• 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.
They could go the D&D route.. I don't remember it off the top of my head, but it went something like this..

Attribute Score = Bonus Modifier

0-1 = -4 Penalty
2-3 = -3 Penalty
4-5 = -2 Penalty
6-7 = -1 Penalty
8-9 = Average 0
10-12 = +1 Bonus
13-14 = +2 Bonus
15-16 = +3 Bonus
17-18 = +4 Bonus


So basically, if your ruler has a stat of 14, and your adviser has a stat of 16, because of the advisor's stat you get a +3 bonus to your ruler's stat. So, 14+3=17. Being under the average means that person would be so bad at it that he or she will just end up making things worse. In a sense, think of someone you know who is horrendous at math, they can't comprehend it, they can't solve it, yet there they are.. an accountant who makes mistakes all the time and can't do it right.
 
now for seriously: I am pretty sure there were rulers without advisors, if it is that important I will ook some up when I got the time
Yes those independent hovels or those incompetent rulers who are so full of themselves they think they know everything, but not for long. No ruler of any significance (and well below the county level) has ever ruled for long stretches of time without advisers because they know what they don't know and know they need someone who does know in order to help their own ambitions.
 
How about simply making advisor's stats (and all characters for that matter) hidden? You could have interviews with applicants to try and determine their skill levels, but you could get it wrong, based on the skills of whoever was involved in the interview. There could be references from previous employers, as well as perhaps official university degrees (or whatever applied at the time) and just a general "reputation" that would be earned as advisors did their job.

This could make for clandestine offers to a rival's advisor, based on the reputation that he was earning from doing such a good job. The prestige of the relative rulers bidding for his or her services, along with their loyalty and ambitions could then be used to determine who they would like to work for.

Both during the interview and over time traits and vague levels of competency could be revealed to the ruler. This could be applied to family members as well, but of course with family members, stats and traits would be revealed far more easily as you know them much better.

Added to which, certain stats could be used to either conceal stats and traits - imagine the steward who while having a Midas Touch with stewardship, also is has the trait "embezzler" and while making great money for you, also siphons a percentage off for himself? Or the Charasmatic Negotiator who fools you into thinking that his skills as a Spy master are much better than they really are?

And also the loyalty of advisors could be effected by similar and opposing traits of the ruler. And thus why some advisors get fed up with working for their boss and move on. Sacking any advisor could give a loyalty hit to other advisors, unless they had formed a rivalry, moreso if they had formed a friendship.

Now, keeping track of all this for the AI would be a nightmare, so it would have to be something that was kept for the ruler whose court the advisor belonged to only. A simple one off random chance formula could be used for AI and only kept track of for the ruler of that advisor.

So, for an example, the steward to the Duke of Normandy dies and he starts looking for a replacement. Some advisors who are advisors to counts apply as they are looking for a better position in life. Some that are already advisors to Kings decline as they enjoy the prestige of living in a great court. And some in other realms who are simply disaffected with their current ruler or who only hold a court position decide to apply for a change in fortunes.

You get a list, and based off their prestige, perhaps the vaguest idea of their abilities and/or reputation. You can then interview the ones you'd think of hiring, and based on the skills of whoever you chose to help interview them, you'd get a further idea (which could be better or worse) of what they were like. You might get a list like:
Marshall: Poor
Steward: Very Good
Diplomacy: Average
Intrigue: Good
Traits: Honest, Modest

You then decide who to hire. Over the years you discover more and more about them, eventually getting a fairly good picture of who they are, depending on their stats/traits. You could build entire event sequences around the advisors and your interaction with them.

Now that would excite me. You get advisors and yet you're never entirely sure about exactly what abilities they have until you've known them for a while. By which point maybe they've ripped you off for years, or secretly seduced your wife, or murdered your children, making it look like normal deaths from childhood.

That's the start of an idea anyway, needs a bit of fleshing out. Would also make interactions with other courts interesting as you don't immediately know every single thing about your neighbour. Only what's known, based on how well known he is (prestige), the skills of his advisors and himself at influencing opinion of himself and the skills of your court. More interaction again gives more information. Thus making who you foster your child with more important.

The more I think about this, the more ideas I keep thinking of, lol.
 
Interestingly, the debate about when one should be able to remove an advisor without repercussions leads to a recurring theme here: "Personal CBs", for the lack of a better term.

It has been suggested several times, and it's well worth mentioning again, introducing a system for personal vendettas, conflict and hatred and replacing the original CB system with it (you are playing a dynasty, after all, not a nation) seems the way to go.
 
Interestingly, the debate about when one should be able to remove an advisor without repercussions leads to a recurring theme here: "Personal CBs", for the lack of a better term.

It has been suggested several times, and it's well worth mentioning again, introducing a system for personal vendettas, conflict and hatred and replacing the original CB system with it (you are playing a dynasty, after all, not a nation) seems the way to go.
Good idea. I'd give that one its own thread though.
How about simply making advisor's stats (and all characters for that matter) hidden? You could have interviews with applicants to try and determine their skill levels, but you could get it wrong, based on the skills of whoever was involved in the interview. There could be references from previous employers, as well as perhaps official university degrees (or whatever applied at the time) and just a general "reputation" that would be earned as advisors did their job.
While I'm not against this, it wouldn't change the problem of high stats + high stats = ungodly broken nor would it be impossible for someone with math skills to determine the stats.

LordofSaxony has a decent idea although since this game isn't DND I think their number base would be different. Unless the math radically changed, I think they wanted most characters to have single digits as max and having double-digits in any one skill would have been seen as truly genius.

Taking that into mind it would be more like:

0 = -5 Penalty
1 = -4 Penalty
2 = -3 Penalty
3 = -2 Penalty
4 = -1 Penalty
5 = Average 0
6 = +1 Bonus
7 = +2 Bonus
8 = +3 Bonus
9 = +4 Bonus
10 = +5 Bonus
...
 
@ Azugal - The only problem I have with your post is that advisors weren't hired in the modern sense and rulers didn't necessarily go out searching for new ones in the kind of evil Big Business manner that you describe. For the longest period of time, Kings didn't necessarily appoint the most adept people into positions of power, but they appointed their favorites into power. F.e. King Robbie appoints Will of Richfamily, a good pal of his he's known since grade school, as the Lord Marshal of his realm. For the good hearted King, it rewards his friend and the immediate Richfamily clan for their loyalty to the King. It also allows King Robbie the convenience of Will's advice and generally having him around to go out back and shoot a bunch of dear with some arrows with. However, Will Richfamily doesn't know the first thing about leading a bunch of men to war and will more than likely make an ass out of himself when Robbie's realm is invaded. While a more comical example, its nonetheless what happened.
 
Seriously, i think the courts are bit small at the moment. And since the game tries to keep the courts in line, it starts killing off people randomly and no-one, not even the royal family is protected. Most unpleasent if some travelling refugee courts take up massive part of it - and before you know, your family, most helpful advisors and maybe even fosterlings are all sick and dead. I had to tweak it to allow at least human controlled court to be bigger (and some events to get rid of unwanted intruders).

Perhaps higher ranks should have more appointment slots. I can see the benefit of having more positions to fill, or at least more minor titles like Rome's cupbearers / seneschals etc. But it's not necessary for the Count of Fumbuck Cheremisia to have an assistant taster, aromatherapy consultant etc.
 
Perhaps higher ranks should have more appointment slots. I can see the benefit of having more positions to fill, or at least more minor titles like Rome's cupbearers / seneschals etc. But it's not necessary for the Count of Fumbuck Cheremisia to have an assistant taster, aromatherapy consultant etc.

Those are 'titles' not 'positions', they only give benefits to the holder of the title (prestige/loyalty) they give no benefits to you as the ruler (except the loyalty of course).

In CK1 you only have 5 positions which need to be filled. The events that start diseases start when you have more then 30 (when you are a king) of them, which means you have 5 spare courtiers for every position, which is more then enough IMO. Also your heirs and ruler are less likely to get infected.

Also the amount (30) can be modded by people to their own liking or even be entirely disabled.
 
Those are 'titles' not 'positions', they only give benefits to the holder of the title (prestige/loyalty) they give no benefits to you as the ruler (except the loyalty of course).

In CK1 you only have 5 positions which need to be filled. The events that start diseases start when you have more then 30 (when you are a king) of them, which means you have 5 spare courtiers for every position, which is more then enough IMO. Also your heirs and ruler are less likely to get infected.

Also the amount (30) can be modded by people to their own liking or even be entirely disabled.

Yeah, I meant the possibility of more positions as well as more titles for higher ranking courts.
 
Seriously, I must admit, the more moddable the new game is, the better. It kind of tests what kind of ideas work and which doesn't. Saves them a lot of time when developing deep and complex strategy games and when making expansions.

I was talking about how the events worked in CK1.

I see no reason for larger courts if the amount of court-positions stay the same, what is the use of 50+ people in your court who do nothing ?