• 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.

Dev Diary #137 - Machinations of a Clan

Salutations!

It’s been a while since I last wrote a DD, so a quick (re)introduction might be in order. I’m Emil, aka “Servancour”, one of your resident CK3 game designers. I’ve been on the project since way before release, and tend to mostly focus a lot on game mechanics and systemic features. Which, in fact, brings me to why I’m here today. When we settled on Persia as the focus for our upcoming Flavor Pack, we soon came to realize that this would be an excellent opportunity to revisit the Clan Government and give it a much needed update.

Clans, as you currently know them, are very similar to Feudal. There are only two real points of difference between them. Opinion is a major factor in their obligations, meaning that a vassal’s opinion of their liege affects how much taxes and levies they will give to their liege. Secondly, they have access to and utilize vassal contracts, albeit in a slightly stripped down version, with less available options than their Feudal counterparts.

This begs the question; How can we make Clan Government stand out? We’ve already identified one aspect above, so our first action and problem to solve is this - How do (or should) Clans manage their vassals? Secondly, and perhaps much more important, is what does a Clan actually represent? What does the name mean for gameplay?

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Let’s start with the first question, shall we? And have a look at Clan obligations.



Tax Jurisdictions and Tax Collectors

While we knew we wanted to add something new to Clan obligations, we had to ask ourselves how we wanted to make it different. As with all things Crusader Kings, adding a new element that makes use of characters felt like a natural fit, to give obligations some personality if you will. Meet the Tax Collector.

image01.png


You’ll have access to a limited number of Tax Jurisdictions. To which you assign your Clan vassals as Taxpayers, allowing you to gain both taxes and levies from your subjects. A Jurisdiction requires a Tax Collector to function however. So before you can collect any taxes, you need to appoint one of your courtiers as a Tax Collector for each Jurisdiction.

image02.png


With Tax Collectors, you won’t manage the obligations of your vassals directly. Instead, you manage them through your Tax Collector. Similar to a Court Position, a Tax Collector uses their aptitude to set the obligations of the vassals assigned to them. Higher levels of aptitude means that you’ll get more taxes and levies. Aptitude is primarily based on their skills, with Learning being the more important one, but their opinion of you also plays a significant part. To maximize the use of your Tax Collectors, you’ll want to find and appoint a skilled character, and then put the sway scheme to good use in order to squeeze as much gold from your subjects as possible.

image03.png


While your Tax Collectors act as your intermediaries, you are still able to exact a certain degree of control of how they should manage your vassals. This is where Tax Decrees come into play. A Tax Decree is essentially how you want your vassals to be taxed, changing the obligations and providing an assortment of additional benefits.

image04.png


With the introduction of Tax Decrees, it made perfect sense to move over some aspects of vassal contracts to this new system instead. For example, this is where you’ll find Iqta, Ghazi, and Jizya to use as you see fit. While you won’t have to bother with decrees if you don’t want to, they do give you opportunities to min-max in different ways. Decrees change the obligations of your vassals, either increasing or reducing them, in exchange for other boons. Take Iqta as an example. Iqta is a great option if you find yourself with vassals who are slightly upset, just enough for you to start taking notice, and if you also finds yourself being at war frequently, as Iqta provides you with increased Men-at-Arms Damage based on the number of assigned vassals alongside an opinion bonus.

image05.png


One thing to consider is that the modifiers applied to the obligations occur on the level as set by your Tax Collector. Which makes Decrees more or less powerful depending on the Tax Collector in question. Again, looking at the effects of Iqta, -20% to both taxes and levies won’t be very noticeable if your Tax Collector has a terrible aptitude. This makes Iqta very rewarding for the price you pay, since the gained benefit is pretty good. If your Tax Collector is excellent on the other hand, you’ll feel the impact of those 20%.

That about sums it up for how Tax Jurisdictions, Collectors, and Decrees work. With obligations out of the way, let’s go back and answer our second question!



House Unity

As the name suggests, Clans should be all about the clan itself and its members. Something that we really don’t represent at the moment. Nor does it have any real impact on how you play the game. To solve this, and put a significantly larger emphasis on your House when you are playing as a Clan, we are introducing House Unity.

Unity represents the overall state of a House. Essentially the internal relationships between its members and the attitude they have towards each other. In many ways, Unity is the result of how you choose to interact with your fellow House members. We show everything regarding Unity in each Clans House view, allowing you to easily inspect your own Unity, and the Unity of other Houses.

image06.png


We measure Unity on a scale between 0 and 200, divided up into five distinct ranges, or levels. Each level comes with a set of impactful rules and trade offs that may have a noticeable impact on how you play the game. By default, most Houses start in the middle. Essentially a “neutral” level. From there, they’ll be able to actively increase or decrease their Unity.

The levels are as following, listed from lowest to highest level of Unity:
  • Antagonistic
  • Competitive
  • Impassive
  • Friendly
  • Harmonious

Thematically, having a high level of Unity means that you’ll enjoy internal stability and have House members that (generally speaking) adopt a friendly attitude towards each other. But you’ll pay for it with a reduced capability to wage wars as efficiently. CBs become more expensive to use, and you can no longer use the Invasion CB. A low level of Unity provides you with the opposite. You’ll gain a great deal of military might, allowing you to more easily conquer large swathes of land, but pay the price of reduced internal stability. Depending on your playstyle, you might enjoy a particular direction more than the other. Regardless of your own preference, having either low or high levels of Unity is meant to be equally viable.

Instead of having me ramble about the effects of each level, here are some nifty screenshots showing you what they look like:

image07.png

image08.png

image09.png

image10_02.png

image11.png


Other than the passive effects, you also gain access to a set of unique decisions. Most of which are available only to the House Head, as they provide powerful boons for the entirety of a House. The primary currency for these decisions is Piety. Since most Clans belong to an Islamic faith, this felt like a natural fit. Besides, Piety is generally more difficult to get than Prestige, making you consider where and how to spend that hard earned Piety.

Some of these decisions make use of a completely new type of modifier; a modifier that scales on the number of landed House members. If you are like me, and like to utilize nepotism to the fullest, these modifiers can become incredibly powerful. Be mindful that the Piety cost will increase accordingly.

For all you modders out there, you can use scaling modifiers in every place you use regular modifiers. You simply feed it a value for how you want it to scale.

Let’s look at an example. If your House is Antagonistic, you can use the decision “Reinforce Army with Loyal Officers”:

image12.png

image13.png


Last, but certainly not least, Unity directly affects the outcome of your succession. Each level has an impact on the outcome of how titles are inherited, and the succession changes automatically as your House’s Unity changes. They all maintain a variant of Partition, meaning that titles will always be split to some extent. When you are Antagonistic, all eligible children inherit equal shares. If you are Harmonious, the primary heir inherits the majority of the titles (at least two thirds). With varying degrees in-between. At worst, this means that you don’t have to deal with Confederate Partition, and at best, you have an easier time accessing a superior version of High Partition. The drawback? While you can try to get a single heir succession law, such as Primogeniture, it will be more difficult and expensive to do so.

image14.png


Now that we know what Unity does, let’s explore how it’s impacted by gameplay. As mentioned previously, Unity is all about the members of a House and how they interact. This will become apparent as you start interacting with your family members. A lot of existing interactions have been updated to also have an impact on your Unity in different ways. Whenever you are playing as Clan that is. Taking what we call “divisive” actions, such as Revoke Title or Imprison, against fellow House members will naturally reduce your House’s Unity. Meanwhile, “unifying” actions, such as Negotiate Alliance or Offer Ward, will increase Unity. Unity is therefore really a byproduct of how you and your fellow House members interact with each other.

With that said, the House Head enjoys a number of additional actions, giving them a greater degree of control in how they want to direct the Unity of their own House. The foremost of these is a decision in which the Head actively takes a stance and chooses a direction to steer their Unity. Then we also have two new interactions the Head can use on members of their House, both of which act as a double-edged sword and have some clear advantages and drawbacks.

image15.png

image16.png

image17.png


There are of course many more interactions, far too many to list all of them here, which will have an impact on your Unity. Worth mentioning is that the immediate impact of these interactions is fairly small, but they stack up over time, especially when you are not the only one within your House who will be using them.

Rest assured that you’ll have plenty to explore as you get your hands on the updated Clan Government later this year, which will be included with the free update launching alongside Legacy of Persia!
 
  • 147Like
  • 50Love
  • 9
  • 9
  • 8
Reactions:
Do Tax Jurisdictions have to be continuous at all?

Does the maximum number of vassals in a Tax Jurisdiction change at all?

Are Tax Jurisdictions limited to only one Decree at at a time?

Can you share with us the effects of any other Tax Decree?
1. No. You are free to assign whichever vassals to any of your Tax Collectors. Even if they are on different sides of your realm.
2. Currently, no. Based on feedback, this is something that can be adjusted quite easily in the future though.
3. Yes. A Jurisdiction can only have one Decree active.
4. Sure! Ghazi is pretty interesting, especially if you combine it with Iqta.

clan_dd_ghazi.jpg


Will there be some sort of decadence then, or am I reading to much into that trait?
No decadence mechanic to speak of. This is really just an easter egg to CK2.

So Vassal Contracts are once again Feudal exclusive? I kinda liked having a unified/universal system for that...
While the bulk of features included in Vassal Contracts are exclusive to Feudal (just like before), there are still a few options available to Clan. Some of the options simply didn't make a lot of sense to move over to the new system. For example, you can still have and make use of Council Rights or protection against Title Revocation.
 
  • 17
  • 9Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
Please add a "automatically assign best avaiable tax collector" optional box.

I don't want to micromanage another court position when this unlanded dude dies every 10 years
 
  • 4Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Any chance of broadening that significantly to include basically everyone? It gets ridiculous when you have a large dynasty with almost as many cadet branches as there are landed members. Maybe an optional game rule?
Maybe not exactly the same limitation ( founding a new house after gaining independence works great with the clan unity mechanic), but something like: a house member can only found a new house if they aren't a direct vassal of another house member... The amount of houses in one dynasty is really ridiculous.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I am still confused regarding CB invasions and House unity features. I'm hoping the devs can give a clear answer to this.
Do the new features, such as the limitations on CB invasions and the effects of House Unity, apply only to interactions with other house members within a Clan, or do they also affect interactions with external realms and other characters from foreign houses?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I occasionally write small homebrew RPG systems, and this reminds me of a certain phase in nearly every one of those games where I just end up throwing features at the thing out of some misguided belief that "it's not complex enough" or "not thematic enough" or whatever.

Most of the time, I end up taking a step back and forcing myself to look at my original idea only to realize that 90% of my additions just add game mechanics that, while probably solid in their own right, don't contribute to the theme and feel that I want to get across.

This is giving me very similar vibes to that. The mechanics don't sound bad or wrong per se, but it feels a bit like the whole tax collector block just ends up kind of repeating mechanics that are already there but making everything more complicated by being its own self-contained system.
 
  • 2
  • 2
Reactions:
Each cadet branch/house has their own Unity.
Will Unity affect how frequently branches come about?
I would assume a super harmonious house would be significantly less likely to be divided.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
While this looks very nice, in general, i kinda can´t overlook the fact that this "Both ends of the spectrum need to be viable" is divorced from reality.

Sure, this offers more varied game play, instead of offering a single, optimal, way to play, but a disunited clan should, in reality, be a mess and not be more effective in warfare than a united one.

Personally i think there is nothign wrong with a disunited clan facing huge issues; This can be made interesting, if the decisions and actions necessary to keep the clan harmonious are interesting. Like, many necessary actions, like revoking titles, murdering a relative, could lead to disunity, a cost which would need to be calculated into your decisions.
I semi-agree. While i do think that high house unity should make it very easy to surround yourself with loyal people (family) and thus profit off of the stability, i do think seeing low house unity as "no one has the right to stop me" and having a way easier time starting wars willy-nilly is an interesting take.
You don't have to consult family to start major wars. What your father thinks about that is irrelevant if there is no family unity supporting his condemnation of your wars, he can't stop you.

I think the design decision was less focussed on what problems arise with each end of the spectrum, but more what opportunities arise.
Unwavering Stability and Support or uninhibited Pursuit of Power.
I think that choice is vaild.

(I personally would like at least a game rule making it more likely for family members to murder you if they stand to inherit something or someone they like vastly more stands to inherit something. That'd be fun.)
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
While this looks very nice, in general, i kinda can´t overlook the fact that this "Both ends of the spectrum need to be viable" is divorced from reality.

Sure, this offers more varied game play, instead of offering a single, optimal, way to play, but a disunited clan should, in reality, be a mess and not be more effective in warfare than a united one.

Personally i think there is nothign wrong with a disunited clan facing huge issues; This can be made interesting, if the decisions and actions necessary to keep the clan harmonious are interesting. Like, many necessary actions, like revoking titles, murdering a relative, could lead to disunity, a cost which would need to be calculated into your decisions.

This query and a few others like it have gotten the biggest amounts of likes and no disagreements yet the developers have completely skipped these ones and not provided us with a response.

I think that currently this is going to be the main issue with the clan system, there is simply no downside to it. I think one way to balance this out is to make it so that negative unity affects the house head negatively but it affects the rest of the house positively, as in they will have more opportunities and will be able to make more decisions on their own without really consulting the head. But more unity should primarily affect the house head positively while curtailing other members of the house, in essence something similar to crown authority but with different benefits and negatives. The focus here should be on the house head, with full unity the house head should be viewed as the ultimate decision maker to the point that radical things like revoking titles from family members will not be questioned at all and will not give tiranny even if the house head doesn't technicaly have claims on any of the titles that he is revoking.

While on the other end of the spectre, with a completely disunited house, the house head should be completely disregarded by other house members, perhaps even being forced to have a Diarch co-rule with him and in such a state you should be forced to make drastic decisions that could endanger your realm if you want to regain control over your house. Now that would make for interesting and challenging gameplay.

Also I think that a decadence system should be reintroduced but it should not really be tied to the government alone rather it should be a mechanic that appears when there is a combination of both a Clan government and someone is a muslim and should be affected by house Unity, so the more United a house is decadence will start to appear after a generation or two. So if you have managed to keep your house united for say 2-3 generations it will start to become decadent. I think this would be a really good system.

I see no reason why the decadence system from CK2 should be thrown out completely, improve it and add it to the new mechanics that you are creating, not everything has to be completely scrapped.
 
  • 7
  • 5
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Really interesting dev diary. I have a few questions:

  1. Will Tax Collectors be able to use the "Syphon Treasury" Scheme, with the eventual maluses affecting some County or Taxpayer inside their Jurisdiction?

  2. Are there going to be any special benefits to leaving Vassals Untaxed : Opinion or anything else?

  3. How will Sub-Vassals be impacted by Tax Collectors : Is the basis for taxation going to be what the Taxpayer effectively collected or the "real" income and manpower of the Taxpayer's realm?

  4. Are there going to be Events or Schemes fleshing out the relationship between Taxpayers and Tax Collectors? Maybe you can bribe the Tax Collector to look the other way in exchange for keeping part of the proceeds. Perhaps Tax Collectors will attempt to fleece Taxpayers by exaggerating the numbers and keeping the difference.

  5. Have there been changes to Taxation Grand Tours to incorporate Tax Jurisdictions and Tax Collectors? Did you consider making Tax Collectors physically Travel to the capitals of Taxpayers to further Control, ensure Taxes are properly paid, etc...
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
If there are several Governments in one House, such as Karakhanid in 1066, how does House Unity work?
I think this was answered previously, but to iterate. A house may have members of any government type, but only those who are clan will be able to affect Unity (as in their actions may increase or decrease Unity, for example if they revoke a title from another house member, who also has to be clan). And only clan will gain the effects of Unity/the active Unity level.

This query and a few others like it have gotten the biggest amounts of likes and no disagreements yet the developers have completely skipped these ones and not provided us with a response.
There's a lot of posts, and only so much time to respond to them. But I'll try to provide a brief answer as to the reasoning behind it.

In short, I think this post summarizes it fairly well:
I think the design decision was less focussed on what problems arise with each end of the spectrum, but more what opportunities arise.
Unwavering Stability and Support or uninhibited Pursuit of Power.
I think that choice is vaild.

If you look at Unity less as a scale of how much your house members agree with each other, and more as a measurment of how much the members respects the current status quo and how opportunistic they are, I think you'll have a better idea of what we want to represent in terms of gameplay. A harmonious house will want to focus on keeping the realm as it is and to ensure a safe succession. An antagonistic house on the other hand, wants to expand at every opportunity, and replace the house head in the process if need be. It's really about what type of opportunities you seek. Do you want to expand and conquer everyone else in your pursuit of glory and power? Never quite satisfied with what you have? Or are you and your fellow members happy with the realm you've built, and want to keep it that way?

We could of course have opted for a solution closer to what you and others have suggested, where you want to keep and maintain a high level of Unity at all costs, or face the consequences should you fail. Neither approach is right or wrong. It's a about offering a particular gameplay experience. In the end, we opted for one where you as a player can feel that you have a choice and agency over your house. We want to give you the choice of pursuing a particular level of Unity, affecting the way you play the game in the process. Which, in the grand scheme of things, fits well into the overall CK3 experience.

With that said. Feel free to agree or disagree with the decision, but I hope the reasoning at least is a bit clearer with that in mind. Or maybe it isn't, I might just be rambling at this point.
 
  • 25
  • 17Like
  • 3
  • 3
Reactions:
I think this was answered previously, but to iterate. A house may have members of any government type, but only those who are clan will be able to affect Unity (as in their actions may increase or decrease Unity, for example if they revoke a title from another house member, who also has to be clan). And only clan will gain the effects of Unity/the active Unity level.


There's a lot of posts, and only so much time to respond to them. But I'll try to provide a brief answer as to the reasoning behind it.

In short, I think this post summarizes it fairly well:


If you look at Unity less as a scale of how much your house members agree with each other, and more as a measurment of how much the members respects the current status quo and how opportunistic they are, I think you'll have a better idea of what we want to represent in terms of gameplay. A harmonious house will want to focus on keeping the realm as it is and to ensure a safe succession. An antagonistic house on the other hand, wants to expand at every opportunity, and replace the house head in the process if need be. It's really about what type of opportunities you seek. Do you want to expand and conquer everyone else in your pursuit of glory and power? Never quite satisfied with what you have? Or are you and your fellow members happy with the realm you've built, and want to keep it that way?

We could of course have opted for a solution closer to what you and others have suggested, where you want to keep and maintain a high level of Unity at all costs, or face the consequences should you fail. Neither approach is right or wrong. It's a about offering a particular gameplay experience. In the end, we opted for one where you as a player can feel that you have a choice and agency over your house. We want to give you the choice of pursuing a particular level of Unity, affecting the way you play the game in the process. Which, in the grand scheme of things, fits well into the overall CK3 experience.
Thank you for the answer. I somewhat understand what you mean but it still does not make much sense, I just think that it should be a system that determines internal things more than it does external stuff. Especialy the part where you get an invasion CB if the house is not united, that one makes the least sense. But in any case I will wait for the release and see what it ends up being like.
 
  • 5Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Whenever a new "crusader state" is founded, the government matches the heritage of the new Monarch (ie, Clan for Arabic, Iranian, Turkic; Feudal otherwise).

Wouldn't there be changes to this now that the Clan government is gonna be updated?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
1. No. You are free to assign whichever vassals to any of your Tax Collectors. Even if they are on different sides of your realm.
2. Currently, no. Based on feedback, this is something that can be adjusted quite easily in the future though.
3. Yes. A Jurisdiction can only have one Decree active.
4. Sure! Ghazi is pretty interesting, especially if you combine it with Iqta.

View attachment 1032270

I'm confused. What do you mean by combining Ghazi Status with Iqta Grant if a Tax Jurisdiction can only have one Decree at a time?
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
I'm confused. What do you mean by combining Ghazi Status with Iqta Grant if a Tax Jurisdiction can only have one Decree at a time?

I think they meant having them as two separate Jurisdictions. We see that in the example they can only maintain two, so having one be Ghazi and the other be Iqta would essentially create a "build" for your realm, with every vassal contributing one or the other.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Any chance of broadening that significantly to include basically everyone? It gets ridiculous when you have a large dynasty with almost as many cadet branches as there are landed members. Maybe an optional game rule?

Also, will this Clan government system remain exclusive to Islam, or will it be applied to Christians in notoriously clan-based societies like Scotland, Ireland etc? How does it interact with Zoroastrianism, should one want to go that route in Persia?
I actually like having cadet branches within my realm. Increases RP value, especially with elective succession.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions: