• 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 #24 - Fervor, Religious Hostility, and Doctrine Showcase

Hello everyone, and welcome back to our final Dev Diary on Religion in Crusader Kings 3! Today I will be talking about what the mysterious Fervor is, how that ties into Heresies and Heresy Outbreaks, as well as how Religious Hostility works and some of the ways that Doctrines can impact it. To wrap things up, I will show off some additional never-before seen Tenets and Doctrines!

Fervor
Every Faith has a Fervor score, which is a representation of how strongly adherents of that Faith believe in the righteousness of their religious and secular leaders. While Fervor has a slow ticking increase over time, it is primarily influenced by the virtuousness or sinfulness of that Faith’s leaders. Virtuous priests can inspire a populace and rally the people behind themselves, while sinful ones (especially religious heads) can cause massive scandals that damage the faithful’s trust in their religious institutions.

DD_WM_Scandal.png

[A screenshot of the Pope looking very guilty after being caught in flagrante]

Adherents of a Faith with high Fervor are willing to fight and die for their beliefs. They gain bonus resistance to attempts to convert them to another faith, and both secular and religious leaders can declare Holy Wars to spread their Faith across the world. However, while these Holy Wars are ostensibly waged in the name of the divine, in practice they often tend to be little more than opportunistic land-grabs — as a result, every Holy War declared will slightly damage a Faiths’ Fervor, while losing land to hostile Holy Wars will actually increase your Faith’s Fervor as the embattled faithful dig in and fight for their way of life!

When a Faith’s Fervor drops, adherents of that Faith become vulnerable to conversion. Characters are more willing to accept a Demand Conversion when their Faith’s Fervor is low, and the Court Chaplain’s ‘Convert County’ task gains a scaling bonus against Faiths whose Fervor is lower than their own. In addition, if Fervor drops low enough, a Faith becomes vulnerable to heresy outbreaks!

Heresy Outbreaks
A heresy outbreak is what happens when a ruler becomes disillusioned with their current Faith and is swayed to join a different one. If there is already a heretical Faith present nearby, they will convert to that one automatically. If no suitable heresies are around, they will become a heresiarch and start espousing the doctrines of a brand new Faith, which is typically (but not always), one from their Religion.

A ruler who converts to or founds a new heretical Faith will then attempt to convince nearby rulers of their old Faith to join them, with the success rate of this being dependent on how low their old Faith’s fervor has fallen. This means that while heresy outbreaks can vary wildly in size, converts to the new heresy will tend to remain clustered together in a specific region — this both protects the burgeoning Faith while simultaneously limiting its influence in distant lands.

DD_WM_Heresy.png

[A screenshot showing an outbreak of Lollardy, originating in southern England]

As you can imagine, heresy outbreaks are incredibly divisive events; nobody wants to sit on the fence when your immortal soul is on the line! As a result, after a heresy outbreak occurs both the old Faith and the new heretical Faith will gain a substantial increase to their Fervor score. As this is likely to encourage Holy Wars for both sides, it is not uncommon for a new period of religious violence to follow as the two Faiths fight for supremacy!

Ultimately, the flow from scandal to heresy to zealousness and back will cause Fervor to vary wildly over the course of a game of CK3. Unlike the relatively static Mortal Authority in CK2, this means that even the big dominant religions will have periods of weakness, making them vulnerable to fractures and religious violence.

Religious Hostility
Speaking of religious violence, how does that work? With so many different Faiths and Religions in Crusader Kings III, how do they view each other? What is the difference between how an Orthodox ruler views a Catholic, a Bogomil, and an Ash’ari?

In Crusader Kings III this is all handled by the Religious Hostility system. For characters of a given Faith, every other Faith in the game will receive one of the following rankings:
  1. Righteous
  2. Astray
  3. Hostile
  4. Evil
Righteous is how a Faith views itself and, in a few rare circumstances, other Faiths that have certain things in common with it. Righteous Faiths have no penalties at all with each other.

Astray is how a Faith views other Faiths that have similar goals and ideals but are just a little… wrong. For example, Orthodoxy and Catholicism consider each other to be Astray. Astray Faiths have only a minor opinion penalty with each other.

Hostile is how most Faiths view their heresies and other significantly divergent Faiths. Opinion penalties are more substantial at this level, and rulers gain the ability to declare Holy Wars against rulers of Hostile Faiths. However, intermarriage is still common when it is politically convenient, and alliances can still be forged between rulers of Hostile Faiths.

Evil Faiths are considered to be an anathema, and cannot be tolerated. Evil Faiths suffer the most severe opinion penalty possible, and Holy Wars against each other become commonplace. Rulers will almost never accept marriages with characters of an Evil Faith, making alliances all-but-impossible.

So how is Religious Hostility determined? The primary factor is what Religion Family both Faiths belong to:

DD_Hostility.png

[A screenshot of a spreadsheet showing how base Religious Hostility is calculated, with Abrahamic Faiths being the least tolerant and Eastern Faiths being the most tolerant]

But wait, if Abrahamic Faiths view other Faiths within the same Religion has Hostile, why do Catholicism and Orthodoxy only see each other as Astray? The answer to that, my friend, is Doctrines!

Doctrine & Tenet Showcase
Now we’re going to take some time to reveal a bunch of the various Doctrines and Tenets available for Faiths in Crusader Kings 3. For starters, the Catholic, Orthodox, Apostolic, and Coptic Faiths all have the ‘Ecumenism’ Doctrine, which changes the Hostility of any other Faith with the same Doctrine to just ‘Astray’, thus allowing these Faiths to have cordial relations with each other.

DD_WM_Doctrine_Ecumenism.png

[A screenshot showing the Ecumenism doctrine, which reduces Hostility between certain Christian Faiths]

In a similar vein, the various Muslim Faiths all have a doctrine representing their belief in the true succession for Muhammad. The various Sunni Faiths all see each other as Astray, with the same being true for the collective Shia Faiths and the collective Muhakkima Faiths.

The embattled minority of Gnostic Faiths have an ever stronger version of this; having always struggled to have their beliefs accepted, they see all other Gnostic Faiths as being fully ‘Righteous’. This allows us to have coalitions of Faiths within or even outside of a Religion that see some Faiths as allies and others as enemies, completely changing the dynamic of how religious relations play out in Crusader Kings III.

DD_WM_Doctrine_Gnositism.png

[A screenshot showing the Gnosticism Tenet, which among other things eliminates Religious Hostility between Gnostic Faiths]

Finally there are other Tenets which can modify how your Faith sees, and is seen by, Faiths in other Religions.

DD_WM_Doctrine_Syncretism.png

[A screenshot showing various Syncretism Tenets, which reduce Religious Hostility across entire Religions]

Diplomacy not your thing? Try some warfare!

DD_WM_Tenets_Warfare.png

[A screenshot showing various warfare-focuses Doctrines and Tenets, including Armed Pilgrimages which enables Crusades]

Or is all of this just too secular for you? After all, isn’t religion supposed to be about spiritualism, a belief in otherworldly entities beyond our understanding? Well then maybe one of these tenets would suit you...

DD_WM_Tenets_Mysticism.png

[A screenshot showing various Tenets of a more spiritual nature: Astrology, Auspicious Birthright, Reincarnation, Sun Worship, Sky Burials, and Esotericism]

Of course, this is just a sample of the Tenets and Doctrines that we have in Crusader Kings 3. It would take too long to go into this level of detail for all of them, but here is a teaser of some available Tenets on the Faith Creation screen, showing both some previously revealed and unrevealed Tenets.

DD_WM_Tenets_List.png

[A snippet of a handful of available Tenets from the Faith Creation screen]

That’s all for now — hopefully this post has given you something to think about as you plan your first campaign of Crusader Kings III, and every one after that!
 
  • 70Like
  • 14
  • 12
  • 2Love
Reactions:
One of the tenants, I find interesting is the esoteric tenant; it’s interesting that each tenant gives extremely unique mechanics to how you play your game. (An “Armed Pilgrimage” holy war doctrine will act differently with different buffs than “Struggle of Submission”.)
 
But this is also a very complex issue. We certainly know that at several stages the Sassanian approach to several Christian groups - especially non-Chalcidian and thus ones which were most often persecuted and sidelined in the Roman state - was either tolerant or explicitly supportive. At other times (i.e. under specific rulers) this could be reversed, but there very meager evidence for wholesale hostile stance towards 'Christians' as such.
Yes, it is a complex issue indeed. I think if we take religious hostility as a general rule, things would be more easily clarified than adapting the hostility system to all the intricacies Late Antique and Middle Ages leadership implies. Individual situations have individual opinion modifiers factoring in after all.

Still, there is some evidence of Christian-Mazdayasnian relations as a whole in the event I mentioned in the post above. The tenure of Mihr-Narseh Suren as wuzurg framatar began with massed attacks on fire temples by Christians, and the nobles said "Yazdegerd, we know you don't hate Christians nor Romans, but this is going too far". Not much, but it's a start for an analysis of a general stance.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Whoops, yes, I meant point 1.
Or rather the interplay between 1 and 2. Can prehistoric conflicts really factor in relatively late religious hostilities? I don't know, I think devs used a "ratings" and not numerical system do streamline the problem somewhat.

Can they? Well, yes. The time span between when Canaan was given to the Twelve Tribes of Israel by G-d and when the modern state of Israel formed is pretty substantial.

Do I think this ancient and theoretical hostility should outweigh other considerations? No.

As well, I think it is an example of how hostility realistically is not a fixed value.

In addition to the confederation you pointed out, the Miao were warped from (relatively shorter and darker) people to outright demonic beings, with their leader Chi You having "many eyes, a roar that tears the earth," and he "eats rocks to grow his horns." Chi You is also said to wield wicked magicks. So ... yeah, you now have more or less an overview of the tale of Huangdi, the very first emperor of China's enemies.
And then later, the historical first Emperor named himself after Huangdi and worshiped Chi You.

1) Point is legit, but later Mazdan rulers did call upon their legacy, and in the event Mazdayasna regains mainstream status, Sassanian legal norms would likely also be recovered and reused;

I don't know. In CKII, not playing as a Mazdan you mostly saw Muslims win out in Persia and Mazdans only enduring in the Steppe. And under player control, I think the easiest start was still up there, growing in strength while waiting for the Muslims to weaken. Even when a Uighyr or Khazar or Sogdian Khagan takes the mantle of Shanashah and rules over the "Persian Empire", neither he nor his subjects are really going to know what that means, with at least a century between them and the Sassanids.

The biggest defining event for religious hostility would realistically be however the Mazdans retake Persia. 100 years of assassination and holy war between big states? That would logically make things quite hostile. Diplomatic shenanigans with honorably-earned hooks leading to a peaceful succession? Probably going to make things less hostile.

2) The Nestorians did count on the Sassanids for protection ... in their capacity as king of kings, not protector of the holy flames. In fact, the Shahanshah most closely related to Jews (it's Yazdegerd I, not Shapur II by the way) was forced to move against Nestorians at the behest of his court, after Nestorians started attacking Mazdayasnaian fire-temples.

I agree with the last point. So long as hardcoded material is not that big of a problem, we can always resort to modding to change anything and everything. Devs even made a point of showcasing religion mod-friendliness.

Shapur II was the son of Jewish woman Ifra Hormizd. Yazdegerd I had a Jewish wife, but was not ethnically Jewish himself. Though I was wrong in saying the Sassanids had a partially Jewish Shanashah, as Bahram V, Yazdegerd I's son was also ethnically half (or, well, half + some other fraction) Jewish.

Also the events you're describing are really just a religious minority revolt, which I think are supposed to be independent of the hostility system.
 
Can they? Well, yes. The time span between when Canaan was given to the Twelve Tribes of Israel by G-d and when the modern state of Israel formed is pretty substantial.

Do I think this ancient and theoretical hostility should outweigh other considerations? No.

As well, I think it is an example of how hostility realistically is not a fixed value.
Well, this much we can concur.
And then later, the historical first Emperor named himself after Huangdi and worshiped Chi You.
I admit the demonization of Chi You was a gradual process, but Shihuangdi named his new title after all the mythological rulers of China (Three Huangs Five Dis ... ugh it sounds so horrible like that) and perhaps, worshipped Chi You to placate his Miao subjects - Yunnan was not as easy to govern back in the day after all.
I don't know. In CKII, not playing as a Mazdan you mostly saw Muslims win out in Persia and Mazdans only enduring in the Steppe. And under player control, I think the easiest start was still up there, growing in strength while waiting for the Muslims to weaken. Even when a Uighyr or Khazar or Sogdian Khagan takes the mantle of Shanashah and rules over the "Persian Empire", neither he nor his subjects are really going to know what that means, with at least a century between them and the Sassanids.
I meant the anti-Muslim revolts like Mardavij, but you do have a point for the Khazars and Uyghurs. Yes, there would be ... complications for such a scenario, and the game doesn't simulate the need to recruit Persian bureaucrats to rule over Persian lands, something that would have easily disseminated knowledge of the old empire's legal systems into the new government.
Shapur II was the son of Jewish woman Ifra Hormizd. Yazdegerd I had a Jewish wife, but was not ethnically Jewish himself. Though I was wrong in saying the Sassanids had a partially Jewish Shanashah, as Bahram V, Yazdegerd I's son was also ethnically half (or, well, half + some other fraction) Jewish.

Also the events you're describing are really just a religious minority revolt, which I think are supposed to be independent of the hostility system.

Even though that does explain where he got the backing he needed to eventually become a powerful King of kings, I still would have to ask for your sources on Shapur II's parentage.

Emmm ... shouldn't religious hostilities affect all adherents of said faiths, regardless of whether they were of the same realm or not? Having a province full of people who follow a religion that hates yours should make them a lot likely to revolt, shouldn't it?
 
Having a province full of people who follow a religion that hates yours should make them a lot likely to revolt, shouldn't it?
Well, that really depends on how you treat theirs. If you don't ban their worship or force them to observe yours, you won't really be giving them a reason to hate you for it. They might prefer a ruler of Religion X, but if you're tolerant, coexistence even among rival religions can happen (such as at some points in Mughal India).
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Well, that really depends on how you treat theirs. If you don't ban their worship or force them to observe yours, you won't really be giving them a reason to hate you for it. They might prefer a ruler of Religion X, but if you're tolerant, coexistence even among rival religions can happen (such as at some points in Mughal India).

This is probably represented by traits like the Adaptive trait mentioned by a Dev in the recent Islam thread - it was IIRC described as minimizing religious discontent in your ruled areas / with vassals, on account of your laissez faire attitude to their practices.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I don't know if this has been asked before, sorry if that is the case, but is their going to be requirements for some of the tenets? LIke that you can't take one tenet without taking a certain other? and that you can't combine some?
 
I don't know if this has been asked before, sorry if that is the case, but is their going to be requirements for some of the tenets? LIke that you can't take one tenet without taking a certain other? and that you can't combine some?
Yes. We can see that from the popups shown. For instance, you can't take the primitivism one with any tenet that considers a particular action criminal.
 
Yes. We can see that from the popups shown. For instance, you can't take the primitivism one with any tenet that considers a particular action criminal.
Hmmm, okay, it makes sense, just that when I first saw these I got an idea of a religion I wanted to make and I'm pretty sure it ain't gonna work since some tenets exclude some others.