Kingdoms from the Scratch

[unmerged(21937)]

I don't think that there was anyone objecting to the idea of stat caps. I know, at least, that I wasn't. I was just pointing out that there are/were a few people that broke the mold.

I know you weren't objecting, I just summarized.

I was thinking about Brandenberg/Pommern as well. I thought about suggesing we bring Prussian culture into Pommern/Brandenberg instead, thinking that if three cultures is good enough for France that it should be good enough for Germany as well. Depending on how many German provinces remain after the expansion of Dutch culture, and the inclusion of Saxon (and Prussian?) culture, we might consider making Lower Lorraine Saxon as well.

Well about prussian culture, there is the slight thing that at current prussian culture exists only in Memel, in Teutonic territory. So if we would be making Pommern / Brandenburg prussian, it would be logical if eastern Pommern and Prussia were prussian too, which weakens Poland (they are polish now). There are 13 dutch provinces in Flandern & Friesland, if we add Brabant & Hainaut, it ups to 16. Saxony is 7 saxons, Holstein is 2 and Mecklemburg 3. So with just currently planned saxons and dutch, we would have only around 45 germans. Brandenburg and Pommern adds 5, so something small more would be needed then.

How about making Krain, Kärnten and Steirermark south slavic? That would drop german to around 35 or so...

Then about France, Brittany as welsh is 6. Lanquedoc, Toulouse and Armagnac as latin is 11 more. French Hainaut and part of Picardy as dutch is 2 or 3 more. Bordeaux as basque is 4 more. That adds up to around 25. So a few more would be needed, again... Logical option, though I personally somewhat dislike normans, is to make Normadie norman. Then we'll have 30 french provs in France, as desired.

I'd cap it at 4 brothers, putting the maximum age a PC could take at 32. I don't know why, but I like the idea of a PC being able to be over 30.

Well, as far as I am concerned player's characters can be 100 years old, if they prefer, they just will get 3 or 4 brothers at max and no kids at start.

While that is true, I don't think it would necessarily affect things much. between the brothers and sisters of the King, cousins would be quickly crowded off the succession list, and they also would be in-dynasty which wouldn't make it as bad if you got inherited by one of them.

They would be different dynasty cousins. Children of player's aunts. Besides, the children of youngest sister out of twelve sisters will get crowded out very quickly off the succession list as well. When they are cousins (aka children of aunts), they themselves are eglible for succession, which husbands of sisters are not.

I also don't think that in France and Germany it is even necessary to have everyone with some tie or another to the throne. We should only give sisters to Dukes of the same culture in those larger countries. Indeed, I think that with Germany and France, we should try to have a small pool of nobles for each ethnicity and require that lands whose culture differs from the King's has to be ruled by a noble from that culture (or one of the King's brothers, of course.) For example, there might be two Basque nobles in the King of France's pool and one of them (or one of the King's brothers) has to be Duke of Bordeaux, there might be five Latin nobles for the three Latin Duchies, and so on. Doing it might give Germany and France a slightly larger beginning court than other PCs, as we obviously wouldn't want to short change them on their own culture, but I think that's OK. They're the biggest countries, and I think it makes sense that they would have the biggest courts.

Well, I feel it makes the dukes a bit more personal if they are somehow related to king... That culture idea you present here is good though, as it gives the dukes more local feeling and when different dukes are of different culture they seem less like each other.

 

[unmerged(27106)]

Well about prussian culture, there is the slight thing that at current prussian culture exists only in Memel, in Teutonic territory. So if we would be making Pommern / Brandenburg prussian, it would be logical if eastern Pommern and Prussia were prussian too, which weakens Poland (they are polish now).

True.

We could either just pretend that the Pagan Prussian culture was suppressed by conquoring Poles in eastern Pommern and then make Brandenburg and western Pommern Prussian (my preference), or we could make Brandenburg and western Pommern Saxon. It's up to you, so pick which story you like better and implement it.

There are 13 dutch provinces in Flandern & Friesland, if we add Brabant & Hainaut, it ups to 16. Saxony is 7 saxons, Holstein is 2 and Mecklemburg 3. So with just currently planned saxons and dutch, we would have only around 45 germans. Brandenburg and Pommern adds 5, so something small more would be needed then.

How about making Krain, Kärnten and Steirermark south slavic? That would drop german to around 35 or so...

Don't forget that there is Western Slavic culture as well. You could make Croatia and Krain/Karnten/Stiermark Western Slavic, just to add a bit more Slavic spice to the mix. Either way, Krain/Karnten/Stiermark is a good pick, I think.

Then about France, Brittany as welsh is 6. Lanquedoc, Toulouse and Armagnac as latin is 11 more. French Hainaut and part of Picardy as dutch is 2 or 3 more. Bordeaux as basque is 4 more. That adds up to around 25. So a few more would be needed, again... Logical option, though I personally somewhat dislike normans, is to make Normadie norman. Then we'll have 30 french provs in France, as desired.

Sounds good. Normans in Normandie.

Well, as far as I am concerned player's characters can be 100 years old, if they prefer, they just will get 3 or 4 brothers at max and no kids at start.

I'm going to be 270 at the start of the game, then.

With 4 brothers max and a 1 brother/4 years scheme, PCs will get a little bit of a bonus for being over 30. I just wanted to give folks a bit of incentive to break the big 3-0.

They would be different dynasty cousins. Children of player's aunts. Besides, the children of youngest sister out of twelve sisters will get crowded out very quickly off the succession list as well. When they are cousins (aka children of aunts), they themselves are eglible for succession, which husbands of sisters are not.

That is true, but it still wouldn't change the fact that the cousin's impact on inheritance would be negligable to non-existant. I think it's much better to have more diverse, powerful dyansties out there than to have an obscure relative that is so removed from the throne that they wouldn't even get a claim. I just think it's more interresing to have more Family names in power than less. Plus, people in your own dynasty don't knock you out of the game, so they're not as dangerous as possible inheritors to a player as non-dynasty relatives. It's ultimately an aesthetic preference, though.

Well, I feel it makes the dukes a bit more personal if they are somehow related to king... That culture idea you present here is good though, as it gives the dukes more local feeling and when different dukes are of different culture they seem less like each other.

In my experience, I rarely feel a personal tie to a Duke even if he is married to my sister. Indeed, with manditory semi-sallic laws, I'm more likely to see him as a threat than a kinsman. Granted, that may have been a very common opinion of your noble in-laws in the period, but that is the feeling I get.

The main advantage to having a diverse array of ethnicities in the larger Kingdoms and a corresponding diversity among the Kings' courts, is that it gives the larger realms a more cosmopolitan feel. That's just my opinion, though.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

We could either just pretend that the Pagan Prussian culture was suppressed by conquoring Poles in eastern Pommern and then make Brandenburg and western Pommern Prussian (my preference), or we could make Brandenburg and western Pommern Saxon. It's up to you, so pick which story you like better and implement it.

That suppression story sounds better. Makes the poles look evil too.

Don't forget that there is Western Slavic culture as well. You could make Croatia and Krain/Karnten/Stiermark Western Slavic, just to add a bit more Slavic spice to the mix. Either way, Krain/Karnten/Stiermark is a good pick, I think.

Well, western slavic is not used in normal game as people culture at all, though it has names. Western slavic is used as the unit graphic of bohemians, poles and hungarians. Also the western slavic names sound like a collection of bohemian and polish names. So I'd say Croatia as south slavic is better, as it gives Croatia, Serbia and Bulgaria as minor kingdoms the benefit of more easily spreading technology between them.

I'm going to be 270 at the start of the game, then.

Damn methusaleh. :rofl:

With 4 brothers max and a 1 brother/4 years scheme, PCs will get a little bit of a bonus for being over 30. I just wanted to give folks a bit of incentive to break the big 3-0.

Well, let's have the brother cap at four then.

That is true, but it still wouldn't change the fact that the cousin's impact on inheritance would be negligable to non-existant. I think it's much better to have more diverse, powerful dyansties out there than to have an obscure relative that is so removed from the throne that they wouldn't even get a claim. I just think it's more interresing to have more Family names in power than less. Plus, people in your own dynasty don't knock you out of the game, so they're not as dangerous as possible inheritors to a player as non-dynasty relatives. It's ultimately an aesthetic preference, though.

*sigh* Different dynasty cousin = different surname. I just thought that everybody's daddy has been a very active rabbit, if we go with just sisters and no cousins.

In my experience, I rarely feel a personal tie to a Duke even if he is married to my sister. Indeed, with manditory semi-sallic laws, I'm more likely to see him as a threat than a kinsman. Granted, that may have been a very common opinion of your noble in-laws in the period, but that is the feeling I get.

Well, we see things a bit differently here then. Well, it would mostly make sense in the way that the previous king would have wanted to secure the loyalty of powerful dukes by making them son-in-laws... Though with Primogeniture the younger brothers will anyway have predence over the lines of sisters, so if you have first your own kids in succession order, then your brothers, then their kids, you won't see any sister's kids in succession order soon...

The main advantage to having a diverse array of ethnicities in the larger Kingdoms and a corresponding diversity among the Kings' courts, is that it gives the larger realms a more cosmopolitan feel. That's just my opinion, though.

I already said that different cultures in dukes is a good thing Pat. I think cosmolitanism is a good thing too, as the Kingdom of Jerusalem certainly shows.

 

[unmerged(27106)]

That suppression story sounds better. Makes the poles look evil too.

Excellent...

Well, western slavic is not used in normal game as people culture at all, though it has names. Western slavic is used as the unit graphic of bohemians, poles and hungarians. Also the western slavic names sound like a collection of bohemian and polish names. So I'd say Croatia as south slavic is better, as it gives Croatia, Serbia and Bulgaria as minor kingdoms the benefit of more easily spreading technology between them.

OK. You have convinced me. South Slavic it is!

Well, let's have the brother cap at four then.

Sounds good.

*sigh* Different dynasty cousin = different surname. I just thought that everybody's daddy has been a very active rabbit, if we go with just sisters and no cousins.

*Patrucio stares at you vacantly for a minute.* OOOOOH! Now I get it. Let's do that.

Hmm. OK. Well, once you get the changes made that we have discussed thus far, let's post the scenario so everyone can look at what we've agreed on thus far.

In the meanwhile, I thought of two suggested rule for this game:
1) Players can only gain additional Christian King titles through inheritance.

2) Players may not take the last province of a Christian noble unless that noble no longer has any vassals.

The first rule is, obviously, to keep countries like France running over Kingdoms like Navarre just for the title. It also makes it possible for Kingly titles to be lost unless they are actively kept alive.

If an enterprising King of England wants to go butt heads with the Fatimeds, he can crown himself King of Egypt if he is successful enough. If the King of Wales is slaughtered by the same King of England, though, the Kingdom of Wales title is lost through conquest and it's gone for good.

The second rule is more to slow down PC vs. PC wars, and to help make wars less-than-total and to also help prevent big swaths of territory changing hands quickly. (See the Burgundy/Naples war or Germany's annexation of Karnten in the Game of Thrones.)

 

[unmerged(21937)]

*Patrucio stares at you vacantly for a minute.* OOOOOH! Now I get it. Let's do that.

Finally.

Hmm. OK. Well, once you get the changes made that we have discussed thus far, let's post the scenario so everyone can look at what we've agreed on thus far.

Right.

The first rule is, obviously, to keep countries like France running over Kingdoms like Navarre just for the title. It also makes it possible for Kingly titles to be lost unless they are actively kept alive.

Well, that sounds very good idea, though I might suggest the following way to be able to re-create lost christian kingdoms: If you can trace a legal inheritance line to the last king that ruled in the kingdom and you have enough land of that particular kingdom to recreate it, you may do so. This would also give every ruler who also can trace legal inheritance to the last king a claim on the newly created king title. The claims would be edited in between sessions. This way the families of kings that have lost the title will stay very valuable still.

If an enterprising King of England wants to go butt heads with the Fatimeds, he can crown himself King of Egypt if he is successful enough. If the King of Wales is slaughtered by the same King of England, though, the Kingdom of Wales title is lost through conquest and it's gone for good.

Yes, but they are Mamluks in Egypt, not Fatimids.

The second rule is more to slow down PC vs. PC wars, and to help make wars less-than-total and to also help prevent big swaths of territory changing hands quickly. (See the Burgundy/Naples war or Germany's annexation of Karnten in the Game of Thrones.)

Though I suppose we are able to take the ducal titles of christian nobles while they still have vassals? Or did you mean that we can't take ducal titles from nobles if they have vassals?

 

[unmerged(27106)]

Well, that sounds very good idea, though I might suggest the following way to be able to re-create lost christian kingdoms: If you can trace a legal inheritance line to the last king that ruled in the kingdom and you have enough land of that particular kingdom to recreate it, you may do so. This would also give every ruler who also can trace legal inheritance to the last king a claim on the newly created king title. The claims would be edited in between sessions. This way the families of kings that have lost the title will stay very valuable still.

That sounds fun. I like it!

One question, though- how would we determine what a legal inheritance is? Would we assume semi-sallic Primogeniture is the measure upon which we would base the legitimacy of a claim (ie, would need to be a direct decendant of the King's children, brothers, or sisters), or would anyone with even the most tenuous of ties to the last King (ie, a decendant of the King's second cousin) be able to get a claim?

Yes, but they are Mamluks in Egypt, not Fatimids.

Ah, it's all the same to me. Of course, that might also explain why my Crusaders never found Alexandria....

Though I suppose we are able to take the ducal titles of christian nobles while they still have vassals? Or did you mean that we can't take ducal titles from nobles if they have vassals?

The latter- you can't take a Ducal title until the Duke is deprived of all his count vassals, and you can't take a King title until he is deprived of all his Duke vassals. Or rather, you can't destroy a Kingdom until the King is deprived of his Ducal vassals, since we aren't letting people take new Kingly titles by force. If you wanted to demote a King, you could take his title by force, and then we would just edit away the title at the earliest opportunity.

Letting a King keep his count vassals and still be destroyed means that the former King could remain a Duke so long as he holds onto a Duke title. Like I said, that would help cut down on huge transfers of land by beating up on AI vassals, and would also make it so that Duchies are conquored via a series of small wars rather than one Blitzkrieg battle. Particularly since the Stupid AI always gives away all it's land but one province, we need to set up some sort of safeguards against the Stupid AI's strategy.

 

[Sterkarm]

Well, I think the no taking Ducal title should be if it is the last ducal title the duke has. If he has like 5 ducal titles, you should be allowed to take up to four. And, perhaps we could allow getting king titles by war, but the you can't grab the title, it either has to be usurped or claimed by inheritance or assassination attempt?

 

[unmerged(21937)]

One question, though- how would we determine what a legal inheritance is? Would we assume semi-sallic Primogeniture is the measure upon which we would base the legitimacy of a claim (ie, would need to be a direct decendant of the King's children, brothers, or sisters), or would anyone with even the most tenuous of ties to the last King (ie, a decendant of the King's second cousin) be able to get a claim?

A legal line by the rules of semi-salic primogeniture. It can go through ex-king's second cousins and ten generations down and so on. Just need to be legal by ss-primo. If it becomes important during game, I can do the check if the claim is valid or not.

The latter- you can't take a Ducal title until the Duke is deprived of all his count vassals, and you can't take a King title until he is deprived of all his Duke vassals. Or rather, you can't destroy a Kingdom until the King is deprived of his Ducal vassals, since we aren't letting people take new Kingly titles by force. If you wanted to demote a King, you could take his title by force, and then we would just edit away the title at the earliest opportunity.

Well, how about this house rule instead: You can't take ducal title if duke has vassals, unless you have got valid claim on the title by having been among the first five successors when last duke died? Example: Duke of Flanders dies and is inherited by his only son, but had also a daughter, who is my mother. So I get a valid claim and can fight for that, because I feel that I am more legal successor than my mother's brother. This would make it more useful to marry daughters of dukes, instead of going always for stats...

Also if we make this as the only way to validly fight and press a claim on king title, it would open up many nice intrigue options and would make people more wary about marrying their daughters to heirs of kings...

Letting a King keep his count vassals and still be destroyed means that the former King could remain a Duke so long as he holds onto a Duke title. Like I said, that would help cut down on huge transfers of land by beating up on AI vassals, and would also make it so that Duchies are conquored via a series of small wars rather than one Blitzkrieg battle. Particularly since the Stupid AI always gives away all it's land but one province, we need to set up some sort of safeguards against the Stupid AI's strategy.

I think kings should not be allowed to be demoted, because they still are legally kings as long as their line continues. Think about the present even, there are people that are still recognized as legal kings of their countries by the rest of royalty though they might have been in exile for several generations.

I think kingdoms should either be disputed with a legal claim through inheritance or destroyed by taking all counties held by a king without vassals.

 

[Sterkarm]

What if no legal relatives of the last King exist? Then we could make it a rule that you simply have to have 100% of the land in the King title to create it, as long as no relatives exist?

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Well, I think the no taking Ducal title should be if it is the last ducal title the duke has. If he has like 5 ducal titles, you should be allowed to take up to four. And, perhaps we could allow getting king titles by war, but the claim must be manufactured by either usurpation or an assassination attempt?

Ah, good point Sterkarm. Dukes with multiple titles. I suggest that we go by same rules as with single duchies, but so that the no-vassals requirement for each duchy applies to only counties in the claimable area of the duchy in question. Counties that are not in the claimable area of any duchy held by the multi-duke will be considered as vassals of the primary duke title.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

So, I'm assuming kingdom titles CANNOT be created? Perhaps we could just make it so that they cannot be created unless you have all the land required?

No, you can't recreate christian kingdom title unless you have legal inheritance line to the last king by the rules of semi-salic primogeniture. All starting kingdoms count as christian kingdoms as well as do all kingdoms created by christians from moslem / pagan lands that are later destroyed again.

If there are no legal relatives of the ex-king anywhere at all, we might allow titles to be recreated normally. Though you can be sure that I will look very throughly into the lines of dead kings to make sure there really are no legal relatives before this happens...

 

[unmerged(27106)]

A legal line by the rules of semi-salic primogeniture. It can go through ex-king's second cousins and ten generations down and so on. Just need to be legal by ss-primo. If it becomes important during game, I can do the check if the claim is valid or not.

OK. That sounds fine to me. Are we going to go through and give claims to NPC rulers as well on the off-chance that a Kingdom is recreated, or just PCs.

Well, how about this house rule instead: You can't take ducal title if duke has vassals, unless you have got valid claim on the title by having been among the first five successors when last duke died? Example: Duke of Flanders dies and is inherited by his only son, but had also a daughter, who is my mother. So I get a valid claim and can fight for that, because I feel that I am more legal successor than my mother's brother. This would make it more useful to marry daughters of dukes, instead of going always for stats...

I like this. I strongly encourage making diplomatic/poltical marriages more important and de-emphasizing marrying based on stats. I'd also like to make it harder to get claims, maybe by raising the difficulty level. Of course, raising the difficulty level tends to make other aspects of the game (read: the Mongols) a bit tricky.

Of course, if we go with a higher difficulty level, I could always just play in England.

Also if we make this as the only way to validly fight and press a claim on king title, it would open up many nice intrigue options and would make people more wary about marrying their daughters to heirs of kings...

Thumbs-up from me.

I think kings should not be allowed to be demoted, because they still are legally kings as long as their line continues. Think about the present even, there are people that are still recognized as legal kings of their countries by the rest of royalty though they might have been in exile for several generations.

I think kingdoms should either be disputed with a legal claim through inheritance or destroyed by taking all counties held by a king without vassals.

Agreed.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

OK. That sounds fine to me. Are we going to go through and give claims to NPC rulers as well on the off-chance that a Kingdom is recreated, or just PCs.

Yes, NPCs too because claims are inherited with titles. So that way if duke of Bordeaux is a legal claimant on kingdom of Navarra, which has been recreated by king of Poland, I will inherit the claim on Navarra if I happen to inherit duchy of Bordeaux.

I like this. I strongly encourage making diplomatic/poltical marriages more important and de-emphasizing marrying based on stats. I'd also like to make it harder to get claims, maybe by raising the difficulty level. Of course, raising the difficulty level tends to make other aspects of the game (read: the Mongols) a bit tricky.

Well, if we raise the difficulty level to make grabbing more expensive, we can always disable the mongols, if we don't like them.

 

[unmerged(27106)]

Well, if we raise the difficulty level to make grabbing more expensive, we can always disable the mongols, if we don't like them.

I don't think we should do that. I think the Mongols offer an important and interersting flavor, and present one of the truely genuine reasons all the players could temporarily band together. Actually, the stronger the Mongols are the more incentive we have to work together, so I actually don't mind if they are strengthened somewhat...

 

[unmerged(21937)]

I don't think we should do that. I think the Mongols offer an important and interersting flavor, and present one of the truely genuine reasons all the players could temporarily band together. Actually, the stronger the Mongols are the more incentive we have to work together, so I actualy don't mind if they are strengthened somewhat...

Well, I haven't fought mongols yet in CK, but I suppose we could worry about the mongols when our game approaches year 1200, which is anyway almost 150 years after we start...

 

[Sterkarm]

No, you can't recreate christian kingdom title unless you have legal inheritance line to the last king by the rules of semi-salic primogeniture. All starting kingdoms count as christian kingdoms as well as do all kingdoms created by christians from moslem / pagan lands that are later destroyed again.

If there are no legal relatives of the ex-king anywhere at all, we might allow titles to be recreated normally. Though you can be sure that I will look very throughly into the lines of dead kings to make sure there really are no legal relatives before this happens...

Ok, then I'm fine with all this, I was concerned that we weren't going to be able to create any new kingdoms, but please look at my post again, I edited, suggesting that when there are no more living relatives that whoever controls all the land for that kingdom should be able to create it.

 

[Sterkarm]

Also, when do you expect the scenario to be finished? I think we should discuss the time for the game, and, remember, after the month of August, I can't make games on any days except Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, and Friday no earlier than 20 BST (16 EST).

 

[unmerged(27106)]

We'll have to see once Byak finishes modding in what we have come up with thus far, but we may be at a point to start thinking about when we would want to program this game. Byak, you should shoot for having distributed Duchies to the NPCs before you get around to posting the new file. You might have two versions: one with blank Christian nations, and one with all the Christian nations except for those set aside for PCs filled out with Dukes.

I'm going to suggest that we take a look at Saturdays, either our usual 3 am GMT or 9 am GMT. The former is proven to be a good time to play for those that have proven themselves regular and reliable (unless Jarkko has to work on that day), while the latter would let us Americans have our turn at waking up early to play an MP game. I'm open to other suggestions as well, but I thought I might toss those times out.

As countries go, we have, thus far:

England:
France: Solmyr (?)
Germany: Byakhiam
Hungary:
Italy:
Poland: Sterkarm

 

[Swuul]

Saturdays, either our usual 3 am GMT or 9 am GMT. The former is proven to be a good time to play for those that have proven themselves regular and reliable (unless Jarkko has to work on that day), while the latter would let us Americans have our turn at waking up early to play an MP game.

Still at work, I am on my coffee-break. Anyway, we are three leading pharmacists here, and one of my collegues will take a study leave in the autumn (he wants to get a masters degree in economics in addition to his PhD(Pharmacy)), and he wants to do all the Saturday and Sunday shifts from September to December; which is fine with me and my second collegue So from September and on I won't be working on Saturdays on Sundays.

However, in September I'll be away for reservist training. But most likely that means I'll miss about one session in the games I am involved in.

 

[Sterkarm]

We'll have to see once Byak finishes modding in what we have come up with thus far, but we may be at a point to start thinking about when we would want to program this game. Byak, you should shoot for having distributed Duchies to the NPCs before you get around to posting the new file. You might have two versions: one with blank Christian nations, and one with all the Christian nations except for those set aside for PCs filled out with Dukes.

I'm going to suggest that we take a look at Saturdays, either our usual 3 am GMT or 9 am GMT. The former is proven to be a good time to play for those that have proven themselves regular and reliable (unless Jarkko has to work on that day), while the latter would let us Americans have our turn at waking up early to play an MP game. I'm open to other suggestions as well, but I thought I might toss those times out.

As countries go, we have, thus far:

England:
France: Solmyr (?)
Germany: Byakhiam
Hungary:
Italy:
Poland: Sterkarm

I was asking around about a CK game on Fridays (US), which would be the same day for us as your times are. 3 GMT would be best for me, but there is absolutely no way I can make 9 AM GMT. That's 4 AM for me, which means instead of waking up early, I would be staying up extremely late.