-
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.
Just saw that today AGAIN and decided to demostrate this epitome of absurdity to everyone.
What on Earth is this kind of Buddhism?! "The end is nigh", "burn infidels"... I know Mahayana does have that little thing about "skillful means", but these means are far from skillful no matter how you turn it.
(Yes, I perfectly understand this is just a copypasta from Christianity here. But I am not even sure that a non-zealous Christian ruler should lose piety by taking this fool out of sight, let alone the Eastern faiths)
What on Earth is this kind of Buddhism?! "The end is nigh", "burn infidels"... I know Mahayana does have that little thing about "skillful means", but these means are far from skillful no matter how you turn it.
(Yes, I perfectly understand this is just a copypasta from Christianity here. But I am not even sure that a non-zealous Christian ruler should lose piety by taking this fool out of sight, let alone the Eastern faiths)
- 20
There is nothing pious about burning someone who is mentally ill. Plenty if not most of religions would agree on that, even at the time. Turning off witch-hunt-related events and mechanics are something I’d very much appreciate.
- 4
As this event is about heresy, it really should have a trigger blocking eastern religions from getting it (probably pagan faiths too). Edit: Or maybe change the options based on it being a eastern religion
As for piety, it's represents perceived piety. It's a social currency like prestige. So, would their faith at large view it as pious, neutral, or impious to let a heretic go? Zealous would only come into this for whether the ruler losses stress or the AI is more likely to pick an option.
Last edited:
- 4
- 2
This event actually does somewhat make sense for Mahayana Buddhism. There were several times in history where millenarianist Buddhists led revolts claiming to be the Maitreya. The most famous one from the CK3 timeframe would be Gung Ye, a bastard one-eyed Korean prince who ruled his own kingdom until he was overthrown by one of his own generals. So a Buddhist claiming that "the end is nigh" and the "time of the Maitreya is coming" does make sense. I do agree however it never really made sense that one loses piety for taking the fool out of sight.
- 16
And of course, China (if it's ever added) was pretty consistently wracked by various Taoist apocalyptic cults as well.
- 7
- 1
- 1
Joan of Arc would like to know your location.
Plenty of people have been hung, starved, beheaded, burned, nailed to wood, impaled, trampled, quartered, drowned, tortured and any other form treatment imaginable for heresy or similar.
The term martyr exists due to people dying for reasons you claim didn't happen. "Mental illness" was not an excuse.
It doesn't matter what "religions would agree to", only what people have done and how they justify it.
Last edited:
- 4
- 3
- 1
She died because she fell on the wrong side of the war. If anything, you should have to SPEND piety to convince your priests that she’s guilty of anything. That’s a ruler twisting the faith to his designs, not a ruler being pious and following the canon law.
Last edited:
- 8
- 2
- 1
I agree, too, that a ruler could just delete a heretic, but that should take piety from him for most religions, except of course those who practice human sacrifice
- 2
I'll quote myself from another thread:
Regarding "Grand Rites" and "covens": some sort of event about gathering of various witches/shamans/magicians/occultists would be cool, but in its current form it's a rather bland crossover between satanic societies and Wiccan sabbats.
I think it'd be best if potential "witches" were divided into three distinct categories, ideally each having a separate acceptance doctrine:
Regarding "Grand Rites" and "covens": some sort of event about gathering of various witches/shamans/magicians/occultists would be cool, but in its current form it's a rather bland crossover between satanic societies and Wiccan sabbats.
I think it'd be best if potential "witches" were divided into three distinct categories, ideally each having a separate acceptance doctrine:
- Mystics: vision-havers and holy people like Jeanne d'Arc who are most in-line with the religion's orthodox teachings but are not priests and can sometimes be in conflict with them.
- Witches: shamans, wise women, and witch-doctors who mutter prayers to good and evil powers of given religion, dabble in herbalism, and serve as an informal spiritual leaders who might or might not be on good terms with the faith's official clergy.
- Magicians: alchemists, gnostics, cabbalists and occultists with "scientific" and ceremonial approach to magic, akin to Hermetic Society members from CK2. Your stereotypical Philosopher's Stone's seekers belong here. Depending on the faith's doctrines, they are either valued members of the society (alchemists of Islamic Golden Age) or are branded as heretics.
- 11
- 1
- 1
I imagine the devs added what we have now as a launch placeholder for if (hopefully when) they get a chance to expand on the system at a later point.
I like all of this and it sounds really interesting!
For the first group, you could tie them to your religions legitimacy and if it gets below a certain point (whether because of evil priests, lost holy wars, whatever) they begin to advance ideas related to the decline of your religion (too many foreign religions in the kingdom, witches are the problem, too many deviants, etc) and want you to solve them by forcing conversions, mass executions and so on. These mystics could form a faction (that could be backed by peasants counties as well as sympathetic nobles who can serve as knights or commanders even if they are landless) that eventually launches a revolt to depose the ruler (or maybe appoint an automatic entrenched regency) and then force through their agenda. Assassinating or otherwise murdering the mystic could either cause the movement to fizzle out or it could result in the slain mystic being considered a martyr and radically increase the power of the faction.
Do you have ideas for how the different categories would interact with the player and the world in general?
- 3
.png){kind=avatar}
If there are witches in reality, I hereby proclaim myself a wizard.
In regards to the game, I think OP overexxagerates a bit, in my games I have never found witch trait being common, it does show up here and there. But its relative rarity always makes me notice it when it is present.
- 3
- 1
I think part of its rarity/commonness depends on how much time you spend on the Learning foci (which have a couple of events that can either make you a witch or generate a witch character).
But I agree that the requirements for making a coven basically require the player to actively spread it.
But I agree that the requirements for making a coven basically require the player to actively spread it.
- 2
- 1
Cool! Roll for initiative.
I haven’t found it too common either, but it’s gotten a bit easier to get with the addition of Meet Peers event that offers a choice of herbalist or witch if you’ve got a witch in court.
- 3
I think it might be a good opportunity for some form of "societies" from CK2 to return, albeit less as "secret orders" and more as "we've heard you receive visions from the angels / can turn lead into gold hereby we invite you to our meeting to share experiences with fellow mystics/sages": characters with one of the three mentioned traits would be able to attend activities related to each. As for other content:
- As a "Mystic" ruler, you could debate with other Mystics, strive to receive visions, and perform "miracles" to convince the commonfolk and the nobility alike that you truly are a holy man (sainthood return from CK2 pls!)
- I admit I don't have many ideas for activities avaible for "Witch" rulers, as European rulers hardly engaged in folk herbalism iirc; I imagine Paradox (or modders) could take a look at how non-Christian rulers of the land interacted with shamanesque and vodou-like practices in Northeastern Europe, Asia, and Africa.
- A "Magician" ruler could dabble in alchemy; while turning lead into gold would remain impossible, I imagine research into the nature of substances could significantly boost the speed of reaching innovations such as Wootz Steel. Plus basically the content of Hermetic Society from CK2, it was extremely cool.
- 2
- 1
"If you're bothered by this ahistoric nonsense, you should just use an even more ahistoric system"
Seriously, one of these days I am going to have to start a thread just ranting about the absurd notion of European Catholic rulers converting willy-nilly to random heresies and then suffering no real consequences, or just coming out and declaring their own religion with any trait they want as long as they've been a good enough Catholic and really smart leading up to it
- 10
For consistency, are you also against other ahistorical, made-up fantasy features like restoring the Roman Empire, dissolving the Papalcy, reforming pagan religions? Should the game prevent historical characters from dying (or not dying) at the wrong time, to keep the game historically accurate?
If you want perfect historical accuracy, go read a wikipedia page. This is a game, with gameplay mechanics. Witchcraft is (at present) a severely underdeveloped mechanic that attempts (poorly, at present) to capture several legitimate historical occurrences under the same mechanic. It's only an approximation, but then, most features of the CK games are just approximations to history.
Last edited:
- 7
- 1
This is the best argument in favour of the supernatural elements.
In CK2, when something only mildly "supernatural" happened, you could never be sure whether it was actually supernatural, or if it could be explained rationally. There was that sense of mysticism and wonder when playing the game, which accurately recreated the sense of mysticism and wonder that was genuinely prevalent during the time period.
With no supernatural elements at all, the game loses that sense of wonder and mysticism.
Going down the rare immortality chain, for example, would often end with you having been fooled. People did try and pursue immortality, fountains of youth etc., and there were firm beliefs that these things were real. If you know beforehand that there is nothing supernatural in the game, then you know that there's no point going down the event chain to try and get a prize you know doesn't exist. There are numerous real-world examples of rulers consuming poison under the misguided belief it would give them immortality (Qin Shi Huang being a notable example). But what CK3 player would make that choice, knowing the reward simply isn't there?
By knowing there is nothing supernatural in the game, you already know the outcome of pretty much any/all mysticism events. Which itself is unrealistic. The game needs at least the threat/promise of supernatural events in order to push the player into making historically accurate decisions, while also immersing the player in the historically accurate sense of wonder and mysticism.
Sure, add a game rule to turn it off for players who aren't interested. But CK3 is a worse, less immersive game, for its lack of supernatural content. Maybe Paradox should make a single DLC which adds all the content, so players who don't want it don't have to and players who understand and appreciate what supernatural content can do for the game get to enjoy it.
- 2
- 1
Restoring the Roman Empire or dissolving the papacy? You can just choose not to do it (and if magically an AI could manage that, I certainly wouldn't stop people from getting an optional toggle to disable it for the AI, you know). Reforming the pagan religions ditto.
Characters dying (which happened, happens, and could have happened at any time anyway) is hardly comparable with something that didn't happen, doesn't happen and could not have happened because it does not exist. It's like having the Jan Mayen Bear Empire enabled by default.
- 1
- 1
How do you know that there weren't, though? It is logically impossible to prove that something doesn't exist. Only existence can be proven by an example.
That said, I find witches to be boring. All it is, is a negative secret that can propagate to your offspring if you want to. That's all there is, afaik? Really, really uninteresting. There should be some events at least.
- 7