• 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.

Victoria 3 - Dev Diary #53 - Characters

16_9 (3).jpg

Welcome back! With the traditional Swedish summer vacations over, the Victoria 3 team is back to work and that means the resumption of dev diaries. Today we’re going to take a look at Characters and their various facets, including Leader Ideologies, Traits, Popularity, and more.

His Imperial and Royal Apostolic Majesty, By the Grace of God Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohemia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, Galicia, Lodomeria and Illyria; King of Jerusalem, etc.; Archduke of Austria; Grand Duke of Tuscany and Cracow; Duke of Lorraine, Salzburg, Styria, Carintia, Carniola and Bukovina; Grand Prince of Transylvania, Margrave of Moravia; Duke of Upper and Lower Silesia, of Modena, Parma, Piacenza and Guastalla, of Auschwitz and Zator, of Teschen, Friaul, Ragusa and Zara; Princely Count of Habsburg and Tyrol, of Kyburg, Gorizia and Gradisca; Prince of Trento and Brixen; Margrave of Upper and Lower Lusatia and in Istria; Count of Hohenems, Feldkirch, Bregenz, Sonnenberg etc.;
Lord of Trieste, of Cattaro and on the Windic March; Grand Voivode of the Voivodeship of Serbia etc., etc.

DD53_1.png

Interest Group Ideologies, such as Liberal for the Intelligentsia and Jingoist for the Armed Forces, are for the most part set in stone outside of some special instances. Interest Groups represent broad class interests rather than the prevailing political zeitgeist, so we’ve taken care to ensure that their Ideologies align with those interests. The Rural Folk’s Particularist Ideology, for instance, opposes Serfdom, Debt Slavery, and Peasant Levies - and it’s difficult to imagine them changing their stance on such matters.

Market Liberals can appear after researching Stock Exchange, and may well decide that they want to shake up your tightly controlled or agrarian economy.
DD53_2.png

The Ideologies of your Interest Group Leaders, however, do represent the prevailing political zeitgeist within their own section of society. Every character comes with their own personal Ideology, determined by a wide variety of factors reflecting the material and political conditions of your nation. I’ll list a few examples of these factors:

  • Fascist leaders are more likely to emerge in countries that are paying War Reparations after losing a war.
  • Radical leaders are more likely to emerge in absolute monarchies with high turmoil in incorporated states.
  • Communist leaders are more likely to emerge in countries with large urban centers and low living standards for the lower strata.
  • Social Democrats are less likely to emerge from content Interest Groups - angry IG’s will turn towards more radical forms of socialism.
  • Theocrats are more likely to emerge when your country has the State Religion law and the Devout Interest Group is powerful.
  • Market Liberals are more likely to emerge in countries with large Urban Centers and less “modern” economic laws like Traditionalism and Mercantilism.

Mr Marx here is one of several historical figures who has been lovingly sculpted by our artists. He can show up in your country shortly after researching Socialism, and may become the Interest Group Leader for the Trade Unions.
DD53_3.png

Some characters have a specially defined historical appearance, such as Mr Marx here or the Kaiser above. We’ll have a limited number of these on release, but we expect to continue adding more historical DNA to both characters present in the start date and characters who can emerge later in the game. Likewise, many countries (especially those we expect to be popular among players) have an historical set of starting Interest Group Leaders and Commanders but not all. Once again we expect to flesh this out further as we deep-dive into particular regions post-release. Where historical characters haven’t been defined, the game will generate a character with an appropriate Ideology based on the factors described above.

A variety of historical figures can emerge as the game progresses beyond 1836. We can define everything you’d expect about a character like their religion, ethnicity, and traits, but there’s also a little more we can do here. Taking US President Abraham Lincoln as an example, we’ve set the earliest date that he can become an Interest Group leader to 1847 (when he first entered the House of Representatives, joining the national political stage). We can set both country-level and Interest Group-level triggers on when it’s appropriate for a character to emerge - Lincoln can emerge only in the USA, and he can join either the Intelligentsia or Rural Folk if they are not Marginalized. We can also determine the chance that a politician will emerge every time a suitable Interest Group selects a new leader.

Santa Anna’s political and military career is as long as it is fascinating. The day he was captured by the Texan army however was not one of his best days - should this happen in Victoria 3, Mexico will be forced to capitulate and recognize Texan independence.
DD53_4.png

Every character has one or more Roles that determine their impact on your nation. Characters can sometimes have multiple roles, for instance it is possible to Grant Command to your monarchs and dictators give them the ability to command your armed forces personally. Characters can have the following Roles:

  • Rulers. The King, the President, the Pope, the head honcho of the nation. Who rules your country is determined by your Governance Principles law.
  • Heirs. Heirs exist only in monarchies, and primarily spend their time waiting for mummy or daddy to pop off so they can have their turn on the throne.
  • Politicians. These are Interest Group Leaders, whose ideologies are a huge determining factor for the laws you can pass and the Political Movements that will emerge.
  • Commanders. Your Generals and Admirals, heroically (or not so heroically) leading your forces into battle.

A Charismatic Interest Group Leader can provide a very large boost to their IG’s Pop Attraction, which if you want to empower that IG can be a powerful advantage in realizing your ambitions. If the Charismatic leader is a member of an IG you are not so keen on however, they may become a painful thorn in your side.
DD53_5.png

Each character also has Character Traits. Traits have a variety of effects, and these effects can differ depending on the Character’s Role(s). Let’s take the Cruel Trait as an example. All Cruel characters take a very substantial hit to their Popularity (more on that in just a bit), but the other effects are applied depending on the character’s role. A Cruel commander will encourage his forces to cause more casualties to the enemy and more devastation in the course of the war. When an IG has a Cruel leader, they will gain more approval for being included in the government. Finally, a Cruel Ruler enjoys cheaper Decrees (Violent Suppression might be a favorite), but opposition IG’s will more readily disapprove of the government and all pops in the nation will have reduced standard of living. Other Traits include Ambitious, Pillager, Innovative, and of course Opium Addict.

A character’s virtues and vices may impact their Popularity - Mr Pretorius here has many fine qualities, but his relationship with cocaine has caused his otherwise stellar reputation to take a hit.
DD53_6.png

Popularity is a measure of a Character’s reputation among the people of the nation. It comes primarily from their Traits, but many Events will cause Characters to rise and fall in the arena of public opinion. Like Traits, the effects of a Character’s Popularity depends on their Role(s). For the Ruler, Popularity adds Legitimacy to their government. The Popularity of Interest Group Leaders affects the attractiveness of their IG to pops and is a contributing factor to Momentum in Elections. Finally, combat units will regain their morale faster (or slower!) depending on the Popularity of their Commander.

Characters play an important role in Victoria 3. They rule nations, dominate internal politics, and command armies. Through their Ideologies, new and old ideas clash in the arena of government and public opinion, while their Traits will help or hinder their goals as well as yours.

And that is all for today! Next week, Martin will unveil the revisions to the trade mechanics since we last covered them.
 
  • 160Like
  • 63Love
  • 12
  • 11
  • 10
Reactions:
What does it add to the game though to represent this as a personal union when it's not as if dynastic politics would have severed Poland (or Finland, for that matter) from Russia? In EU4 a PU can go away if a monarch dies but it's not like if Nicholas I died and dynasties changed Poland would have just left
Because then you get a playable poland at game start, you don't start with it annexed and instantly able to control absolutely everything about poland as russia?
At most the change would be purely cosmetic, and as far as I'm aware the only PU in the time frame that actually was affected by inheritance was Hannover, which already has something scripted to represent that in-game
Thats the issue with modern paradox, making specific scripting for specific options, rather than general mechanics which can be applied generally
The Schelswig Holstein question was also affected by differing laws of inheritance. Neuchatel crisis also could've shaken European politics by having the swiss at war again.
Theres also the fact of what PUs could have formed had deaths occured in a certain manner, especially when the german princes started gaining thrones again, eg wittlesbach and hohenzollern. Also the British Monarchy being renamed Windsor because the propaganda department went too far
 
Last edited:
  • 7
Reactions:
it's really not worth adding intricate PU mechanics tied to family trees (which currently don't exist and would require more characters and logic for generating them) just for Hannover (which easily can be handled as it is right now), Neuchatel, and S-H. Keep in mind too that these are all situations at game start which again can be scripted. I don't foresee any way in which new situations like those could arise in the context of the 19th and 20th centuries and it definitely doesn't warrant, again, investing time into developing a whole system to deepen dynastic mechanics in a game where that isn't the central focus

also Poland being playable doesn't require PU mechanics, just put it on the map and call it a vassal with some level of autonomy (though I don't know if it deserves that, that's a separate debate)
adding dynastic mechanics to Poland does nothing because again, there is absolutely no way that a change of monarchs would have impacted Poland's vassalage status. Russia would not have peacefully just let Poland go if it were inherited one way or the other, and if the monarchy even went away entirely they wouldn't be content to let Poland go, it does nothing for gameplay and wastes dev time
 
  • 21
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Thats the issue with modern paradox, making specific scripting for specific options, rather than general mechanics which can be applied generally
The Schelswig Holstein question was also affected by differing laws of inheritance. Neuchatel crisis also could've shaken European politics by having the swiss at war again.
Theres also the fact of what PUs could have formed had deaths occured in a certain manner, especially when the german princes started gaining thrones again, eg wittlesbach and hohenzollern. Also the British Monarchy being renamed Windsor because the propaganda department went too far
What's it with people using the phrase "Modern paradox" to complain specifically about things that were significantly more prominent at "old paradox"
 
  • 25
  • 2Haha
  • 1Like
Reactions:
it's really not worth adding intricate PU mechanics tied to family trees (which currently don't exist and would require more characters and logic for generating them) just for Hannover (which easily can be handled as it is right now), Neuchatel, and S-H. Keep in mind too that these are all situations at game start which again can be scripted. I don't foresee any way in which new situations like those could arise in the context of the 19th and 20th centuries and it definitely doesn't warrant, again, investing time into developing a whole system to deepen dynastic mechanics in a game where that isn't the central focus
Those 3 were what came off the top of my head, more may emerge, especially seeing as just before you said there was only one that you could think of. Dynastic mechanics isn't the central focus, but neither is having specific character models for karl marx, and yet he has been added, along with actual rulers. If we're representing the wills and desires of umpteen billions of people, what would be wrong with adding fleshed out royal families too? We're now getting women and children along with those disabled by war, why not also right another wrong that vic2 had in having little to no monarchical mechanics
also Poland being playable doesn't require PU mechanics, just put it on the map and call it a vassal with some level of autonomy (though I don't know if it deserves that, that's a separate debate)
adding dynastic mechanics to Poland does nothing because again, there is absolutely no way that a change of monarchs would have impacted Poland's vassalage status. Russia would not have peacefully just let Poland go if it were inherited one way or the other, and if the monarchy even went away entirely they wouldn't be content to let Poland go, it does nothing for gameplay and wastes dev time
Once you start the game you can make your own history, the ottomans were unlikely to successfully reform and keep their whole empire intact and yet Victoria 3 is offering the choice whereby completing some missions you stop this, and likewise are able to stop the opium wars for qing china. But adding mechanics for monarchies that's beyond the pale, especially Poland because its fate is set in stone.
A communist Russia would ofc try to reclaim Poland, but does that mean its a fait accompli ? War is now automated but we have all these diplomatic plays we can use, and if Russia is communist but the west not, surely they would be less likely to join said war, and even incentivised to join Poland's side to stop the spread of communism?
Dynamically creating kingdoms and Empires in the Americas after a debt repayment gone wrong ala Mexico would be another reason to add in dynastic mechanics
 
  • 10
Reactions:
What's it with people using the phrase "Modern paradox" to complain specifically about things that were significantly more prominent at "old paradox"
Because the more and more flavour added to games, the more and more they've been for specific countries. Look at eu4, as vietnam you can get a discount on cannon cost for being friendly to the west, no one else can. Look at ck3, people are now wrapped into 19th century cultural caricatures, rather than the far more lax cultural effects of ck2 where most things were determined by religion
 
  • 8
  • 4Like
Reactions:
I love that fact that Vic3 will have an increased character focus. Even if the "Great Men" model of history leaves much to be desired, individuals do seem significant for the timing of when evens came to fruition, and besides they make for nice storytelling and recognition. However I am a bit puzzled that a game with a primary focus on politics, cultural movements and economical development has a special section of "Great people" for military commanders, but not for industrialists, inventors or artists, who would seem to have influenced the period as much if not more than individual commanders. I realise some of these can fall in to the "Politician" role as heads of interest groups, but it seems to me that there could be a role for them even outside this sphere. I also hope that there can be "politician" characters that are not the current lead of an IG, so you can see and influence some of the drama around who captures/defines the zeitgeit for your intellectuals or rurals.

But cool stuff.
 
  • 13
Reactions:
I agree with you, the point here is that Santa Ana is being shown as an example of what is proposed in the development diary. Then it would be expected to meet the points proposed by this development diary, as is the case with the historical physical appearance of the Kaiser and Marx.
If you read the dev diary, not really. They specifically mention the modeled appearance for historical characters before then, and even take care to only mention Marx and Ferdinand von Habsburg and not mention Santa Ana when talking about it, "some characters have a specially defined historical appearance, such as Mr Marx here or the Kaiser above." It's made pretty clear in the diary that Santa Ana is not a historically modeled character and is randomly generated. And that's fine. Not every historical character in the game is going to be able to get the attention to detail for their appearance by game release. Some will just have to wait for a flavor pack DLC just because the devs only have a limited time to do things and need to prioritize their work.
 
  • 6
  • 2
Reactions:
What's it with people using the phrase "Modern paradox" to complain specifically about things that were significantly more prominent at "old paradox"
Because a lot of people have no idea what old Paradox design actually was like.
 
  • 10
  • 3
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Because a lot of people have no idea what old Paradox design actually was like.
People seem to have some weird nostalgia for older Paradox titles for some reason? I mean I like them and played the hell out of some of them but how people come to praising Vicky 2 capitalist AI or DLC policy is beyond me
 
  • 12
  • 2
Reactions:
I see there a base for cabinet system - really looking for Prime Minister in Dual-headed-Executive-Governments by Expansion-Patches

NGL, I would love to see the dual executive system with the cabinet headed by the Prime Minister, though I am not sure how that would be implemented without becoming cumbersome to the point that it reduces the gameplay fun value of the game. Basically, I would like to see Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary for the United Kingdom. Obviously, the cabinet positions would have different titles depending on the culture or something like that (e.g. Secretary of State for the U.S. equivalent of British Foreign Secretary). One issue, though, is how to make cabinet work across different countries with widely different offices. For example, most of the responsibilities held by the British Home Secretary are split up with multiple Cabinet offices in the U.S. which did not have its own Home Secretary.

There is also the complication of how to make cabinet work with both unitary and dual executive systems as well with the different systems of government, the parliamentary and the presidential. The executive in the U.S. federal government obviously have a single head as opposed to the dual executive in the British government where the prime minister is the head of government and the monarch is the head of state. And the cabinet in the U.S. are not simultaneously members of the legislative branch as they are in the United Kingdom.

Personally, I would love to see such deep government mechanic but, realistically, my enthusiasm for this is tempered by the concern about how that would work without compromising the gameplay fun. Either way, a DLC or a patch implementing the cabinet system would be a huge plus if and when that ever happen.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Is there anyway to retire or remove a character? Or interact with them, mainly politicians I mean. If not in game, then maybe in modding? I can imagine a mod letting us assassinate a particularly troublesome revolutionary, really gives me Tropico vibes.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
i'm not sure to understand here, yes they have bonuses , a bit like leader traits from HOI/EU4 but ... what is their purpose?
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Can a military commander/general become the ruler of a Interest group or even a nation??

It would be interesting to see a prominent general becoming leader of your nation.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
NGL, I would love to see the dual executive system with the cabinet headed by the Prime Minister, though I am not sure how that would be implemented without becoming cumbersome to the point that it reduces the gameplay fun value of the game. Basically, I would like to see Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary for the United Kingdom. Obviously, the cabinet positions would have different titles depending on the culture or something like that (e.g. Secretary of State for the U.S. equivalent of British Foreign Secretary). One issue, though, is how to make cabinet work across different countries with widely different offices. For example, most of the responsibilities held by the British Home Secretary are split up with multiple Cabinet offices in the U.S. which did not have its own Home Secretary.

There is also the complication of how to make cabinet work with both unitary and dual executive systems as well with the different systems of government, the parliamentary and the presidential. The executive in the U.S. federal government obviously have a single head as opposed to the dual executive in the British government where the prime minister is the head of government and the monarch is the head of state. And the cabinet in the U.S. are not simultaneously members of the legislative branch as they are in the United Kingdom.

Personally, I would love to see such deep government mechanic but, realistically, my enthusiasm for this is tempered by the concern about how that would work without compromising the gameplay fun. Either way, a DLC or a patch implementing the cabinet system would be a huge plus if and when that ever happen.
I think this would place a little too much emphasis on individual characters. It's a good idea for a game (I mean, hell, change the names from Foreign Secretary to Chancellor and Finance Minister to Steward and that's the basic structure of a CK government) but I'm not sure if that's right for this specific game. Having one character represent not just themselves, but also their close allies should be fine enough, even if it's not fully realistic. It'd be a headache that you have to keep replacing your secretaries every four years because a new guy came to power.
 
  • 3
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
I think this would place a little too much emphasis on individual characters. It's a good idea for a game (I mean, hell, change the names from Foreign Secretary to Chancellor and Finance Minister to Steward and that's the basic structure of a CK government) but I'm not sure if that's right for this specific game.
Finance minister is Chancellor (of the exchequer) in the UK
Cabinets consisting of characters could be useful for coalition govs, helping show weaknesses of pr coalition govs over fptp majority govs.
Having one character represent not just themselves, but also their close allies should be fine enough, even if it's not fully realistic. It'd be a headache that you have to keep replacing your secretaries every four years because a new guy came to power.
If you keep your party popular it could be longer than 4 years, even longer with an appointed government. Bismarck was in for 30 years
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions:
I discussed this elsewhere. But my idea is that you would have one "Chief minister" office (Which can be left empty in absolute monarchies, representing the fact that the ruler can reign independently) and a bunch of Hoi4 styles "advisor" slots. Which could represent actual cabinet ministers, ministers without portfolio, family members, industrialists, influential courtiers etc.

This is to avoid breaking suspension of disbelief by having the same officers replicated in every country, it allows to even represent countries without a defined cabinet system, and it also represents the fact that sometimes the most influential people in the government don't hold formal office, or hold a minor office but have outsized influence. The reason why "chief minister" is special is because it more or less exists or could exist in every country, even if it is informal or a combination of several different offices (As was the origin of the British prime ministership, for example).
 
  • 5
Reactions: