"CK3's Feudal System Feels Too Rigid — It Could Take Notes from Japan's Upcoming Mechanics"
After watching this excellent Kings and Generals video on how feudalism isn’t as clear-cut as games and popular media often portray it, I’ve been thinking a lot about how CK3 models feudal government.
Right now, CK3 treats feudalism as a mostly static, hereditary system: titles pass down generations, and the only major distinction is between feudal and clan. But real-world feudalism—especially in Europe—was far messier. Many lords were appointed or granted titles temporarily, based on loyalty or political convenience, not just birthright. There were layers of vassalage, revocable appointments, and overlapping loyalties, often shaped more by pragmatism than rigid law.
Ironically, CK3 seems to be acknowledging this complexity better with Japan, based on what we’ve seen from their dev diary a month or so ago. The inclusion of both appointed and hereditary vassals in that system feels like a step toward representing feudal governance more dynamically.
It makes me wonder: shouldn’t that flexibility apply to European-style feudalism too? I’m not saying the game needs to simulate every feudal contract, but adding mechanics that allow for more appointment-based vassalage—where rulers can grant land temporarily, replace unruly vassals more easily, or distinguish between noble dynasts and political appointees—would add both realism and strategic depth.
What do others think? Would a more nuanced feudal system make the game feel more authentic and engaging, or would it bog things down too much?
After watching this excellent Kings and Generals video on how feudalism isn’t as clear-cut as games and popular media often portray it, I’ve been thinking a lot about how CK3 models feudal government.
Right now, CK3 treats feudalism as a mostly static, hereditary system: titles pass down generations, and the only major distinction is between feudal and clan. But real-world feudalism—especially in Europe—was far messier. Many lords were appointed or granted titles temporarily, based on loyalty or political convenience, not just birthright. There were layers of vassalage, revocable appointments, and overlapping loyalties, often shaped more by pragmatism than rigid law.
Ironically, CK3 seems to be acknowledging this complexity better with Japan, based on what we’ve seen from their dev diary a month or so ago. The inclusion of both appointed and hereditary vassals in that system feels like a step toward representing feudal governance more dynamically.
It makes me wonder: shouldn’t that flexibility apply to European-style feudalism too? I’m not saying the game needs to simulate every feudal contract, but adding mechanics that allow for more appointment-based vassalage—where rulers can grant land temporarily, replace unruly vassals more easily, or distinguish between noble dynasts and political appointees—would add both realism and strategic depth.
What do others think? Would a more nuanced feudal system make the game feel more authentic and engaging, or would it bog things down too much?
- 20
- 1
- 1
