Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Numerals for kings - and other name related wishes

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Crusader Kings II 69941 Bug Reports 19717 User Modifications 10604 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6373 After Action Reports
oggbogg2 said:
When it comes to jean, john, sean and so on i don't feel there's a big problem if a John is followed by a Jean and they are both numbered nr. 1. That's my opinion.

And dukes are commonly numbered by the total number of dukes that's held the title before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Spencer,_4th_Duke_of_Marlborough

Example of numbering dukes
Click to expand...

No, dukes were commonly numbered just as kings (and counts)

Your example is from the English Peerage, and shouldn't be confused which what is considered 'commonly' :)

Also this George you list here isn't named George IV, but as George the 4th duke of Marlborough. In case of George IV it is part of his name in case of George 4th duke it is part of his title.

EDIT
Anyway your solution seems to be the easiest to make for the game.
 
Last edited:
Veldmaarschalk said:
No, dukes were commonly numbered just as kings (and counts)

Your example is from the English Peerage, and shouldn't be confused which what is considered 'commonly' :)

Also this George you list here isn't named George IV, but as George the 4th duke of Marlborough. In case of George IV it is part of his name in case of George 4th duke it is part of his title.

EDIT
Anyway your solution seems to be the easiest to make for the game.
Click to expand...

When you read history books you always read about Louis XIV. How often have you heard the number The Duke of marlborough had? I've never run across it. This is also a feature that would distinguish clearly between counts, dukes and kings.

Counts - no number
Dukes - numbered by how many dukes there have been before them in that particular duchy
Kings - numbered by how many kings of that realm have had the name before (John VII for instance.

PS. I've read on wikipedia that you can argue for both my and Veldmarschkalks case.

English dukes are numbered by their order from the forming of the duchy
German dukes are numbered as i propose to number kings.
Irish dukes are numbered as the english ones
Spanish dukes are numbered as the english ones
Italian dukes are numbered as the german ones
Bohemian dukes are also numbered as kings
Polish dukes are numbered as the german ones

This is after a quick read on wikipedia.

We have to choose one or the other of these to systems, and i propose that my system is the best one, as this is a great way to distinguish between kings and dukes, is quite nifty and also easier for the makers of crusader kings 2.

What do you think?
 
Veldmaarschalk said:
No, dukes were commonly numbered just as kings (and counts)

Your example is from the English Peerage, and shouldn't be confused which what is considered 'commonly' :)

Also this George you list here isn't named George IV, but as George the 4th duke of Marlborough. In case of George IV it is part of his name in case of George 4th duke it is part of his title.

EDIT
Anyway your solution seems to be the easiest to make for the game.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind seeing that, but after all this time and wishing the "Jean IV, King of England" type of thing was in the original CK, I hope they put that in CK2.
 
oggbogg2 said:
When you read history books you always read about Louis XIV. How often have you heard the number The Duke of marlborough had? I've never run across it. This is also a feature that would distinguish clearly between counts, dukes and kings.

Counts - no number
Dukes - numbered by how many dukes there have been before them in that particular duchy
Kings - numbered by how many kings of that realm have had the name before (John VII for instance.
Click to expand...

That would be my top and preferred choice. The more detail of naming and title, the better.

English dukes are numbered by their order from the forming of the duchy
German dukes are numbered as i propose to number kings.
Irish dukes are numbered as the english ones
Spanish dukes are numbered as the english ones
Italian dukes are numbered as the german ones
Bohemian dukes are also numbered as kings
Polish dukes are numbered as the german ones

This is after a quick read on wikipedia.

We have to choose one or the other of these to systems, and i propose that my system is the best one, as this is a great way to distinguish between kings and dukes, is quite nifty and also easier for the makers of crusader kings 2.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

If they went to that elaborate extreme, I would be fine with it. But, your right that system of simply counting dukes would work well too.
 
English dukes are numbered following that particular incarnation of the forming of the dukedom. It's quite hard to follow really.

Austen
 
One more thing

I haven't read any comments on the other two elements in my original post. Papal names and nicknames for kings. What do you people think about that?
 
Austen said:
English dukes are numbered following that particular incarnation of the forming of the dukedom. It's quite hard to follow really.

Austen
Click to expand...

Well, if they have a Duke sheet (file) and any time that a dukedom is created, it starts back at "I", and as long as the dukedom lives on it creates "II", "III", and such for each heir. Dukedoms can be destroyed or re-absorbed into the King, and once done it would wipe that portion of the file. If the King re-distributes the dukedom and gives it to someone down the line, it restarts at "I". It could work that way I suppose.

Perhaps as a small bonus, for each numeral you have you'll get a small amount of bonus prestige due to the age of the family, because your family will appear to have a long line of noble births this way. Therefore, Richard, the IV Duke of Lancaster would have more starting (when you inherit) prestige than William, the II Duke of York.

Also from a top down perspective, if you are controlling the King, you may have to think twice about removing a duke who is the VIII incarnation of that dukedom line, since you'll be removing a nice sized bonus, which also lowers your power a bit possibly.

edit:

oggbogg2 said:
One more thing

I haven't read any comments on the other two elements in my original post. Papal names and nicknames for kings. What do you people think about that?
Click to expand...

I think that would be great for the Papacy, have Pope style names. Looking over the Wiki of Popes during that era, there sure are a lot of same named popes with a bunch of numerals, makes a lot of sense.
 
LordofSaxony said:
Well, if they have a Duke sheet (file) and any time that a dukedom is created, it starts back at "I", and as long as the dukedom lives on it creates "II", "III", and such for each heir. Dukedoms can be destroyed or re-absorbed into the King, and once done it would wipe that portion of the file. If the King re-distributes the dukedom and gives it to someone down the line, it restarts at "I". It could work that way I suppose.
Click to expand...

I agree. But the king is technically also a duke, so it should not be starting at one again.
If the duketitle is destroyed, not claimed anew, the duke sheet could have the word interregnum on it. For destroyed kingdoms there is the same.

Example:

The duchy of Sachsen

1066-1087 Wolhardt Billung
1087-1100 Heinrich Billung
1100-1118 Weinhardt von Franken
1118-1177 Interregnum (The german kingdom broken up, and Sachsen is conquered by muslims)
1177-1179 Harald Yngling

I don't know, what do you think?
 
oggbogg2 said:
I agree. But the king is technically also a duke, so it should not be starting at one again.
If the duketitle is destroyed, not claimed anew, the duke sheet could have the word interregnum on it. For destroyed kingdoms there is the same.

Example:

The duchy of Sachsen

1066-1087 Wolhardt Billung
1087-1100 Heinrich Billung
1100-1118 Weinhardt von Franken
1118-1177 Interregnum (The german kingdom broken up, and Sachsen is conquered by muslims)
1177-1179 Harald Yngling

I don't know, what do you think?
Click to expand...

If the King is also a duke, then the title automatically would gain "I", "II", "III", etc as if he was the soul duke as well. Example text..

Richard Lancaster
Richard IV, King of England
Richard, VIII Duke of Lancaster

Basically, he was a Duke before he became King, so his Dukedom numeral would still be ticking away. If the King wasn't a Duke before he becomes King, and he acquires it later it starts back at "I". If the King were to "give away" the Dukedom to a vassal, then it would start over again too. There needs to be a way for the Dukedom numeral to start over again, otherwise we'll see Richard, XXXIII Duke of Lancaster eventually.

Basically, I would like the numerals to represent what family has lasted with a particular Dukedom, and I think it's easier that way. The higher the numeral, the longer the family has controlled the Dukedom.
 
LordofSaxony said:
Basically, I would like the numerals to represent what family has lasted with a particular Dukedom, and I think it's easier that way. The higher the numeral, the longer the family has controlled the Dukedom.
Click to expand...

I really love this part of your idea. One other thing. Certain duke titles could carry more prestige than others. Take Germany for instance. I would think that Bavaria is a more prestigious duchy than Brandenburg? The duke of Bavaria could then have more prestige than some other. Perhaps.
 
oggbogg2 said:
I really love this part of your idea. One other thing. Certain duke titles could carry more prestige than others. Take Germany for instance. I would think that Bavaria is a more prestigious duchy than Brandenburg? The duke of Bavaria could then have more prestige than some other. Perhaps.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the amount of prestige would be based on how many territories represent the Dukedom, the more territories the higher the prestige?
 
I would suggest income rather than number of territories. Surely it is more prestigious to be the Duke of Genoa (or somewhere) rather than the Duke of... well, most all of the Middle Eastern provinces that are nothing but sand.
 
I'd figure Numeral tied to the dynasty is the best approach.

Now I understand this doesn't fit every case in history and everyone on here can find a wiki article that states why it shouldn't be this way but for the most part this works.

As I understand the ultimate goal for the player is to achieve what the Romanovs did. To have an unbroken dynasty that lasts for hundreds of years.

Now I understand we have to cinsider the AI. Whenever I get in a dilema* like this I ask myself this, "Is this game designed to be sold to and played by the AI or the user/customer?"

*(did I spell that correctly? Ever get that moment where you can't spell a word because even the correct spelling looks wrong. Or saying a word so many times it doesn't sound like a word)
 
Stratagyfan101 said:
As I understand the ultimate goal for the player is to achieve what the Romanovs did. To have an unbroken dynasty that lasts for hundreds of years.
Click to expand...

I think it's a great idea that the Dukedom numerals represent the dynasty in control. I can see people having difficulties of "handing away" Dukedoms to make things more efficient, especially if the Dukedom your handing away has a IX in it meaning that you've had it for a long time (aside from possible extra bonuses because of that fact).
 
If a Ducal title is going to be numbered by how many individuals have held the title then I think the number should be rolled back when:
1. The title is taken by force.
2. When it is revoked by a liege.
3. When The Individual holding it looses all his/her land (ie the title becomes extinct).
4. When A King grants it to an individual not of his line.

There is no reason to change the numbering If the Duke inherits his fathers Kingdom then gives it to his son. Nor if it is inherited by a dukes grandson through his daughter.
 
Keinwyn said:
If a Ducal title is going to be numbered by how many individuals have held the title then I think the number should be rolled back when:
1. The title is taken by force.
2. When it is revoked by a liege.
3. When The Individual holding it looses all his/her land (ie the title becomes extinct).
4. When A King grants it to an individual not of his line.

There is no reason to change the numbering If the Duke inherits his fathers Kingdom then gives it to his son. Nor if it is inherited by a dukes grandson through his daughter.
Click to expand...

I agree, it sounds similar to what I mentioned earlier. :)
 
Being able to name your own children is my number one name-related wish in CK2.

I've always imagined you get a message when your child is born with a default name saying "Your wife suggests x" and you get the option to either select or even type your chosen name. Those who aren't bothered just press ok and get the default name (equivalent to how CK1 chooses names).
 
Beauclerc said:
Being able to name your own children is my number one name-related wish in CK2.

I've always imagined you get a message when your child is born with a default name saying "Your wife suggests x" and you get the option to either select or even type your chosen name. Those who aren't bothered just press ok and get the default name (equivalent to how CK1 chooses names).
Click to expand...

As long as I can alternate between Stephens and Johns, I'm happy : ]

Austen
 
Beauclerc said:
Being able to name your own children is my number one name-related wish in CK2.

I've always imagined you get a message when your child is born with a default name saying "Your wife suggests x" and you get the option to either select or even type your chosen name. Those who aren't bothered just press ok and get the default name (equivalent to how CK1 chooses names).
Click to expand...

You mean like this? Plenty of good ideas people had in there about that feature. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back