Tinto Talks #60 - 23rd of April 2025

[SAmaster]

Because different schools of Protestantism came only later. At first, protestants and Lutherans were used interchangeably. So, depending on whatever other schools, or splits .... denominations, if you will, determines how they are called. Just like they were Christian before Catholics and Orthodox became a thing, or like how Jesus was jew before his baptism..... and that's why Hussites are called Hussites and not protestants or Lutherans because they predate them......
.... and lets be honest, unlike pretentious and sadomasochistic theology of different Protestant schools, Hussites were the best, because all they wanted was wine.... I mean eucharist for the lay people as well.

that makes me think.... Hussite religion should probably boost pops/church building's need for wine consumption, while on the other hand, Calvinist churches & pops should have less luxury consumption needs.....

What about protestants and fish?

And on that note, we should also consider muslims and wine. I don't think pork is represented as seperate from 'livestock', or cows, but maybe something can be done with less demand for beef and pork for hindu's and jews. Jains being strict vegetarians would have no demand for livestock. Don't think they'd even want eggs, or the use of leather.

 

[Znikii]

What about protestants and fish?

And on that note, we should also consider muslims and wine. I don't think pork is represented as seperate from 'livestock', or cows, but maybe something can be done with less demand for beef and pork for hindu's and jews. Jains being strict vegetarians would have no demand for livestock. Don't think they'd even want eggs, or the use of leather.

iirc ban on alcohol has been confirmed. Livestock is livestock. There are still other livestock used for more reasons than just meat production.

Protestants and fish consumption are interesting. Using historical data, anthropology, and macroecology gives us a very good answer. Protestanism was strongest and most persistent in northern parts of Europe, where the agricultural harvest is less bountiful as is. Secondly, rich fisheries in the North Sea and easy access via the major rivers made fish consumption in those parts an important diet of that region since prehistoric times. The third fact is a little ice age that peaked during the reformation, followed by the 30 Years War ensured that the repeated failed harvests and limited trade made food supply an existential problem. Thus making fish and fishing a lifeline that can not be ruined not by bad weather nor a passing army. Now when you combine the (relatively) minor story played by fish and fishers during the early christanity with the facts above,.... give a very good explanation and a comforting story for why you have been only eating rotting cods for the last five years and while those degenerated papal heretics gorging on white bread pork and wine need to die....

There is a similar very solid theory why Muslims (well, ban on pork in those regions predate Islam anyway.....) banned pork..... the reason being the hot desert climate made butchered meat impossible to store and conserve. So breeding pork for food would be totally wasteful and too inefficient, and most importantly, a public health hazard.

 

[SAmaster]

There are still other livestock used for more reasons than just meat production.

That's why I mentioned eggs and leather. I think wool production is a seperate good still. Guess you could use the raw furs, but I honestly don't know how that factors into medieval/early-modern economies.

Anyway I thought the big economic factor with Fish and protestants is that they don't eat it for lent, as they don't practice lent as stringently as the Catholics do- where most catholics give up meat, but fish don't count as meat. At least, that's what the EUIV event had me believe.

I will add, Hindu's used to eat beef, with early hindu society being centered around horses and oxherds, and with an ancient hindu 'horse ritual' where kings would let a sacred horse graze whereever it wanted, and that territory would become the Kings land by divine right. However this practice fell out of fashion when Hindu's settled down and when political borders became much less flexible. I don't know when exactly the beef taboo entered, but I do think it was prior to 1337.

 

[Znikii]

That's why I mentioned eggs and leather. I think wool production is a seperate good still. Guess you could use the raw furs, but I honestly don't know how that factors into medieval/early-modern economies.

Anyway I thought the big economic factor with Fish and protestants is that they don't eat it for lent, as they don't practice lent as stringently as the Catholics do- where most catholics give up meat, but fish don't count as meat. At least, that's what the EUIV event had me believe.

I will add, Hindu's used to eat beef, with early hindu society being centered around horses and oxherds, and with an ancient hindu 'horse ritual' where kings would let a sacred horse graze whereever it wanted, and that territory would become the Kings land by divine right. However this practice fell out of fashion when Hindu's settled down and when political borders became much less flexible. I don't know when exactly the beef taboo entered, but I do think it was prior to 1337.

There are ample absurd and bizarre accounts of how monks tried to amputate one leg from a freshly born pigglet in order to grow and pass down the ''phenotype'' to breed a 3 legged pork breed.... reason? 3-legged animals wouldn't count as forbidden meat during the Lent

Livestock was and still is an excellent source of work power; dung is an excellent, practically free, fertiliser crucial for intensive agriculture. There is also fat, which is insanely useful for gazillion reasons. Certain bones and teeth also have durable properties that can be used in many cases. Also, many internal organs like the intestines and bladder as well.

 

[matfer13]

I hope that the western schism gives relations modifiers and a unique causus belli against countries supporting the opposite Pope that gives you the possibility to force them to change side

 

[Znikii]

I hope that the western schism gives relations modifiers and a unique causus belli against countries supporting the opposite Pope that gives you the possibility to force them to change side

Doesn't regular Holy War serve perfectly fine for all intents and purposes? Just as well as -opinion toward heretics for relations?

What would be neat tho, if the whole Western Sycsm situation became a draw, deadlocked in a stalemate between 2, each side gets a call for a Crusade event against the other side, giving them special Crusade against the Anti-Pope special cb.....

 

[matfer13]

Doesn't regular Holy War serve perfectly fine for all intents and purposes? Just as well as -opinion toward heretics for relations?

What would be neat tho, if the whole Western Sycsm situation became a draw, deadlocked in a stalemate between 2, each side gets a call for a Crusade event against the other side, giving them special Crusade against the Anti-Pope special cb.....

But they are still catholic, even if there's an Antipope, I think that the crusader mechanics don't apply for them also they are locked like every other Papal bull actions with the schism

 

[mekhaanempire]

I liked the idea from the MEIOU and Taxes mod where regions in northern Europe, farther from Rome, have a higher chance of becoming Protestant (which is how it usually played out historically). Also, cultures ruled by a foreign court often choose—or stick with—a different religion (like Ireland or the Netherlands). I hope something similar will be implemented in PC

 

[King of Zoot]

Are Anabaptists their own religion? Their doctrine was/is quite distinct from Lutheran and Calvinist traditions.

 

[Znikii]

But they are still catholic, even if there's an Antipope, I think that the crusader mechanics don't apply for them also they are locked like every other Papal bull actions with the schism

tHats why i said only if western schism can not be resolved one way or the other because of the stalemate. Such turn of events should be rare and not a norm. So crusade against an anti pope only as a special rare end to the western schism resolution....

Still catholic? The Antipope, the Babylonian whore that resides in Avignon, the personification of Antichrist himself? .... if such threat and internal decay is not a justifiable call for a Crusade, then what is? ... or do you think the Black Plauge is just a coindicence?
Are you an agent of Apocalyse to call such charaters cathol8c???

 

[Captain Frakas]

Just posted one example of a policy, when you hover it, there's a description of its actual effect.

Incipint for many of them if not all, anyway.

They “require” Historical culture rather than Latin fluency.
(And Historical culture tends to come, somewhat, while playing Paradox games, I believe, so the world is well done).

Cum postquam, “While after that“
Unigenitus Dei filius, “The only son begot by God”
Etsi Dominici gregis, “And if the Lord's herd's”

 

[matfer13]

I really hope that the protestant preachers buildings prioritize converting catholics in a location(as that was their priority historically), then other types of christianity other religions and then other religions

 

[titan.bevel]

"Buy our new Council of Constance DLC! Pick among 3 different popes which one will rule the Holy Roman Church, and decide if you want to burn Jan Hus, or make him a living saint!"

Would without joke buy a DLC focused on the various schisms and uniting mechanisms if it's as immersive, historical and fun as PC seems to be.

Otherwhise I hope the western schism has as much content as possible, but hard to give suggestion without more details on what it currently entails. Off the top of my head, support with more than just "cardinal number", CB against other side heretics, relationship modifier, and an end result that isn't just "the pope chosen is different", but that makes the papal state and catholicism dynamic as a whole REALLY different depending of who wins. I agree a 3rd pope (the historical option !) is probably hard to represent, but maybe it could be a possibility if the 2 popes are stalemated, as an event asking for the HRE involvement.

 

[Znikii]

is probably hard to represent, but maybe it could be a possibility if the 2 popes are stalemated, as an event asking for the HRE involvement.

As it happens. That's kinda how it happens historically. HRE was for a few years in a relative stability from their usual dynastic politikn and succession wars and close&far family drama. And on the other hand the France had a weak king that waa kindda funky in his head as well as fighting its own dynastic civil war between its richest members as well as giving the Wnglish anothr shot at 100s years war..... so they were not really in position where they could back their Avignon papacy. So HRE got involved. Council of Constance was called that ended with mending the Western schisim. And then just about the French ended their own long time dybastic struggles, the HRE and the Pope learnet what in meant to be defenestratate by Hussite Bohemians and jumped head in a Crusade to cull the heretics..... fun times

 

[titan.bevel]

As it happens. That's kinda how it happens historically. HRE was for a few years in a relative stability from their usual dynastic politikn and succession wars and close&far family drama. And on the other hand the France had a weak king that waa kindda funky in his head as well as fighting its own dynastic civil war between its richest members as well as giving the Wnglish anothr shot at 100s years war..... so they were not really in position where they could back their Avignon papacy. So HRE got involved. Council of Constance was called that ended with mending the Western schisim. And then just about the French ended their own long time dybastic struggles, the HRE and the Pope learnet what in meant to be defenestratate by Hussite Bohemians and jumped head in a Crusade to cull the heretics..... fun times

Indeed, I read the wikipedia page for council of Constance before commenting on it, it IS indeed a very intriguing and hard to represent part of history. But that's precisely the kind of content I hope PC will live up to, intricate wars and influence tractations where the goal isn't "more land for me", but "MY rules for the whole catholic world"

 

[crowdemon]

Good overview on the Western Schism, the Reformation, and the Council of Trent.

 

[Arbuzik]

What will the interactions between the Orthodox and the Catholic Churches be like? Could something like the Union of Brest happen in the game?

 

[Rule Britannia]

Dude, you would be surprised by how many assets from other PDX GSGs we've had in this game, until being replaced by new ones. I think that we even had Stellaris ones!

So if this is Stellaris 2.0, will you be making an equally indepth map and gameplay for each planets?

 

[sheram_]

There aren't only Lutheran Preachers and Reformers in the Situation, but more on this next week:

View attachment 1284683
The duplicate portraits' graphical bug has been quickly solved! Truly a miracle!

Justus Jonas? Drei Fragezeichen? Am I the only one who noticed?

 

[Rule Britannia]

I hope that the player will have some agency in when and how to set up the Anglican Church. Waiting for a random one time only event to fire was always really annoying in EUIV. Of course it makes sense that certain preconditions are met and that you need to do it in the correct age, however, I really hope that assuming these conditions are met, that it is a process the player can choose to initiate at a time of their choosing.