Tinto Talks #15 - June 5th 2024

[Johan]

Have you considered calling it charisma or something else, to differentiate it from the heavily-abstracted mana in EU4?

its been called DIP since before eu1 was a computer game

 

[Johan]

Does this mean that modders cannot scope a character to create such an event, or does it just mean that it is not something you currently have? If the former, please consider this an option. I can think of hundreds of ideas and situations where both historical and non-historical character events would be super neat. And that does not mean I need their portrait on the left of an event interface. For me executing commands on them would be enough.

Yes you can scope to characters in events,.

 

[Johan]

Their style kinda bug me out, as it seems historical characters use contemporary to the current ruler clothes, but that may be a feature, not a bug

And I surely love the 3D here

It’s due to the low amount of content produced so far.

 

[Johan]

1.Why isn't the Bruce dynasty showing up in Scotland?

Cause its in a regency atm

 

[Pavía]

I was thinking about that as well. Maybe it could be that in contemporary sources they were referred to as House of Aragon instead of House of Barcelona? Historiografically they are always known as the House of Barcelona and it makes more sense since it's the dynasty of the Count of Barcelona, but I'm not knowledgeable in how the contemporary sources say it.

Other people have already said it, but I will put data on the table to argue why the Aragon dynasty is incorrect and should be Barcelona dynasty.In 1150 AD Ramon Berenguer IV of the house of Barcelona marries Petronilla of Aragon, successor and heiress of Ramiro II of Aragon, who had no male offspring.From this marriage was born the future king of Aragon, Alfonso the chaste, who, since his parents' marriage was not matrilineal, the dynasty would be that of his father, of Barcelona.The Barcelona dynasty ends with Martin the Human in 1410, who dies without issue and the crown will pass to the Trastámara dynasty, as can be seen at the beginning of Europa Universali IV.

In this link you can see the entire dynasty of the house of Barcelona

There isn't an outright answer about it, to be entirely honest. 'Dynasty' was not really a concept back in the 14th century, but a modern, historiographic one; this means that the Kings of Aragon didn't consider themselves officially of a certain dynasty or the other, but as of the lineage of both the Kings of Aragon (because of their main title), and of the Counts of Barcelona (because of the patrilineal heritage), at the same time. The only direct mention in the period is in the Chronicle of Ramon Muntaner, that estates at its start that "aquest libre senyelladament se fa a honor de Déu e dela sua beneyta Mare e del casal d'Arago" ("this book was done in honor of God and of his Mother and of the house of Aragon"); while King Peter IV 'the Ceremonious' entitled himself in his Ordinacions: "regne Darago lo qual regne es títol e nom nostre principal" ("king of Aragon which is our title and our principal name"). The page on the Catalan Viquipèdia gives good information about the matter.

So this is something that we've discussed internally quite in-depth (I, being Castilian, with our Catalan and Aragonese content designers, lol), as we have three possibilities for this dynasty name: 'Aragó/Aragón', 'Barcelona', or 'Aragón and Barcelona'. For the moment we used 'Aragó' for the sake of simplicity, but we'll be reading your feedback regarding this, and this may not be the final version.

 

[Johan]

So, I ask, how is it that the Trastámera dynasty appears in Europa Universalis IV and not Aragon?If what is taken into account is the main title, the same should happen with the different kingdoms of Europe.

Because it was a dynasty started by a bastard son of the King of Aragon..

And the kid is 3 years old at the start of the game-

 

[Pavía]

Sorry Johan, I am confused with this data you are giving me. Who was a bastard child? And who was three years old at the start of the game?
If you are talking about EUIV the ruler is Alfonso the Magnanimous (of the Trastámera dynasty) aged 48 years old, and in no case is he a bastard son of Ferdinand I.

What I mean by all this is that if we talk about dynasties, as they are focused on EUIV or the Caesar project, it is what it is, if not as I said before, all European rulers should take the main title dynasty. To give just one example, in the case of Austria, it would be Austria and not Habsburg.
Forgive my insistence and thank you for answering both you and Pavía to my doubts, but I just don't see your approaches clearly.

You mean the bastard son of the King of Castile I assume?

Yeah, Johan meant of Castile (speaking of the start of the Trastámara dynasty, with Enrique, the bastard son of Alfonso XI).

In any case, we'll think about the feedback received, because as I said, the decision is not final, and it's relatively easy to change; our objective is to portray the historical situation in the most accurate way, even if sometimes there are some different ways to portray it (and I know well that, as a former historian).

 

[Pavía]

The problem is that the Kings of Portugal were descended from the Dukes of Burgundy while the Kings of Castile were descended from the Free Counts of Burgundy, which were two completely different states and dynasties (the former Capetian in origin, the other Italian and actually partially Carolingian). They need to be differentiated from each other in some manner, as anyone not knowledgeable in this rather obscure bit of medieval genealogy who is looking at the game will very likely think that any "of Burgundy" dynasty will be the same, when, due to having two Burgundies at the time of the start of the game, they aren't. It's unfortunately a long-standing, confusing mess (even chroniclers of the time thought that the two Burgundian princes who arrived in the area at the same time were related, when they weren't), and this is probably the best way to differentiate the two, given that the Dukes of Burgundy would have the senior title. Or, maybe have them Capet-Burgundy and Ivrea-Burgundy?

It did lead to some fun historical developments such as both Portugal and Castille having a "King Pedro I of Burgundy" with the same dual nicknames (both being known as Pedro I "The Just" and Pedro I "The cruel") ruling at the same time in both countries.
However you are probably right while both dinasties historically went by the same name leading to those interesting situations it might be prudent not to recreate the historical confusion in game (even if it would be accurate).
In that sense I would support keeping the portuguese dinasty as simply "de Borgonha" since reference to the Capets (while accurate) would sound rather alien to a portugueses audience since the alphonsine dinasty never made them historically and renaming the Castillian dinasty to your suggestion of "de Ivrea-Borgoña" (either that or "de Borgoña-Ivrea" doesn't really matter), to differentiate them from the portuguese dinasty but still adding the "of Burgundy" part that the dinasty actually went by.

Yeah, they come from different dynasties, as Demetrios explains quite well. Funnily enough, in 1337, the Duke of Burgundy and the Countess of Burgundy are married, creating a Personal Union of both territories; meanwhile the Castilian and Portuguese are also related, as Alfonso XI of Castile is married to Maria, the daughter of Afonso IV of Portugal.

In this case, I also have some pending work, to finish the links between the different brances, etc., for both dynasties; in the case of the Castilian one, we've also not make a final decision if it will stay as Ivrea, or if we'll rename it as Borgoña.

 

[Pavía]

You mean the bastard son of the King of Castile I assume?

Not to be *that* guy but Enrique de Trastámara is a bastard son of the king of Castille not of the king of Aragón although I'm sure it was just a mix-up .



On the topic of Enrique and his half-brother Pedro, given that Pavía is castilian I'm going to assume that the massive civil war in between them that starts a few decades after the game starts is going to be represented, considering how it is one of the most important events in castilian history (and I mean who doesn't like a good old civil war in Spain in a Paradox title near game start, right?, we would just be waiting for the carlist war to actually be added to Vicky 3 to have it in nearly every title).

My question is then less about wether if it is going to be added but about how it is going to be represented. I hope the event isn't just about choosing between two guys with sligthly different mana values and fighting a few pretender rebels. Imho the war between Enrique and Pedro had massive consecuences for the future direction of the country, and should be understood as not just a dinastic dispute but a manifestation of the growing tensions between the nobility and the cities and the growing radicalitation of religious intolerance. Both individuals had very different political views and as such were supported by very different social classes, Pedro was supported by the cities, being incredibly popular among the lower classes (who saw him as taking their side in the conflict with the nobility), and had a very tolerant view of religious minorities, having a lot of support from the jewish community, and being basically bffs with the ruler of Granada at the time. By contrast the nobility (whose power Pedro was trying to crush) and the church (who didn't look kindly at the king fraternizing with heathens) rallied behind Enrique.
Historically Enrique's victory led to an increase of political power by the aristocracy, large land owners seazing much municipal owned land (over time), the Cortes (castilian parlament) losing power and influence (to the nobility) and an strengthening of religious persecution, that eventually led to the expulsions of jews and muslims and the creation of the Inquisition.
Personally I think that it would be amazing if supporting Pedro meant leading Castille to a different path that what historically happened with the power of city councils strengthened and away of the fires of the Inquisition.

Speaking of the bastards of Alfonso XI, we already have in the game those born by 1337 (Pedro, Sancho, Enrique, Fadrique, and Fernando), and his mistress, Leonor de Guzmán. And yes, the game will have content regarding the civil war between Pedro I and his half-brothers; but it's too early to start speaking about that.

 

[Johan]

Guess it depends what 'close' means. The Habsburgs certainly did engage in fairly close familiar marriages, uncles and neices, etc, so I guess that should be permitted (probably via a specific 'law') in very limited circumstances. Anything closer such as siblings, parent/child should be 100% disallowed universally.

Close = mother, father, sibling, child.

 

[Johan]

Does this mean there won't be bastards popping out creating new dynasties? Because that's like half the noble families of Europe, like the Trastamaras discussed

there will