• 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 #92 - Orders of Magnitude

Hello there!

We are already more than halfway through July, and we are already at the third of the five rogue Dev Diaries we will have. For this week’s Dev Diary, we are going to talk about Holy Orders, and the small changes being made to them.

I am going to start off with clarifying that Holy Orders are NOT going to be made playable. The changes are made so you can interact with them in new ways, not for you to play as them. The game is still focused on dynasties, and that has not changed with Holy Fury. Another thing I want to note, is that all these changes to Holy Order are part of the patch to Holy Fury, and not part of the expansion. In other words, you will not have to pay for them.

And as always, certain things might change before the release of Holy Fury.

Clipboard01.png


With their own government form rather than being Feudal, it is easier for us to treat them as their own entities, and not having the player awkwardly inherit one of them, with all their own quirks and special focuses. They should be easier to distinguish from a normal Feudal character as well, now that they have their own frames rather than the Feudal blue.

Clipboard01.png


Some of the other Christian Holy Orders have received decisions for forming and vassalizing them as well, in addition to the old decisions for the Knights Hospitaller and the Knights Templar. In the example above, you can see the decision to vassalize the Knights of Calatrava, and we have added similar ones for the Knights of Santiago, the Teutonic Order and the Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre.

A new limitation we have added, is that you can only vassalize 1 Holy Order at a time with these decisions. This was to make sure we didn’t have one player changing religions and trying to capture all of them. This is Crusader Kings 2, after all, not Pokémon.

Clipboard02.png


If you have vassalized a Holy Order and they don’t find you fit to rule anymore, they will leave your service. They will return any land they hold that you are the De Jure Lord of, so with that in mind you usually shouldn’t lose large swathes of land if a Holy Order leaves your service. Though I would recommend staying on friendly terms with them.

Clipboard03.png


For the Knights Hospitaller, they can now ask a ruler conquering an island in the mediterranean to donate it to the order. We have added a similar event for the Teutonics in the north, replacing the old event where they asked for a single county.

Clipboard04.png


... So that is all for today!

Hopefully the Holy Orders will be a tad more interesting with some of these changes. Next week we will take a look at… Let me take a look at my notes here… “Shepherds, zealous kids and Venetians burning down Byzantium”? Surely that’ll be exciting news!
 
Last edited:
To end the discussion about why no playable Holy Orders or Theocracies, this summed it up pretty well:
However, if I'm mistaken, and if you're asking the simple question of "Why is this how they original made it?"
Because it's called "Crusader Kings", and they wanted to make a game about dynastic gameplay. Might as well ask why D&D 3.5 Edition didn't include spreadsheets for being lord or mayor of a territory and ruling over it. Sure, it fits into the setting, and sure they COULD have thought it a good idea to include the option, but in the end that is not the game they set out to make.
We're playing video games, not holodeck simulations. Maybe one day
It is simply a design decision to have the game focus on characters and their dynasties. In the same way in EU4 you play as the spirit of a nation as opposed to your generals, it is simply a design decision on what the game is about.
 
Have you done something about baron-tier commanders of the holy orders ability and AI decision to marry as well as having children that will default back to the main order's court upon the commander's death? Seeing how the christian holy orders are essentially monks this is not working as intended.
 
Last edited:
I don't get the desire to play theocracies, maybe holy orders, but theocracies just seem meaningless from a gameplay standpoint. You would be playing a random character every single time that you have no control over. What meaningful interactions do you expect to get out of such a gameplay experience?

To this day I still don't understand the obsession with playable theocracies.
 
I don't get the desire to play theocracies, maybe holy orders, but theocracies just seem meaningless from a gameplay standpoint. You would be playing a random character every single time that you have no control over. What meaningful interactions do you expect to get out of such a gameplay experience?

To this day I still don't understand the obsession with playable theocracies.

I've used the playable papacy mod. It really isn't that fun, other than being able to excommunicate people.
 
On that note, please one day make a CK style game thats REAAALLY about petty local disputes. I want a game where i'm literally a baron xD I'm thinking Pillars of Earth level of drama....just a bit more ck2.
The day Paradox makes a The Guild II style game, except you know, without all the utterly broken parts, is going to be a happy day.

(To those that don't know, basically you start out as a peasant with an unusually large sack of gold, and can start/buy a business, grow your economic empire, enter partnerships or rivalries with other merchant houses and even partake in medieval politics by having your family elected on the town council, potentially even taking over all the most important town- and eventually kingdom offices for your house. It's a broken mess, but a lovable broken mess.)
 
imperial cults is government combines theocracy with an absolute monarchy. (theocracy exist dynasty)


Historical imperial cults

Ancient Egypt - Pharaoh

Ancient China - Son of Heaven

Ancient Rome - Imperial cult (ancient Rome)

Ancient and Imperial Japan - State Shinto

Ancient Southeast Asia


Tibet

Examples of divine kings in history

Some examples of historic leaders who are often considered divine kings are:





it if could create it new stories of your divinity characters and new Government :rolleyes:

 
Last edited:
Maybe we could also settle the issue of religion and/or culture for the heir?

Like it used to be - if I am educated into foreign culture and then inherit Lithuania my all previous cultural buildings go null.
Now it is going to be - if I am educated into foreign religion and then inherit whatever Empire it’s previous Holy Order leaves.

Why not have a decision(s) upon assuming higher (or even same) tier throne:
1) I will respect the faith of my new subjects and convert to Catholicism (Holy Order stays, opinion of subjects increase +10)
2) No, I believe in Manichaeism (Holy Order goes, opinion of Catholic subjects decrease -10)

Something similar for culture.
 
Have you done something about baron-tier commanders of the holy orders ability and AI decision to marry as well as having children that will default back to the main order's court upon the commander's death? Seeing how the christian holy orders are essentially monks this is not working as intended.
I'm fairly certain that the vassals of a holy order will have the Holy Order governement type.
 
i see in the part what talk about the news events of the ordes, a event in the intrige whit the flag of the impire of hispania and put ///prepare the reconquist war///, can you talk about this?
There's been word that it would be one of the topics 2 weeks from now, so you probably shouldn't expect much official feedback for now.

Presumably it will be an decision available to Christian rulers in/neighbouring the Iberian Penninsula that requests a special crusade like war to reclaim it for the lord through hard work, elbow grease and jolly cooperation.
 
Wiil you change some duchies , countis and kingdoms,

Andalusia is so big, why not do 2 andalusias or kingdom of granada,

The countis of gradada is so big, why not cut in two and put the new county as jaen

And the same all countis of hispania are so big comparated whit all others westerns empires

Pls if you have the kingdoms of castille and leon do event in intrige to create rhe kingdom of castille and leon, and the same whit the kingdom the castille/leon and aragon

In italy, the capacity to form the kingdoms of naples and tinacracy(i dont know the name)

If you are catholic and you have the duchie of constantinopla or the kingdom of grece a event in intrigue to do the latin empire, too whit great moravia, if you are bohemian and have the duchy of moravia, and too whit the kingdom of chipre

And the kingdom of saxony dint destroy, for no have a gigant kingdom of germany, too whit asturias,

And why the kingdom of borgundy didnt have the duchy whit the same name

When you play whit no christians you cant create jeruslem, if you would make it creable, but if you are a Muslim,change the name and and the flag, because if you have not, you will be screwed up by the expansion

Sorry for my English, and I know, I'm very annoying
 
It is simply a design decision to have the game focus on characters and their dynasties. In the same way in EU4 you play as the spirit of a nation as opposed to your generals, it is simply a design decision on what the game is about.

Thank you for answering my question. That is what I (and probably many others) was wondering.
 
To end the discussion about why no playable Holy Orders or Theocracies, this summed it up pretty well:

It is simply a design decision to have the game focus on characters and their dynasties. In the same way in EU4 you play as the spirit of a nation as opposed to your generals, it is simply a design decision on what the game is about.
Personally, I accept and respect the decision. However, I believe the problem here is not being unable to pull of theocratic playthroughs in a dynastic manner but the restriction of playing only as landed characters. If you would just remove it, it could be made possible to play consecutive members of a dynasty without any regards to government types. You could be chosen a pope, then obviously loose the title on succession but maybe see your grandson becoming a grand mayor of some backwater republic, make your heir a chief of a mercenary band who escapes Mongols to the western Africa just to establish... bla bla bla, etc, etc.
Also, I think it would only add dynastic spice as you could start as a cardinal, spawn some more or less legitimate kids, become a pope and use your powers to distribute some wealth to your descendants before you start a proper feudal run. You could also play as disinherited noble who climbs the clerical hierarchy only to bring doom on his kinsmen.
It could be easily made possible to have continuity of dynastic ties without passing the main title to a heir.

So, I appreciate that you tried to bring the discussion to a conclusion but I really believe there are ways to bring other government types to being playable inside the design decision.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I accept and respect the decision. However, I believe the problem here is not being unable to pull of theocratic playthroughs in a dynastic manner but the restriction of playing only as landed characters. If you would just remove it, it could be made possible to play consecutive members of a dynasty without any regards to government types. You could be chosen a pope, then obviously loose the title on succession but maybe see your grandson becoming a grand mayor of some backwater republic, make your heir a chief of a mercenary band who escapes Mongols to the western Africa just to establish... bla bla bla, etc, etc.
Also, I think it would only add dynastic spice as you could start as a cardinal, spawn some more or less legitimate kids, become a pope and use your powers to distribute some wealth to your descendants before you start a proper feudal run. You could also play as disinherited noble who climbs the clerical hierarchy only to bring doom on his kinsmen.
It could be easily made possible to have continuity of dynastic ties without passing the main title to a heir.

So, I appreciate that you tried to bring the discussion to a conclusion but I really believe there are ways to bring other government types to being playable inside the design decision.
This seems to me to be a big enough change to how the game currently handles things to warrant being part of a potential CK3 rather than DLC. Sounds fun, but I feel it would be too significant a change to the game.
 
Personally, I accept and respect the decision. However, I believe the problem here is not being unable to pull of theocratic playthroughs in a dynastic manner but the restriction of playing only as landed characters. If you would just remove it, it could be made possible to play consecutive members of a dynasty without any regards to government types. You could be chosen a pope, then obviously loose the title on succession but maybe see your grandson becoming a grand mayor of some backwater republic, make your heir a chief of a mercenary band who escapes Mongols to the western Africa just to establish... bla bla bla, etc, etc.
Also, I think it would only add dynastic spice as you could start as a cardinal, spawn some more or less legitimate kids, become a pope and use your powers to distribute some wealth to your descendants before you start a proper feudal run. You could also play as disinherited noble who climbs the clerical hierarchy only to bring doom on his kinsmen.
It could be easily made possible to have continuity of dynastic ties without passing the main title to a heir.

So, I appreciate that you tried to bring the discussion to a conclusion but I really believe there are ways to bring other government types to being playable inside the design decision.
A pope cant have sons because cant marrie ,and if you have bastard, you are a bad pope :/
 
This seems to me to be a big enough change to how the game currently handles things to warrant being part of a potential CK3 rather than DLC. Sounds fun, but I feel it would be too significant a change to the game.
I think, they game need more historicall events and normal events, more features, and more historically dinasties whit a real coats of arms,not the editable or random coats of arms, and the things that i put up.

I really think that they sell a game that is not finished.
But anyway, it's a good game.