Character Interactions that should be in the game

[Ikatosh]

In my current playthrough, I’m a duke and vassal of the Holy Roman Empire, and I realized there’s a crucial interaction missing—one that, in my opinion, should absolutely be part of the game:


The ability to ask an elector to support your candidacy for the imperial throne—naturally, in exchange for gold or a hook on you.


But that’s not all. I’ve also noticed a few other potential features that could deepen the experience:

• Requesting the Head of Faith to declare a Great Holy War, at the cost of prestige, piety, and an initial sum of gold. If the war is aimed at reclaiming a sacred site (like Jerusalem, for instance), the Head of Faith would be much more likely to accept.
• The freedom to switch sides or factions during civil wars—with appropriate penalties, of course. This could also involve negotiating a duchy or other major rewards in return for your support. (Maybe introduce a new trait like “Oathbreaker”?)
• The option to request gold from your vassals in exchange for hooks or contract renegotiations.

In short, these kinds of interactions could make the world feel more dynamic and unpredictable. What do you all think? How could these mechanics be improved or balanced?

 

[prismaticmarcus]

The ability to ask an elector to support your candidacy for the imperial throne—naturally, in exchange for gold or a hook on you.

This is there but it's the other way around. You have to get the hook first and can then use it to force them to vote with you.

 

[EricMN93]

I recently made a post outlining some interactions and mechanics that I think should be in ck3 and that would help improve immersion internally.

Learning from 3KTW

All the talk on forums in China and the rest of Asia has made me want to play a quick game of Three Kingdoms Total War. I think most strategy game fans have tried different games and know that each has its pros and cons. However, Three Kingdoms...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

 

[Ikatosh]

This is there but it's the other way around. You have to get the hook first and can then use it to force them to vote with you.

I'm referring to the case where you're a duke and therefore can't vote as an elector. So, through gold or a hook, you force an elector to vote for you. As far as I know, currently you can only influence votes if you're already an elector yourself—is that correct?

 

[TripleAgent]

Being able to switch sides in a civil war would be huge for the RP perspective and to making warfare more chaotic. IIRC in the CK2 AGOT mod you had that ability, I remember having a lot of fun with that.

 

[peteoj]

They need to absolutely slash all the useless events and focus on actual interactions to foster better roleplay

 

[Chaotic_Good]

They need to absolutely slash all the useless events and focus on actual interactions to foster better roleplay

Events need a big rework.

Some of them are very repetitive, others dont have any relation with your traits, lots of events with people from the other corner of the kingdom but at same time you can stay lot of years without events with your own family or people from your court.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

I'm referring to the case where you're a duke and therefore can't vote as an elector. So, through gold or a hook, you force an elector to vote for you. As far as I know, currently you can only influence votes if you're already an elector yourself—is that correct?

Yeah, that's true. I see what you mean. You can be a candidate but not an elector.

 

[Pups' Socks]

Having other characters interact with eachother. An ambitious vassal lord should be able to, say, encourage his daughter to find her way into the kings bedchamber during a visit, especially if the king is as of yet unmarried or have an old and ugly wife or if your young son is taken as a hostage you should encourage him to befriend the other lords similarly aged heir and stuff like these. Currently even being a house head or the head of your entire dynasty is pretty much useless on how you interact with your kin besides calling them to wars or legitimizing the bastards when in reality even being the head of your own family (not house head, regular old man, spouse, children) should've opened up many options such as these.

 

[EricMN93]

1. I think the faction system needs an overhaul. When a faction is created, vassals should position themselves as pro, neutral, or anti.

This would help with vassal wars. 1b. There should be a "positive" faction of loyalists.

2. I think that when a king/emperor's capital is besieged and the war is won, a choice should be made as to what to do with the prisoners: freeing all, only the ruler, or not freeing anyone. This could lead to very interesting situations of internal chaos within the kingdom.

 

[Chaotic_Good]

Having other characters interact with eachother. An ambitious vassal lord should be able to, say, encourage his daughter to find her way into the kings bedchamber during a visit, especially if the king is as of yet unmarried or have an old and ugly wife or if your young son is taken as a hostage you should encourage him to befriend the other lords similarly aged heir and stuff like these. Currently even being a house head or the head of your entire dynasty is pretty much useless on how you interact with your kin besides calling them to wars or legitimizing the bastards when in reality even being the head of your own family (not house head, regular old man, spouse, children) should've opened up many options such as these.

This kind of interactions between characters is what the games need.

I think it would be more elegant if character interactions of this style occurred more through natural game mechanics than through events.