Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Tolerance Law Ideas

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 69939 Bug Reports 19717 User Modifications 10604 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6373 After Action Reports
Regarding the tolerance laws; I took a look at the files and saw that there is already a 'tolerant' trait, but the event that gives the trait (in cosmopolitan_events is hashed out. Is this an oversight? (Additionally, the bonus for heathen opinion should probably be a bit larger than +5).
For the CBs, I'd suggest allowing the normal 'take all titles' Holy War CB only for proselyte religions (and making it more expensive), and giving a different 'subjugation' duchy/kingdom-level CB for other religions. It might also make sense to have a CB for empire titles (e.g. the Roman empires) to subjugate their de jure vassals. This would preserve the religious diversity of expanding empires (which fits with the LI setting).
Finally, marriages between the different Hellenistic religion groups should probably be permitted (AFAIK there are mods that allow interfaith marriages).
 
Numahr's already coded in a lot of inter-faith marriages, according to the SELIN matrix. I'll await his feedback on CBs before changing any, as he's in charge of religious matters.
 
LAF1994 said:
Regarding the tolerance laws; I took a look at the files and saw that there is already a 'tolerant' trait, but the event that gives the trait (in cosmopolitan_events is hashed out. Is this an oversight? (Additionally, the bonus for heathen opinion should probably be a bit larger than +5).
Click to expand...
The Tolerant trait mechanics were introduced by someone else, but I will have a look in the spirit of business continuity. I agree that it could give a greater bonus than +5.

LAF1994 said:
For the CBs, I'd suggest allowing the normal 'take all titles' Holy War CB only for proselyte religions (and making it more expensive), and giving a different 'subjugation' duchy/kingdom-level CB for other religions. It might also make sense to have a CB for empire titles (e.g. the Roman empires) to subjugate their de jure vassals. This would preserve the religious diversity of expanding empires (which fits with the LI setting).
Click to expand...
I think these are interesting suggestions. Maintaining the existing rulers could be more frequent to fit the LI lore, as you point out. We have "heirs of ...." descending from centuries-old dynasties, it can be anti-climatic to see too many of replaced in a generation of game-play. This being said, the current CB set up is the result of many other factors being taken into account. So it needs a good look to avoid creating inconsistencies in other areas. I will have a look and see how we can go in this direction.

LAF1994 said:
Finally, marriages between the different Hellenistic religion groups should probably be permitted (AFAIK there are mods that allow interfaith marriages).
Click to expand...
Indeed as richvh noted this is fairly well thought of. Your point is a classical case of looking at Hellenistic religions as if they were in 1066 what they used to be when they were alive IRL. Well, this is already an approximation as "Pyromantism" as it is in LI never existed in RL. So here is the point: these religions had centuries, or roughly a millenium, to evolve. Facing pressure from the intolerant newer monotheisms, they resisted and developed further by taking some of their "genes". I try to make this clear in the religious descriptions. Also remember that we speak about matrimonial alliances, not commoners' marriages. As these religions evolved, their defining factor for a religion, as I wrote in the main post for SELIN, is actually the Soul more than the Civilization. A Statist Soul is ready to make spiritual compromises for the State's interest: Statist religions are "strong" at inter-faith marriages. In fact the Central Asian Hellenistic faiths, which combine a Statist soul with many cultural affinities, are very strong at that.

So overall the distribution of inter-faith marriages takes many factors into account, and acknowledges that religions have evolved in a "late antiquity" context towards less tolerance and more institutionalized definition of spiritual boundaries.
 
Casus Belli

I had one more look. I agree that the Holy War CB, as it is, is actually not perfectly balanced against the other CBs which have more inertia and tend to vassalize defeated rulers. To be more specific, the normal county conquest CB lets you win the county or vassalize holder if that is his last title; so it is a bit of a mix of territorial annexation and vassalization.

The traits conditions for the Holy War CB are also not coded in (probably removed by a modder at some point).

Anyway, I have an idea to make this CB fitter to LI:
  • Prozelyte religions: yes they are prozelyte, but they focus their efforts on their own religious groups as they prioritize ensuring the religious unity of Islam / Christendom / etc. So 2 situations: a) for religions of their own group, price is cheap but it results in vassalization only (a cheap subjugation CB). Note that they have the tools to convert subjects: so you first vassalize, then you may convert the ruler and/or the province. b) for religions outside their religious groups, it remains a true Holy War but at a very high cost, as this is not the real focus of your believers. That is the only "gain all titles" situation.
  • Ancestral religions: only vassalization and at a high cost, no difference based on religious group. An expansive Subjugation CB against other religions, in other words.
  • Bastion of the Faith religions: a Holy War is very much a way to protect your spiritual realm. So again you cannot get titles and it acts as a subjugation. Difference with Ancestral religions is that you get it cheap for religions outside of your religious group as your believers (if you are Luwian for example) will now feel the necessity to put foreign cults under your control, for the sake of protecting their own spiritual world. So a subjugation CB against other religions, with a discount against foreign religious groups.
Note that many Graeco-Roman cults will fall into the third category: this will please the advocates of some form of "tolerance" within this group as the Holy War CB will be more expansive against other graeco-Roman cults, which is quite OK in terms of how far I imagine their tolerance may go.

In addition, the more I think of it, the more I have a crazy idea. Remember a quote from Shaytana about a crazy neo-Platonic ruler running amok and conquering the world in a blood bath, inspired by his beautiful ideals. A very LI-esque vision indeed, but never turned into reality. Well, I am considering adding a simple code adding the "atomic bomb" of the Total War CB to possessed rulers of any scholarly religion, at a very high piety cost. For a reminder, this CB is currently only available to 5 radical religions, is cheap and generates a gain_settlements_under_title effect.


Tolerant Trait
@riknap ,do you remember why you commented it out? I am ready to make the code available again on an experimental basis, but @LAF1994 , can you please test it and report any oddity?

(I will have actual coding time to implement these changes not before this WE)
 
Numahr said:
Tolerant Trait
@riknap ,do you remember why you commented it out? I am ready to make the code available again on an experimental basis, but @LAF1994 , can you please test it and report any oddity?

(I will have actual coding time to implement these changes not before this WE)
Click to expand...
I tried un-commenting the Tolerant event, but it didn't seem to work (i.e. the event didn't fire)- I don't know why.
 
Which event is it?
 
Numahr said:
I already uncommented it. You need to uncomment the connection to it in laws file as well, which I did. This is in yesterday late evening's submission, can you test please?
Click to expand...
I can't access the files from github without downloading the entire folder (which would take some time), but I can't see any reason why I shouldn't work (although you should probably remove the AI modifiers connected to particular de jure titles).
 
Revisiting slightly my earlier design in the course of implementation, I will add the mechanic that Proselyte religions will convert rulers of the same religious group upon successful Holy War, only when religions of the attacker and defender are linked by a heresy or reform relationship. So Cathar and Catholics would convert each other (one being the heresy of the other) but Catholic will not convert Orthodox. Forced-converted ruler also gains the cynical trait.

It introduces nuances in terms of which religions boundaries are more fluid than others.

This also brings in the concept of conversion wars for a very specific and relevant scope without the need to (re-)code in that CB.
 
Way back when I wrote the Sacred War CB, I wrote another one as well intended to convert the defending ruler. I never did get it working properly.
 
Numahr said:
Overhauled Holy War mechanics are completed and uploaded. @LAF1994 , I would suggest you try this version and provide feedback :)

I'll post shortly in the Spirituality Enhancement thread to explain the new approach
Click to expand...
1) I tested out the new Holy War mechanics; one problem is that the new subjugation holy war subjugates the targets entire realm, not just the targeted duchy. I'd suggest making it only transfer vassals within the target.
2) I'd recommend adding a CB for emperor-tier rulers to subjugate rulers within their de jure territory, even if said rulers hold titular titles (i.e. so the Roman emperors can reassert their authority without destroying their vassal's titles).
3) As it stands, without a working system for tolerant rulers, wrong-religion AI vassals are far more rebellious than they probably ought to be.
4) To make the setup a bit more... interesting, I'd suggest giving dynasties that were previously occupying one of the Roman thrones a claim on said throne (e.g. Isauria, Thessalonia and Nicaea get claims on the ERE, and Ravenna and Venetia get claims on the WRE). This would make for a lot more fighting over the Imperial throne.
5) Minor issue: the 'Blood of Chlorus' trait needs a grammar/spelling check.
6) Also minor: the Augustus dynasty should probably be called Julius (Augustus is a title).
 
Holy Wars should be fixed in Github. I also edited Blood of Chlorus.

Have you tested subjugating a ruler with a titular primary title?
 
LAF1994 said:
1) I tested out the new Holy War mechanics; one problem is that the new subjugation holy war subjugates the targets entire realm, not just the targeted duchy. I'd suggest making it only transfer vassals within the target.
2) I'd recommend adding a CB for emperor-tier rulers to subjugate rulers within their de jure territory, even if said rulers hold titular titles (i.e. so the Roman emperors can reassert their authority without destroying their vassal's titles).
3) As it stands, without a working system for tolerant rulers, wrong-religion AI vassals are far more rebellious than they probably ought to be.
4) To make the setup a bit more... interesting, I'd suggest giving dynasties that were previously occupying one of the Roman thrones a claim on said throne (e.g. Isauria, Thessalonia and Nicaea get claims on the ERE, and Ravenna and Venetia get claims on the WRE). This would make for a lot more fighting over the Imperial throne.
5) Minor issue: the 'Blood of Chlorus' trait needs a grammar/spelling check.
6) Also minor: the Augustus dynasty should probably be called Julius (Augustus is a title).
Click to expand...
Thanks for detailed suggestions. Let me answer these points:
1) This was an implementation glitch in my code, thank richvh who fixed it
2) I did not forget. I am not done with CBs yet. I am thinking this could be a re-work of the existing de jure casus belli, going towards a subjugation approach as for the holy wars. I know this is a major deviation from Vanilla. But I see it as a well-justified one considering the things we mentioned before, i.e. the long-standing existence of these ancient dynasties in LI, who survived in their power hold through many wars and changes.
3) I tried to activate the tolerance events: it generated a CTD on start. Debugging may take some time. Still, we can fix this issue on a temporary basis by decreasing the default opinion modifier for wrong religion. We will increase the communitarian / sectarian negative modifier in the same amount. This way only religions which should have a problem with each other, will get an opinion decrease.
4) We could try that... but on the other hand it is my understanding that these dynasties are now more concerned about their current power holds. See Isauria as played by richvh in his AAR: his interpretation of lore is not towards them claiming the imperial title. A bit like real life Timurid local powers used the memory of the empire for political legitimacy without actively trying to restore it. Or in fact any real life "post-imperial" power like the kings of late antiquity. I'd be curious to hear what other councilors would have to say on this though, as your proposal has merit, especially from a gameplay point of view.
5) OK
6) I will let others look into this if appropriate
 
I fixed the tolerance events some time ago.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Numahr said:
3) I tried to activate the tolerance events: it generated a CTD on start. Debugging may take some time. Still, we can fix this issue on a temporary basis by decreasing the default opinion modifier for wrong religion. We will increase the communitarian / sectarian negative modifier in the same amount. This way only religions which should have a problem with each other, will get an opinion decrease.
4) We could try that... but on the other hand it is my understanding that these dynasties are now more concerned about their current power holds. See Isauria as played by richvh in his AAR: his interpretation of lore is not towards them claiming the imperial title. A bit like real life Timurid local powers used the memory of the empire for political legitimacy without actively trying to restore it. Or in fact any real life "post-imperial" power like the kings of late antiquity. I'd be curious to hear what other councilors would have to say on this though, as your proposal has merit, especially from a gameplay point of view.
Click to expand...
3) To be honest, I'd just suggest scrapping the communitarian/sectarian modifiers altogether; as it stands, there's no particular reason why those particular religions are disliked (e.g why would people in Greece hold a special disdain for the cult of Alexander?). I'd suggest replacing them with Ancestral/Bastion of the Faith/Proselyte modifiers, where Proselyte religions dislike and are disliked by all others (particularly other Proselyte faiths) but have a strong boost to relations with their own faith, while Ancestral and Bastion of the Faith religions tolerate each other to some extent but don't get same-faith relation bonuses.
4) The difference here is a) the Roman titles are still very much in existence in LI, and b) those dynasties held the throne at some point in the not-too-distant past, and so may wish to reclaim it.
Also, in the history files any ruler who held both Roman Empire titles should probably also have held the united 'Roman Empire' title.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back