• 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.
Hello, I'm Crusader Kings II developer Goosecreature. You may remember me from such Developer Diaries as "Events and Decisions" and "The Heathens are Coming." Today I'll be talking a bit about - you guessed it - the events and decisions of The Old Gods. This expansion will introduce many of these and not just for the Vikings.

As a Norse Pagan, you can hold a blot every nine years during winter. This is a good way of making your vassals like you more, and it is somewhat similar to a feast with one big difference – the human sacrifice. During a blot, four random prisoners will be brought up from your dungeon and you will have to decide whether or not to sacrifice them to the Allfather for prestige and piety. If you have no prisoners, some nameless thralls will be sacrificed instead but this won't bring you nearly as much renown. Anyone can be sacrificed, including close family members, but you will earn extra piety if your victim is a Christian or a Muslim. These are harsh times and the world is not a friendly place.

View attachment CKII_ToG_DD_05_Blot_Sacrifice.jpg

Another way of increasing your prestige is to commission a runestone. This can be done only once in a character's lifetime, and you can choose to devote it either to yourself or one of your parents. The Scandinavian dueling tradition of holmgång is also in the game, and Norse characters can, under certain circumstances, challenge each other to single combat on an isolated islet. There are also events for Norse characters leaving to join the Varangian Guard, the discovery of Greenland and Vinland, characters gaining the Viking or Berserker traits, the appearance of the Jomsvikings and the Seljuks, völur (mystic seers) joining your court, and many more.

View attachment CKII_ToG_DD_05_Holmgang.jpg

The Mongols will have a decision to hold the nerge, a great hunt in which most of their army participates. This is in essence a massive military training exercise that sees the different wings of the Mongol army coordinating maneuvers and driving wildlife before them in close formation. Once encircled, the wildlife is killed and the army gains both provisions and invaluable experience working together as a single fighting force. Doing this will give your armies a morale boost.

Suomenusko pagans will be able to hold the Ukon Juhla festival, where they worship the god Ukko in the hope of improving their harvests. For Romuva pagans, the Užgavenes festival can be held in spring, where effigies to winter are burnt and the coming of summer is celebrated. Finally, Slavic pagans can hold a festival in the name of the god Jarilo, in which a random vassal is given the honor of representing Jarilo and paraded around wearing bells and other glamorous clothing.

View attachment CKII_ToG_DD_05_Jarilo.jpg

This doesn't cover everything, but as I wanted to write a bit about something else, it will have to do for now.

There have been a lot of requests for us to go into more detail on the Zoroastrians, which is something we hadn't originally planned to do for the Dev Diaries. In order to please YOU (yes, you in particular), the next part of this diary will be devoted to them.

For those who aren't familiar with it, Zoroastrianism is an ancient religion that originated in Persia. It predates the Abrahamic faiths by quite a bit, and was the state religion of the Achaemenid, Parthian and Sassanid empires. Its decline as a major religion came with the Arab invasion of Persia and the spread of Islam in the 7th century, but pockets would still remain in the Central Asian hinterlands of the former Sassanid Empire centuries later.

View attachment CKII_ToG_DD_05_Zoroastrian_Persia.jpg

By 867, the common folk in several parts of Persia still cling to Zoroastrianism but they are the subjects of Muslim rulers and their conversion to the Mohammedan faith is only a matter of time. Just north of these domains, along the eastern shores of the Caspian Sea, Satrap Vandad of the Karen dynasty rules the last independent Zoroastrian realm on the map. This is a challenging starting position and reclaiming Persia and its holy sites for the Zoroastrian faith will not be easy, but it can be done.

Zoroastrianism is not a member of the Pagan religious group, and so they have no need to reform their religion. They will start the game in 867 without a High Priest, but if you hold the Persian Empire there is a decision to restore the position of the Moabadan-Moabad (the Priest of Priests). Just like the Pope, this priest can grant divorces and sanction invasions against other Zoroastrian realms. You'll probably be the only one at this point, so this likely won't do you much good unless your carefully built Zoroastrian empire fragments in civil war.

Also, Zoroastrian rulers are able to enter holy marriages with close relatives of the opposite gender. Such a sacred union will increase their standing among vassals, but producing a healthy heir may become a problem... fortunately, you can always fall back on your concubines for that.

View attachment CKII_ToG_DD_05_The_Zoroastrian_Church.jpg

If you manage to stage a miraculous Zoroastrian recovery and reclaim the Persian Empire, you will have the option of declaring yourself the Saoshyant, the chosen savior of the world mentioned in prophecy by Zoroaster himself. This will not only earn you a new nickname, but you will also get a new trait that significantly boosts the opinion of all Zoroastrian characters towards you. All future descendants of the Saoshyant will also get a less powerful version of this trait, even if they convert to a different religion.

That's all I have for now. I hope you'll have a pleasant Wednesday!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quoting the Bible isn't much evidence - History agrees there was likely no Exodus, nor that the Jews were monotheistic before 650BC at the earliest.
 
Interesting to see that Persia serves a unique role for Zoroastrianism, not unlike Byzantium and Orthodoxy (only ERE can end the schism). I wonder if we'll ever see any special connection being added between HRE and Catholicism.

I'm also intrigued to see that the Zoroastrians use a modified Muslim interface. I wonder which interface do the Aztecs use, as the whole "wood" theme does not really suit them.
 
I'm also intrigued to see that the Zoroastrians use a modified Muslim interface. I wonder which interface do the Aztecs use, as the whole "wood" theme does not really suit them.

I did not notice that - good catch.
 
Quoting the Bible isn't much evidence - History agrees there was likely no Exodus, nor that the Jews were monotheistic before 650BC at the earliest.

Saying "History agrees" is even less evidence than quoting a religious document that contradicts itself. I don't think there was Exodus, although I do think that studying Bible can show us how Judaism progressed from being polytheistic to monotheistic.
 
Saying "History agrees" is even less evidence than quoting a religious document that contradicts itself. I don't think there was Exodus, although I do think that studying Bible can show us how Judaism progressed from being polytheistic to monotheistic.
I said "History agrees" because I didn't want to quote sources
"What Did the Biblical Writers Know, and When Did They Know It?" - William Dever
"Exodus" - Carol Meyershttp://books.google.com.au/books?id...0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Meyers Exodus&f=false
 

Thank you for references, would be a nice read. Appreciate it.

Still, two references != History agrees. Then you tell me I shouldn't quote Bible to support my view, yet you cite (if we can call it that) two authors, at least one of which (Meyers) uses Bible quotes routinely.

It looks to me that my Bible references offended you on some emotional level and you decide to throw your two cents without much deliberation. To clarify, I said "Bible confirms" as a jest. I used Bible to confirm my jest. Yet, both a jest and Bible (in this case) do reflect my view that Judaism was not always monotheistic. Monotheism is the belief that their is just one God, yet Lord himself tells us there are more. What else do I need? :D

Cheers.
 
Stop ruining my half-drunken attempts at debunking all non-Ahrimanic religion <_<
Nah the bible quotes didn't offend me emotionally, if that were the case I'd have commited suicide months ago :laugh:
 
next patch I might make a Zoroastrian irish count <.< (im already going to restore Zoroastrian Persia but why not Ireland too!) Also cant wait for a mod to introduce celtic druidism. Custom create a character in wales with celtic druid stuff, and evict the saxon invaders!
 
Still hoping for some Norse virtues and/or changes to how Norse perceive christian virtues and sins. "Gluttonous: Eat and be merry for Ragnarok awaits! +10 opinion with other norsemen +1 martial +2 diplomacy". Of course the "Ahrimanic" religions still see them the same way and hate you for being a glutton.


norse6.png
 

Attachments

  • Asatru_by_Esonax.jpg
    Asatru_by_Esonax.jpg
    375,6 KB · Views: 109
Great to know that we're getting some new traits, especially the ones for Norse people. In the first screenshot we probably have the "Viking" trait, possibly granting martial and opinion bonuses (or opinion penalties towards lords of other religions?), which is basically the Norse equivalent of the crusade/jihad veteran trait. About the "Berserker trait", I'd imagine it gives you something like +3-+5 martial bonus, but as a downside there might be effects similar to "Lunatic" trait, or even health penalty/penalties to other attributes (assuming that their "berserker mode" was due to consuming drugged foods such as poisonous mushrooms).

In addition, in one of the earlier DDs (was it no. 3?), Rurik of Holmgård had some sort of "bright/innovator?" trait that some people mistaked for "Attractive". This trait still remains unexplained, or at least I haven't heard anything regarding it since the DD in question came out. Could that be the icon for "Berserker"? I doubt it. If Rurik's ridiculously high attributes are taken into account, this trait is likely to give, like, +10 bonus to all attributes.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad to hear that a lot of these new features can only be done by the player. It has already been said that AI pagans will probably never be able to reform their religion, and I'm happy to see that Zoroastrianism will probably disappear or greatly shrink if the player doesn't take a direct role in saving it (not that I have anything against Zoroastrianism, but I think it would be more realistic for Islam to replace Zoroastrianism in Persia if the player doesn't get involved). This is nice because it really allows the player to follow wildly different paths that the game normally wouldn't do on its own.

Question: are there any links to anything that describes how Christians an Muslims will convert others? Is it just a matter of sending your court chaplain to a pagan country?
 
Still hoping for some Norse virtues and/or changes to how Norse perceive christian virtues and sins. "Gluttonous: Eat and be merry for Ragnarok awaits! +10 opinion with other norsemen +1 martial +2 diplomacy". Of course the "Ahrimanic" religions still see them the same way and hate you for being a glutton.
But there's only one Ahrimanic religion :eek:
 
Various forms of African paganism still exist today, and Malinese pagans were playing a significant role in civil wars throughout the CK2 period. I'd expect Ghana to be pagan-ruled in 867, and for count level pagans to last well into the CK2 period. I don't know if they'll group the Canaries in or not (they were completely different culturally and religiously, but Paradox may not want to spend resources developing a single-province religion), but they remained independent pagans until the 1400s.

Compare that with Zoroastrianism (dying out already in 867), much less with a sub-county level area that may have had some peasant remnants of a debased form of Greek paganism.

In Christian theology at least, those 'gods' are usually regulated to demons. This makes sense- it implies in those passages that all the other 'gods' combined couldn't even begin to match the Jewish God, and that he had authority over them all.
 
Quoting the Bible isn't much evidence - History agrees there was likely no Exodus, nor that the Jews were monotheistic before 650BC at the earliest.

Eh, usually themes come from somewhere. A lot of historical discovery in the last hundred years has confirmed that the overall background stories of the Bible are typically accurate. My belief is that confirmation for Exodus will come sooner or latter, just like confirmation for the tribes around Israel or the wealth of the Egyptians (both which history once agreed were unlikely).

Edit: As for the discussion on the Jews monotheism, we should make a distinction between monotheism as we see it, and monotheism as, say, the Egyptians saw it when they had their experience with it. For many during the period, there were still other Gods- but they were all subordinate, indeed, they all drew their power from the One High God. They were (in other words) more akin to demi-Gods than to actual gods.

There is some evidence that suggest that the Jews thought this very early about their own God.