• 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 #138 - Persian Delights

Hello and welcome to this development diary about flavor additions to the greater Iran area. That means in this diary you will get a test of many things that, while individually small, aim to increase the overall authenticity and uniqueness in this part of the world.
I will also begin with a shout out to @Vaniljkaka who worked on the first draft of this DD and did a lot of the event and research work for Legacy of Persia.



Historical Flavor

One way to significantly improve the state of the game in a given start date is to look into what unresolved issues were ongoing in a specific location at the time. To a large degree that is the thinking behind the struggle system itself but and as already described in a previous development diary there is now both a new 867 bookmark start, and a struggle called the Iranian Intermezzo to achieve this.

But the struggle alone cannot cover everything that was important for a ruler in medieval Iran in 867 or 1066. We have therefore taken the opportunity to more thoroughly research the starting situation for both starts, adding new rulers, dynasties, rivalries, as well as less politically influential characters such as scholars or artists active in our time period. Existing family trees have also been significantly expanded in many cases and should also now make use of a new set of coat-of-arms using Iranian or Islamic elements.

Additionally, there has been a general go-over of the cultural and religious setup of the entire region, with adjustments here and there aiming to better reflect the political realities of the time.

image 01.png


The biggest changes are to certain religious groups or sects that were important in 9th century Iran - the Mu’tazila, the Khurramites, the Azariqa. The rebellious, egalitarian Khurramites would be particularly suited for underdog playthroughs though none are landed at the start, whereas the fanatic Azariqa stand ready to unleash a terrifying wave of assassinations, to avenge the Battle of Nahrawan and the many slights they believe that they’ve suffered since. Both these faiths have been given new tenets to portray their unique worldviews. At game start in 867 there is also an ongoing Azariqa rebellion, which you can partake in if you want to attempt to form an Azariqan Caliphate.

An image of the Azariqa faith and its three tenets, highlighting the Fedayeen tenet and its new art

[The Fedayeen tenet is shared by the Azariqa and the Nizari, and allows you to recruit and utilize fearsome assassins - fanatics devoted to slaying the unbelievers.]


An image of the Khurramite faith and some of its counties in 867.

[The rural, rebellious Khurramites are present in pockets all over Iran, though their great rebellions of the mid-9th century have long since been suppressed. Also featured in the screenshot is the new geographic special location of Mount Damavand. One of multiple new special buildings in the update.]


An image of the culture map of the greater Iranian area in 867, showing the new Brahui culture in much of modern Balochistan.

[The cultural map should be largely familiar, with some notable exceptions like 1066 and 867 now having differing setups in the region of Balochistan.]

When it comes to cultures, we have added a number of new cultural traditions, some of which add new gameplay elements such as the Qanat building line (from the Irrigation Experts cultural tradition which replaces Dryland Dwellers) or the new Court Scholar court position (from the new Beacon of Learning tradition) which can be sponsored to unlock new innovations.

An image of three of the Cultural Traditions that Persians have, featuring icons portraying a water wheel, and a scholar looking at an upside-down earth globe - and indeed, medieval Islamic cartography would seem upside-down to us.

[The Persians in particular have been given three new traditions to reflect all the refinement and enlightenment that made them so admired by Arabs and Turks alike.]

For the greater region covered by the update we now also have Jirga (for the Afghan, Baloch and Brahui cultures) which among other things unlock the Tribal Elective Succession form as well as new regional traditions that unlock unique Man-at-Arms types such as the Zupin (Pragmatic Creed) Spearmen or the Tarkhans (Frontier Warriors).

image 06.png


We are also adding historically inspired decisions and events to the region, with the aim of opening up the same possibilities to rulers in our game that historical rulers of the era would have had. This also means that some previously unlikely historical scenarios are now encouraged, for instance Turkic conquerors in general and the Seljuks in particular are more likely to show up and make a new home for themselves in the Iranian plateau, and as a rising ruler in Iran you have new ways of promoting alternate Islamic faiths in the region that are not as present yet at game start (such as the Maturidi denomination of Sunni Islam or Shia Imamism).

For the Seljuk arrival in the late 900s there is also a game rule to make their entrance more random or to turn it off entirely.
Last but not least the chaotic setup in 867 is now further improved by an early event chain about the Zanj rebellion which should add even more uncertainty and dynamism to an already quite open starting situation.

image 07.png




Viziers

A new type of diarchy coming in Legacy of Persia, viziers were historically many things. They were powerful private landholders, vital linchpins of the civil service, some of the most corrupt people in the world, and extravagantly dramatic party-hosts.

image 08.png


Mechanically, Viziers may be appointed by duke-tier or higher clan-government characters. Whilst incumbent, they grant you extra tax jurisdictions (scaled to their stewardship) and add a portion of their own tax collector aptitude directly to all of your tax collectors’ aptitudes, providing a powerful direct modifier on how much gold you get per month. How large a portion of aptitude they grant scales with how heavily the Scales of Power are swung towards them, so a more empowered vizier offers both benefits and drawbacks to their liege.

image 09.png


Unlike regents, being a vizier isn’t a prestigious position for a noble — you are, after all, merely a civil servant, and what’s worse one with actual work you’re expected to do — instead, landless courtiers and minor barons from your faith’s dominant gender compete for the post. Having the vizier in your pocket is still desirable, though, so prospective viziers at court will politick behind the scenes, gaining friendships and rivals with other prospective candidates, their liege’s spouses, and their liege’s stay-at-home adult children.

These relations in turn directly contribute to vizier succession score, so a candidate who’s friends with the current vizier will see themselves climb the ranking, whereas one who’s made an enemy of their liege’s spouse will see their score fall. For the same reason, prospective viziers will often learn their liege’s language, seeking to further their prospects for promotion.

As civil servants, viziers don’t have access to quite as many powers as regents. Predominantly they’ll embezzle and try to give negative county modifiers to vassals in exchange for gold, though a complacent liege who lets the Scales creep too far towards their supposedly-loyal vizier will find that they’re still capable of launching coups. Viziers are also usable in the new-ish confidant council position, which allows you to substitute them in instead of your spouse for spousal council tasks (your choice of which, naturally).

Though such functionaries can be fired at any time, removing the vizierate regardless of the status of the Scales of Power, a vizier with high swing is one who’s enmeshed themselves thoroughly, and who cannot be removed completely without consequence. Above a certain Scale swing threshold, firing your vizier will give you a severe negative economic modifier that harms your monthly income. This scales to how much swing the vizier had — so sure, you can fire them at 80+ swing if you like, but don’t think they won’t have arranged a little job security for just such an occasion.

image 10.png


An easier way to remove civil servants is to kick them upstairs: giving your vizier a county (or, if the Scales are really swung in their favor, a duchy) will also end the vizierate, this time without any economic fallout. Everyone loves a promotion, after all.

Finally, you may recall that I mentioned viziers were legendarily corrupt: though not always strictly true, this was generally the case, and actually a feature of the position rather than a bug. The role of a corrupt vizier was to run the realm’s finances, and it was generally understood that they’d enrich themselves in the process. It was fairly common for viziers to pay significant bribes straight to the liege to get the position — that and to capture and audit the last vizier for undeclared revenue.

The advantage to this for the liege was that, when they needed money in a pinch, rather than have to collect a special tax from the realm as a whole, force powerful vassals and governors to cough up more cash, or individually audit every petty tax collector, there was one person in the realm they could generally guarantee not only had money but had more money than they should have. Minimal overhead, maximum convenience. At least, for the liege.

image 11.png


In-game, we represent this through your vizier’s income and extravagance modifiers. They receive an income from positional corruption proportional to your own income (this doesn’t count towards the embezzlement secret, as it’s technically part of their official remuneration). Every so often, they’ll spend this money on character modifiers for treasure, activities, properties, or charity. Once they have one modifier of each type, they’ll begin again, spending more money on more expensive extra types of each modifier, up to four tiers.

image 12.png


Lieges can then mulct their viziers via interaction, fining them for their excesses. This deletes a rank of the vizier’s extravagance modifiers, liquidating them and transferring gold to the ruler that increases with the tier (and number!) of modifiers liquidated. Naturally, viziers aren’t generally too happy with this, even if the process further enmeshes them as the most important state official, but there’s not much they can do about it other than rebuild their losses. Which, naturally, makes them more attractive to mulct again down the line…

image 13.png


We’ve included about ~160 different modifier descriptions for what viziers are spending their money on, of which about half are explicitly historically attested (comments in the script file for anyone particularly interested in which), and another quarter reasonably probable. The remaining quarter is us trying to keep up with the lavish standards for extravagances set by history’s actual vizierates. These do vary vizier by vizier, so you should see your viziers purchasing extravagance modifiers relevant to their traits and interests.



That was all for this diary! I hope it has given a general idea of the type of flavor content that you can expect in Legacy of Persia, without spoiling all of what there is to discover.
 
  • 138Like
  • 63Love
  • 7
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
Which traits would a Persian Jewish culture have in-game (aside from the ones included in the pack)?

Also, if the Iraqi Jews are named Bavlim, would Parsim or Kalimi be their culture name?
not sure how to name them. but i can say jewish-iranian could be somewhat represented by 3:
in isfahan, yazd, and north of shirvan, the jewish culture would have the jewish root, traditions just like persian and language of iranian.
in bukhara, herat, kabul and balkh the jewish culture would have the jewish root, traditions just like tajik and language of iranian.
in kurditstan and azerbaijan, the jewish culture would have the jewish root, traditions somewhat similar to kurdish and language of aramaic.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
I'd claim that that's what we have different religions within the religion family for! There is no reason to separate Hinduism and Jainism, and only Hinduism and Jainism, from other paganisms and put them in a separate category. It was wrong in CK2, and it is even worse in CK3 where Zoroastrianism is in the same family.
Pagan is really just a religious group for the left over religions in CK2/CK3. Hinduism is not included in it because it really needs to be in the same religious group as Jainism and Buddhism (though I did see you suggestion that Buddhism be a tenet, which while I'm not sure how well that would work, it definitely is an interesting idea).

But even if you go with Paganism as Polytheism (which might run into problems as Waaqism might be monotheistic), Hinduism would not be a neat fit as there are monotheistic Hindus and Hindus that treat Hinduism as philosophy. Also Jainism while having many gods, like Buddhism, it is not centred on them like you'd expect with a more traditional polytheistic religion. Some scholars call Jainism, Buddhism, and some branches of Hinduism transtheistic religions, as they have deities, but the deities are not the focus.

As for Hinduism being a reformed pagan faith, even Judaism has roots in polytheism, so that's not enough to make one pagan.
If I was to try to fix the Pagan Religious group, I do it by splitting it into 3. Sub-Saharan Africa, Eurasian (i.e. Europe and the steppe), and Tibetan. This split has the benefit of every pagan only neighbours other pagan in the same religious group, so the fact some are now more hostile to each other shouldn't be a problem. But would still stop the more ahistorical long distance pagan marriages.
Though I definitely can see arguments for splitting each group up further, these at least group pagans that are either related through decent or have influenced eachother at some point in their history (though some are more tenuous then others).

Though because of a lot of religious blending over the course of history, I doubt there is anyway to divide the religions in CK3 that won't cause some kind of problem.

As for Zoroastrianism, that much is true-ish, but making a "Dualist" religious family for Dualism and Zoroastrianism instead of smashing Dualist under Abrahamic and Zoroastrian under Eastern would arguably be a better choice.
Yeah, I didn't say it was an ideal solution, but putting Zoroastrianism under Abrahamic would be an overkill... unless we manage to find another moniker for "non-Pagan".
The suggestion I made a while back was to move Zoroastrianism, Zunism, and Yazidism (along with the Yarsanism faith I suggested) to a new Iranian religious group.

The leading hypothesis is that Hinduism is the last descendant of Indo European paganism still existing. I am not sure how Jainism relates, but I think Buddhism started as a spin-off from Hinduism.
Hinduism is descended from the Vedic Religion via Brahminism (which yes, the Vedic Religion is thought to draw from Indo European Paganism, among other influences). Jainism and Buddhism are born out of the Shramana movement. Shramana might be a movement within the Vedic Religion seperate from Brahminism (potentially Shramanism was a rejection of Brahminism), or it might have its origins in pre-Vedic traditions.

Hinduism itself is a synthesis of Brahminism, some Shramana ideas, and other religious traditions in India. Because whether or not Shramanism is of a different origin than Brahminism, the two belief system both matured in conversation with the other. Thus much of the cosmology and many philosophical ideas are shared between Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism. Hence why some Hindus consider Jains and Buddhists to be heterodoxical Hindus.
 
  • 8
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions:
@pengoyo, your suggestion is interesting, but I'd say that it overemphasizes the differences between paganisms, especially here:
If I was to try to fix the Pagan Religious group, I do it by splitting it into 3. Sub-Saharan Africa, Eurasian (i.e. Europe and the steppe), and Tibetan
I am reasonably certain that it doesn't need splitting, that Hostile not Evil is the closest to what we should expect if Norse, Tengri, Bön, and Mandé become neighbors. (And faith hostility is basically the only thing that changes with religious group.)

Jainism and Hinduism can arguably be declared two faiths of the same religion by the same logic, although here other factors may come in play.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Pagan is really just a religious group for the left over religions in CK2/CK3. Hinduism is not included in it because it really needs to be in the same religious group as Jainism and Buddhism (though I did see you suggestion that Buddhism be a tenet, which while I'm not sure how well that would work, it definitely is an interesting idea).

But even if you go with Paganism as Polytheism (which might run into problems as Waaqism might be monotheistic), Hinduism would not be a neat fit as there are monotheistic Hindus and Hindus that treat Hinduism as philosophy. Also Jainism while having many gods, like Buddhism, it is not centred on them like you'd expect with a more traditional polytheistic religion. Some scholars call Jainism, Buddhism, and some branches of Hinduism transtheistic religions, as they have deities, but the deities are not the focus.

As for Hinduism being a reformed pagan faith, even Judaism has roots in polytheism, so that's not enough to make one pagan.
If I was to try to fix the Pagan Religious group, I do it by splitting it into 3. Sub-Saharan Africa, Eurasian (i.e. Europe and the steppe), and Tibetan. This split has the benefit of every pagan only neighbours other pagan in the same religious group, so the fact some are now more hostile to each other shouldn't be a problem. But would still stop the more ahistorical long distance pagan marriages.
Though I definitely can see arguments for splitting each group up further, these at least group pagans that are either related through decent or have influenced eachother at some point in their history (though some are more tenuous then others).

Though because of a lot of religious blending over the course of history, I doubt there is anyway to divide the religions in CK3 that won't cause some kind of problem.



The suggestion I made a while back was to move Zoroastrianism, Zunism, and Yazidism (along with the Yarsanism faith I suggested) to a new Iranian religious group.


Hinduism is descended from the Vedic Religion via Brahminism (which yes, the Vedic Religion is thought to draw from Indo European Paganism, among other influences). Jainism and Buddhism are born out of the Shramana movement. Shramana might be a movement within the Vedic Religion seperate from Brahminism (potentially Shramanism was a rejection of Brahminism), or it might have its origins in pre-Vedic traditions.

Hinduism itself is a synthesis of Brahminism, some Shramana ideas, and other religious traditions in India. Because whether or not Shramanism is of a different origin than Brahminism, the two belief system both matured in conversation with the other. Thus much of the cosmology and many philosophical ideas are shared between Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism. Hence why some Hindus consider Jains and Buddhists to be heterodoxical Hindus.
I hope they split up the pagan groups as you said, i made a suggestion or thread on it long ago.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I am reasonably certain that it doesn't need splitting, that Hostile not Evil is the closest to what we should expect if Norse, Tengri, Bön, and Mandé become neighbors. (And faith hostility is basically the only thing that changes with religious group.)
Yeah, as hostility is the only major mechanic religious groups currently have, I definitely agree this is not needed as the game stands.

Jainism and Hinduism can arguably be declared two faiths of the same religion by the same logic, although here other factors may come in play.
Yeah, religions unlike religious groups do have more weight to them in the game. Virtues and sins being a noticeable one. Hinduism has access to the Bhakti tenets which wouldn't make much sense for Jainism. Plus the prices of some tenets are different. Finally there are a few events and decisions that differ between the two (though hopefully more in the future).

So I think it is fair to use religious hostility for determining religious group and other factors for determining religions in CK3
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Can you please check my suggestion for tributaries and suzerain for this DLC


I think one of the major features in this dlc should be tributary system.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I think one of the major features in this dlc should be tributary system.
Too late for that now, given that DLC releases in eleven days (and yes, I do see that you had suggested it earlier, but still...). For this one, they reworked Clan instead. Well, let's hope we'll see tributaries in some other DLC.
Finally there are a few events and decisions that differ between the two (though hopefully more in the future).
Aren't there also such events and decisions for, say, Sunni-Shia?
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Aren't there also such events and decisions for, say, Sunni-Shia?
For Sunni vs Shia, outside ones connected to the head of faith mechanic they added for Islam, no (though there may be some faith specific ones as I only searched based on the Sunni/Shia doctrine and related triggers). Also not counting that CK3 can add flavour text based on faith (i.e. faiths store flavour text on the gods, religious figures, and various religious concepts).

Hinduism has 2 unique decisions (and one more shared with Jainism and Buddhism). Also Hindus and Jains have a few unique events (and Jains have a few it shares with Buddhist but not Hindus) and some more with unique texts. So while there are some for Hinduism and Jainism, there definitely should be more.

Forgot about this before, but Hindus also have unique religious artifacts in CK3 that wouldn't make sense for Jains (and vice versa).

Edit: Clarity
 
Last edited:
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
A new faith with polygamous and equal gender...

Do you at least change how it work right? There is nothing more jarring than seeing your empress landed then immediately she take another husbands.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Why? This seems to be WAI.
Do you even read my comment before slapping disagreement because you don't like it?

I clearly stated that because it's jarring.

I don't care one wit whether it is WAI or not.

If it WAI then there should be more lvl in this gender role, not just between one extreme of each gender and getting cucked.
 
  • 3
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
It's jarring because it's jarring? Real explanatory (not). What exactly is jarring about polygamy + equal gender enabling polyandry to the same extent as polygyny?
We already got equal faiths in game that allow females to make males concubines. I don’t see it being that much different if you upgrade those concubines to secondary spouses.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
What about restoration of the empire of Cyrus the Great? We need some alternative to the epicness of the Roman restoration.
There is the Become the Saoshyant They could add something like that, (Since the buff it gives is pretty wild.) Or just allow it so the Anatolia kingdoms (There's 3 of em.) Georgia Armeria Egypt Judea Syria can become De-jure if you hold the kingdoms. Also having to have Transoxiana and a bit most of the eastern kingdoms. in Bactria etc should work. As if i recall that's the Maximum extent Persia went to under Darius The Great. Though a hard land to hold together if you look at a map....




Jews had been living in Persia since the Assyrians and then Babylonians deported them.

While this is true, If i recall there's a lot of sources that say that the Persian's. Or more so Cyrus the Great Reported?.... Is that how you would say it? Well told them to go back home. (and many did not after setting up shop in Persia Babylonia due to how leveled Juedia was until A generation or two after. I Think it was after Darius had the whole Liar king "legimate way to take Cyrus empire" thing.
 
Last edited:
I was looking at the pictures in the diary, but shouldn't Khurramites have some degree of Islamic syncretism rather than be "pure" Mazdeans?
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
It's jarring because it's jarring? Real explanatory (not). What exactly is jarring about polygamy + equal gender enabling polyandry to the same extent as polygyny?
I think it's about the faith in specific being Muslim. Polyandry is forbidden across Islam.
 
  • 1
Reactions: