading through the dev diary the Mass conversion seemed to me exactly as what Boris I of Bulgaria did historically. Any chance to reconsider the prerequisites?
Given the requirements for being feudal (or Merchant republic) if you're unreformed pagan you're either tribal or nomadic (excluding re-Paganizing - but in this case you probably don't really need Mass Conversion).
More interesting - would this be available for reformed Pagans? Like, Vladimir, the only (afaik) real example of a Pagan faith reformed, turned to Orthodoxy soon afterwards.
if a heresy replaces the main religion (i.e. Messalianism overtaking Nestorianism, Iconoclasm replacing Orthodoxy, etc.), will they get to sponsor mass conversions as well?
They don't need to replace it seems.
(Exception: the Christian Saint Josaphat turns out to have really been Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha.)
Given that Buddha lived way before Christianity... Unlikely, at best. Proofs? (Unless you speak of the saint Joasaph known from precisely one Medieval source not of the Jewish king Josaphat later recanonized).
 
Wait, converting is suppose to be hard? I find it pitifully easy. Maybe I'm just good at managing my vassals, but I have literally no problem converting to Christianity or Islam when I decided the time has come. I have a harder time getting my tribal organization up then I do dealing with religious conversion. Converting was hard before it also auto converted your entire family. Now though once you push the button you're pretty much good.
 
I hope crusades get a tweak , its not right that only one gets the new kingdom , usually the most powerfull crusader kingdom of the many that partecipate that go back without any title or land ... I think a better equal subdivision would be good.
Here
 
Has the "priest refuses to proselytize in pagan realms" event been fixed so that the event actually appears on screen and allows the player to force him to stay?

I didn't even know that event was a thing. Would explain why oftentimes you'll send missionary, they won't get imprisoned, but nothing happens.

I would really like to hear something about this because it does really sound like a sure way to be regarded as a saint, historically, just as the christian wife of a pagan ruler who converted her husband through events would pretty much guarantee a canonization for her, wouldn't her?

Also also, could having a pagan friend, while playing as a Christian ruler, increase the chance that said pagan (if not zealous) would ask you personally for sponsorship in a Mass Conversion?
It shouldn't automatically make you a saint. Mieszko I, Kind of Poland, embraced Catholicism and despite some pagan rebellions Poland followed him, but was never canonized. However, I definitely agree that it should lower the virtue threshold for canonization though.
 
Last edited:
Eh, Western European sources called him a duke, Arabic sources called him a king, we don't really know what title he used himself.
Petty King fits the bill then.
 
Eh, Western European sources called him a duke, Arabic sources called him a king, we don't really know what title he used himself.
Arabic? What has anything Arabic to do with a west slavic ruler bordering the HRE?
The historians have agreed to call Mieszko a duke as his son, Boleslaw the Brave, became the first Polish ruler who was officially recognized by the Western world as a King.
 
Arabic? What has anything Arabic to do with a west slavic ruler bordering the HRE?
The historians have agreed to call Mieszko a duke as his son, Boleslaw the Brave, became the first Polish ruler who was officially recognized by the Western world as a King.
Merchants from al-Andalus, predominantly Jewish travellers, who'd be recording their journeys in Arabic, were not an uncommon thing and left us more sources about Eastern Europe than the HRE did.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrahim_ibn_Yaqub
 
Arabic? What has anything Arabic to do with a west slavic ruler bordering the HRE?
The historians have agreed to call Mieszko a duke as his son, Boleslaw the Brave, became the first Polish ruler who was officially recognized by the Western world as a King.
As Voodoo economist mentions, Ibrahim ibn Yaquib traveled throughout Slavic lands and gave an account of various Slavic rulers and their subjects. He describes Mieszko I as "the King of the North" (yes, really).
 
Merchants from al-Andalus, predominantly Jewish travellers, who'd be recording their journeys in Arabic, were not an uncommon thing and left us more sources about Eastern Europe than the HRE did.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrahim_ibn_Yaqub
I dont think he is anywhere as reliable as German sources. The second part of the 10th century was a period of intensive Polish-HRE contacts. Poland got baptized by the Germans and remained in good contacts for quite some time. There were German missionaries in Poland, German knights and even cities were being established in the German fashion, meaning there were some German advisors in every possible area of social life in Poland.
Mieszko being a duke is pure logic as Polish history is VERY clear that Boleslaw was the first Polish king.
However, citing Arabic/Andalusian sources and claiming they are anywhere close as reliable as German is just ridiculous. Whatever travelers were coming through the lands in this period, they could possibly have no better insight in what was going on in the contemporary Poland than the German sources.
 
I dont think he is anywhere as reliable as German sources. The second part of the 10th century was a period of intensive Polish-HRE contacts. Poland got baptized by the Germans and remained in good contacts for quite some time. There were German missionaries in Poland, German knights and even cities were being established in the German fashion, meaning there were some German advisors in every possible area of social life in Poland.
Mieszko being a duke is pure logic as Polish history is VERY clear that Boleslaw was the first Polish king.
However, citing Arabic/Andalusian sources and claiming they are anywhere close as reliable as German is just ridiculous. Whatever travelers were coming through the lands in this period, they could possibly have no better insight in what was going on in the contemporary Poland than the German sources.
But that's not exactly true. The German sources are very few, many of them written a long time after the events, and all written with a clear, policital/ecclesiastical agenda. The Arabic sources are some of the rare contemporary writings about Mieszko, simply because unlike the Germans the Andalusians were much more likely to be literate. There are not may good sources on the early Piasts, ibn Yaqub is one of the best - ask any historian who specialises in the period and area if you don't believe me.

And to be clear - I am not arguing that Bolesław shouldn't be considered the first Polish king. I'm quite sure ibn Yaqub used the word "malik" just to describe an independent ruler of a significant state in the region, as a translation of whatever Mieszko called himself. The political distinction between who's a Grand Duke and who's a King is something that came from the West though, as part of the Christianisation process and the inclusion of the Latin clergy into the power structures. These titles were not as clearly cut as CK2 would make one think ;) Nobody's absolutely certain what Mieszko called himself before and after the baptism (the first recorded Polish sentence is dated 1270, much later) since just as ibn Yaqub translated what he understood into Arabic, so did other sources into Latin. And even if we knew - the context must've shifted over the period of such great political and social change.

So yes, historians agree that Bolesław the first was the first crowned King of Poland in a sense recognised by the contemporary West. There are many nuances and details though, which we are not sure about and that discussion has been going on for centuries - and Mieszko himself is a figure about which we know extremely little for someone so important (especially pre-christianisation) and we can't afford to discredit ibn Yaqub just because he was from far away. In many ways that actually makes his journals more believable.
 
I dont think he is anywhere as reliable as German sources. The second part of the 10th century was a period of intensive Polish-HRE contacts. Poland got baptized by the Germans and remained in good contacts for quite some time. There were German missionaries in Poland, German knights and even cities were being established in the German fashion, meaning there were some German advisors in every possible area of social life in Poland.
Mieszko being a duke is pure logic as Polish history is VERY clear that Boleslaw was the first Polish king.
However, citing Arabic/Andalusian sources and claiming they are anywhere close as reliable as German is just ridiculous. Whatever travelers were coming through the lands in this period, they could possibly have no better insight in what was going on in the contemporary Poland than the German sources.

Well, these should be sources to be heard nonetheless. Those travellers having no political or religious interest in those Western Slavic areas could mean that their account would be less biased.
 
Sweet! This should make conversion much less of a headache and perhaps also make it worthwhile to spend some efforts to bring the true word to the pagans instead of just crushing them in Holy Wars.