I'm a historian. Unless the titular title is some forgettable 10th century Turkic Khanate, I'll figure out how to do it quite quickly and who to pick. Thanks for the link, I'll write myself a note of things to try.
-
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.
I'm a historian. Unless the titular title is some forgettable 10th century Turkic Khanate, I'll figure out how to do it quite quickly and who to pick. Thanks for the link, I'll write myself a note of things to try.
In addition to that, you should also be able to use the "Search" feature to find the titles in case you are unsure.
Okay, I'm bored, so I figured I should burn some time by helping out a bit. IIRC Scandinavia isn't done in the mod, Norway even being under invasion by Skyrim, apparently. So, I'll help a bit with what Norway looked like in the mod timeline. I would recommend making some map changes to divvy up the current counties a bit, they correspond to the petty kingdoms of 867, after all, and is too large for the early period. Anyway...
Now, most of these were relatively stable polities, and can be assumed to be roughly corresponding to the political situation also in the 6th and 7th centuries, with certain exceptions. In the earliest start dates the Sami would dominate the region north of 14, 15 and 16, despite there being an increasing number of Norwegian settlers there. Numbers 2 and 1 would be settled in the early 700's, but quickly rise to dominate Norwegian politics due to the lucrative trade with the Sami and the tribute the Sami paid to use the land for herding. Numbers 20, 21 and 22 would all be divided; 22 between an eastern part and western part, 21 in south and north of the big bay you see there (the northern bit would also control the bit of 20 south of the fjord), while a kingdom based in the islands on the coasts would control the rest of 20. The region of Trøndelag (4 through 12) consisted of voluntary anarchist unions of these settlers, falling under the control of various clans but all meeting at the same thing (legislative and judicial assembly), from about 600 AD. 23, 26 and 27 were the core areas of Norway, ruled by unions of tribes, normally electing a king from among their number of chieftains. From the late 600's, Grænafylki (23) and Vestfold (26) increasingly fell to the domination of Denmark, with the Danes meddling in the choices of kings and demanding tribute. Finally, 15, 28, 31, 30 and 24 were for most of the period infertile and mostly unsettled dumping grounds for outlaws and refugees, filled with bandits, wild animals, and warlords. By the start of the Viking Age the warlords of these states finally came to get more recognition as proper petty kings, but were still reviled by the others due to their outlaw background.
PS: I recommend giving Iceland to some Irish monks or bears. Nobody lived there in the early starts.
Now, most of these were relatively stable polities, and can be assumed to be roughly corresponding to the political situation also in the 6th and 7th centuries, with certain exceptions. In the earliest start dates the Sami would dominate the region north of 14, 15 and 16, despite there being an increasing number of Norwegian settlers there. Numbers 2 and 1 would be settled in the early 700's, but quickly rise to dominate Norwegian politics due to the lucrative trade with the Sami and the tribute the Sami paid to use the land for herding. Numbers 20, 21 and 22 would all be divided; 22 between an eastern part and western part, 21 in south and north of the big bay you see there (the northern bit would also control the bit of 20 south of the fjord), while a kingdom based in the islands on the coasts would control the rest of 20. The region of Trøndelag (4 through 12) consisted of voluntary anarchist unions of these settlers, falling under the control of various clans but all meeting at the same thing (legislative and judicial assembly), from about 600 AD. 23, 26 and 27 were the core areas of Norway, ruled by unions of tribes, normally electing a king from among their number of chieftains. From the late 600's, Grænafylki (23) and Vestfold (26) increasingly fell to the domination of Denmark, with the Danes meddling in the choices of kings and demanding tribute. Finally, 15, 28, 31, 30 and 24 were for most of the period infertile and mostly unsettled dumping grounds for outlaws and refugees, filled with bandits, wild animals, and warlords. By the start of the Viking Age the warlords of these states finally came to get more recognition as proper petty kings, but were still reviled by the others due to their outlaw background.
PS: I recommend giving Iceland to some Irish monks or bears. Nobody lived there in the early starts.
At the risk of responding a bit quickly and sounding a bit repetitive, you can find the slightly altered Norwegian map which was done here: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ces-holdings-etc.828941/page-10#post-22045505 However, the political map has not been modified so there is more to be done there, naturally. But just to clarify your suggestion here: in addition to the suggested map changes outlined on the map, the headings are suggested duchies to regroup the provinces and each province would be a separate tribe at start?Okay, I'm bored, so I figured I should burn some time by helping out a bit. IIRC Scandinavia isn't done in the mod, Norway even being under invasion by Skyrim, apparently. So, I'll help a bit with what Norway looked like in the mod timeline. I would recommend making some map changes to divvy up the current counties a bit, they correspond to the petty kingdoms of 867, after all, and is too large for the early period. Anyway...
Now, most of these were relatively stable polities, and can be assumed to be roughly corresponding to the political situation also in the 6th and 7th centuries, with certain exceptions. In the earliest start dates the Sami would dominate the region north of 14, 15 and 16, despite there being an increasing number of Norwegian settlers there. Numbers 2 and 1 would be settled in the early 700's, but quickly rise to dominate Norwegian politics due to the lucrative trade with the Sami and the tribute the Sami paid to use the land for herding. Numbers 20, 21 and 22 would all be divided; 22 between an eastern part and western part, 21 in south and north of the big bay you see there (the northern bit would also control the bit of 20 south of the fjord), while a kingdom based in the islands on the coasts would control the rest of 20. The region of Trøndelag (4 through 12) consisted of voluntary anarchist unions of these settlers, falling under the control of various clans but all meeting at the same thing (legislative and judicial assembly), from about 600 AD. 23, 26 and 27 were the core areas of Norway, ruled by unions of tribes, normally electing a king from among their number of chieftains. From the late 600's, Grænafylki (23) and Vestfold (26) increasingly fell to the domination of Denmark, with the Danes meddling in the choices of kings and demanding tribute. Finally, 15, 28, 31, 30 and 24 were for most of the period infertile and mostly unsettled dumping grounds for outlaws and refugees, filled with bandits, wild animals, and warlords. By the start of the Viking Age the warlords of these states finally came to get more recognition as proper petty kings, but were still reviled by the others due to their outlaw background.
They already have the Irish Papars.
No, I didn't make this map, I just know the guy who did. The headings are the areas that were under a unified thing, i.e. law assembly. Frostuting, Gulating, and Eidsivating. The grouped together regions not under the heading of a specific thing may have had their own thing that later died out before they could be recorded in writing, or they may simply have been autocracies. The regions could work as duchies with a bit of finagling, as by the Viking Age we know that the kings of Norway needed the backing of all the things if they wanted to be seen as legitimate. What plagued Norway during the Norwegian Civil War (1177-1240 AD) was that the things began to prop up local pretenders for king, and the Church, Denmark, and the political factions of the time began meddling as well, resulting in decades of pretenders rising, seizing a third or a half of the country, and then being assassinated or killed in battle. Setting the thing regions as duchies is thus somewhat acceptable, even if officially the title of duke would not exist in Norway until the late 13th century. What could work, if you split the Norse culture into West Norse (Norway, eventually Iceland, Orkney, and much of the British isles) and East Norse (Denmark, Sweden, eventually the Rus) is to make the duke-level characters of West Norse cultures become lawspeaker as a title, to at least simulate that the powerful vassals of this period were the things, not particular nobles. Maybe have some sort of decision in the intrigue screen where a lawspeaker with high stewardship could change his title to jarl. You could probably use this mechanic for the Saxons as well.
And yes, in the earlier starts it would be ideal if all the states up to 14, 15 and 16 were independent tribes. Those north of that had not been founded yet. Early Scandinavia was not very conducive to political unification, least of all a mountainous country like Norway, so the countryside was littered with independent microstates and polities. Even this map is a very generous representation, basically trusting the sagas when it comes to the number of actors involved in the unification wars. Vestfold, for example, could easily have been split between 4 tribes as late as the 700's for all we know. It is a nightmare for historians to attempt to piece together any Norwegian history prior to the mid 10th century, due to the lack of proper written sources. With Sweden it is impossible, which is why I have not said anything about it. I'd drop 28, 30 and 31, they are smack dab in the middle of the impassable mountain range, and they are outlaw scum anyway. Splitting Telemark to account for Grænafylki should also be considered; as far as we know, the Telemark was the frontier region for Vestfold and the Grænafylki, and it was only later that the former colonial region would come to dominate the coast due to its wealth in agriculture and lumber. I'd split the current Vestfold province into Vestfold along the coast and Ringarriki inland. With the rest of the country you can do as you want; our knowledge of the political situation there is so poor that I highly doubt someone is going to turn up and complain about historical incorrectness. The reason we have better ideas about the situation east of the Jotunheim is because there the Icelandic and the Danish sagas overlap, giving us a general idea of the polities existing. IIRC, a legendary king known as Ring founded Ringarriki, making him one of the only named characters we know from the pre-Viking period, even if we don't even know which century he lived in. Could have been 5th, could have been 8th, or anything inbetween.
Huh, I could have sworn they were still Norse when I last played in February. Maybe some enterprising Nord or Danish character intervened.
Yes, @Vatterholm himself posted a map here earlier as well. Here you have his concrete suggestions: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ces-holdings-etc.828941/page-22#post-22405285
It is often difficult to find basis for duchies, and the names are usually just important centres rather than the names which would have been used at the time given the lack of sources and of political unification. If we use the thing names, they duke names would also be adapted as you get into below.
The Norse culture doesn't exist in the mod and currently there is no way for it to appear either. Your suggestion regarding this is interesting, but not really possible unless the decision also changes the culture of the ruler (or if there is some other mechanic which I'm once again not aware of). In theory it is possible to give particular titles particular names, but those aren't cultural.
The north in the mod is controlled by Sami tribes, with their culture and Finnic religion.
While the map above is too detailed for it to be adopted as the province map of the area (otherwise each area would have to get a similar amount of provinces and performance would suffer too much) we can always use it to reevaluate the Norwegian province and duchy setup together with what Vatterholm posted.
Presumably, as they have been Papar since the first release. As of the next version no such adventures should happen in the early game either.
I know, I just think they are a province too far south at the present. Just because the Sami still existed in the region does not mean they were the majority or even there all year; nomads and all that shebang. I really wish Paradox would come up with some mechanics for migratory societies that aren't horse nomads.
Ah, finally! That reminds me, in my very first game (as the Exarch of Egypt), I discovered to my surprise that some random Vandal was West Roman Emperor. Hilderic, I believe it was. As far as I understood from checking the titles, through some blessed miracle Romulus Augustulus managed to win the war against Odoacer (I think he got bethrothed to a daughter of the Burgundian king) by 482, but the realm was then shattered in another civil war as the vassals tried to put one of the pretenders on the throne and Odoacer's brother down in Rome revolted (meanwhile, Julius Nepos apparently decided to become ruler of the Ostrogoths rather than use this obvious chance). Romulus put down the revolt of Odoacer's brother, but the other war took him all the way to 488, at the tail end of which he was invaded by the teenaged adventurer Hilderic. AI Hilderic was actually quite the successful emperor, reconquering most of Africa by himself.
Noted, but I believe the current setup was based upon the unclear limits and partial evidence of them being in a part of the province covered. Given the lack of sources, it has been a bit difficult for us to draw the line.
On this matter the mod could theoretically add a new government in-between tribals and nomads, although it wouldn't have a new unique mechanic, even though different aspects of existant governments could be combined. So if you have a detailed suggestion on how you could envision this concept, feel free to provide it.
Sounds like an interesting scenario! Civil wars and shattering pretenders will naturally still happen, and limited adventures, but if everything works properly not the prepared invasions or massive armies roaming the seas that many were used to see in earlier versions.
i would not use things as basis for duchies. considering the larger ones are mainly an effect of centralization during the early 2nd milenium.
i also made a rough map sketch based on more or less same sources as Vatterholm. what i consider a basic subdivision is divided by red borders and numbered in black, the most priority additions in red and further possible divisions in grey.
this is a suggestion for the early medieval/viking era.
i suggested duchies based on more or less traditional regions.
Viken (austr and vestr)
mentioned many times in Morkinskinna/Fagerskinna. mainly austr i vikr or simply vikr.
during early medieval era this area is generaly consider to stretch from Gøta elv, Kungælv/Kunghella.
viken literally translates to the fold, as in a folded piece of cloth, and this is the modern norwegian designation of the area subdivided in Østfold and Vestfold.
during early 2nd milenium the area around Gothenburg/Gøta elv was a Norwegian region called Elfarsysla.
elv being modern scandinavian for river is quite possibly the basis for the region of Alfheim, rather than the supernatural alv(elf), located roughly between the rivers Glomma and Gøta.
on the western side of the fold/vik is located the kaupang at Skiringsal, that along with Borre would constitute the center of a powerful petty kingdom.
Telemark at this point (early medieval) is generally considered to be the elevated inland area, separate from Grenland/Vestmar at the coast. upper Telemark could be considered an oppland (scarcely populated, unaccessible wilderness/border area).
this area likely under some kind of Danish control during early medieval era.
quite possibly the supposed Norwegian branch of the Ynglings were initially backed by Danish kings.
Oppland
centered around modern Oppland and Hedemark this is elevated and inland area. yet a geography of wide valleys, flats and good farmable land gave room for a substantiable population. also the area is the location of lake Mjøsa which through the river Vorma drains into Glomma.
being landlocked, the decentralized valley landscape and with only secondary access to trade, this area would likely be subservient to and liable to taxation/tribute by the realms in Viken.
along with Råbygjalag (upper Agder) and (upper) Telemark this area would likely be free of direct danish influence, decentralized and autonomous.
Sud-vest Riki
the south-west realm, mainly Agder and Jæren, Rogaland and Hordaland.
the relatively flat and mild climate of Agder and Jæren show clear signs of large scale animal husbandry during the late roman era. the scale such that it suggest some sort of cooperative effort and the produce, in form of wool/cloth, exported to the continent and Britain. the settlement at Landa in Forsand (1500bc. - 600ad.) is norways oldest town-like settlement.
the Norse were well aware of Britain and the continent in general. yet before the use of sail became common the safest route, rather than risk rowing in open sea, would be to follow land eastwards and cross over to Denmark before heading west. this benefited the kaupangs along the route and supported local magnates.
it seem that it was by the same coastal route that bronze once came northwards, from the Baltic, which would make the strait between modern Sweden and Denmark an important economic and strategic location for a long time. this would be part of a trade route originating in the White sea and ultimately joining the Amber route.
this northern route, especially the ability to control travel sheltered inside the skerries along Norway, which gave rise to local magnates/petty kings at locations such as Avaldsnes at Karmøy.
when the use of sail became common, allowing a quick and easy crossing, it opened up a direct link to Britain and the continent. this must have disrupted trade in the kaupangs of eastern Norway and could be one reason for Harald Fairhairs forceful unification of Norway. certainly this area composed the last unified stand against Harald at Hafrsfjord.
Mærr
Møre and Romsdal, Sogn and Fjordane.
an area comprised of long and steep fjords, the location of several petty kingdoms, also here Harald Fairhair fought a lot of people.
the name Møre/Mær is also found in Sweden and is thought to point to ocean-landscape, possibly from latin mare. at some point in medieval era north Møre was located in outer parts at the mouth of Trondheims fjord.
Trøndelag
the wide and relative flat landscape gave room for a sizeable population and Trøndelag composed a counter-weight to Viken throughout medieval era.
by the time of Harald Fairhair Trøndelag was ruled by the Jarls of Lade. this family seem to have originated in Hålogaland and could claim a prestigeous ancestry comparable to the Ynglings. it was certainly by support from this dynasty that Fairhair could claim Norway.
controlling the northern part of the trade route Trøndelag would also extract the Finn-tax, that is monopoly on trade with exotic furs, antlers and walrus-tooth by Sami.
Ah, yes, this looks like a great suggestion to me. I am not an expert at Norwegian history (my field is actually Jewish history; I just took a course on the Viking Age back as a postgraduate student), so it's good someone who is more familiar with the primary sources and archæological material than me would be on point. I think you may be overly optimistic about the counties though; as Loup and I have been discussing, performance and regional balancing must be considered. Any mass increase in provinces in Norway would necessitate a similar increase in Sweden, etc. and all of it slows the game down.
PS: Shouldn't it be Sudrvest if you are going for Old Norse? Or am I making a fool out of myself with my extremely limited knowledge of the grammar of that language?
Lapps and Labyrinths: Saami Prehistory, Colonization, and Cultural Resilience by Noel Broadbent discusses this quite a bit. If I am not mistaken, the general consensus is that Sami presence south of modern Trøndelag was minimal prior to the late middle ages, due to the terrain being largely incompatible with the herding-based lifestyle of the Sami. Likely the forays south were a way for the Sami to diversify their diet through hunting and harvesting of forest berries and mushrooms. I think claiming the areas as under the control of the Sami, even on the tribal level, is overly positive. Bear in mind the Sami population of entire Scandinavia was likely less than 100.000 at the time, possibly considerably less. Tribal units of a few hundred or even a few dozen people would not be able to dominate an agrarian society for long if at all, especially lacking horses. A typically CK2 county encompasses tens of thousands of people, even up in rural Scandinavia.
thus i divided my suggestion into 3 categories of priority. i believe my basic configuration does not add much more than 3-4 to the vanilla set-up, mainly the area of Sogn og Fjordane and Møre og Romsdal. as an effect this adds some lesser realms in the vicinity of Trøndelag, allowing Trøndelag to act as a counter-balance to the more crowded Viken.
truth be told i have not played Norse in this mod, so i would not really know if my suggestions adds anything.
never mind my grammar, it is mainly modern Norwegian or some sort of faux-Norse. it is likely not correct at all.
at least by the early medieval/viking age there were people called Bu-finns (settled Finns), that were settled Sami living mainly of agriculture and fishing like any Norse. this were mainly in coastal areas in the north from Trøndelag. besides different religion and language the Bu-Finns were likely closer to the Norse than the innland, nomadic Sami. also their material culture were likely comparable to that of Norse.
in addition to a somewhat milder coastal climate, the Bu-Finns/Sea Sami could rely on fishing and other ocean hunting. the Sea Sami built good boats and nett-fishing could seem to be a female occupation, supposedly conducted in the fjords close to the home.
certainly there are clear signs of permanent settlements, spaning several hundred years, as far north/east as in Varanger, although likely abandoned by this mods timeframe. this northern settlement pattern likely abandoned due to to climate change that saw the woods retract from the sea, forcing people to journey between hunting and fishing grounds thus becoming semi-nomadic.
also inland Sami were semi-nomadic, traveling between summer and winter grounds. the wast herds of owned reindeer are a more recent custom by modern Sami. initially the owned herd of tame reindeer were used for transport, while wild herds used for hunting. the presence of Sami as far south as reindeer trek, likely moving between fixed points, would bring them in some contact with Norse, but less influenced and less governable than the Bu-Finns.
i have no clue of how the current set-up is, but lots of the northern mountainous inland Scandinavia could well be empty nomad counties.
I'll admit to not having firsthand knowledge there, I had read some of the modders working on the Elder Kings mod mention running across it as a problem when someone suggested the mechanic of off map powers would be perfect for the Daedra, but they nixed it, with taht as their justification.
But the... What is the term again? Glottal stop? The glottal stop is not present in a triple consonant. I thought... Maybe I am purposefully confusing myself, I know what you say is true in modern Icelandic, at le... Wait a second, aren't you one of the Winter King devs? What are you doing here on this mod sub?
Icelandic has indeed inherited this from Old Norse, though sometimes you see names like Suðurlandsbraut and Vesturgata, but I guess these are just modern constructions, seeing how words which have an older history like Vestmannaeyjar drop the -(u)r.
And we're here to sabotage your thread, of course. Nah, just for discussions and inspiration, basically, with a side dish of mutual cooperation.
some suggestions:
what about adding an option for Roman realms to erect a triumphant arc upon the event where on get to hold a triumph after a major victory, the effect being something like the Norse pagan runestone.
also adding a funeral rite for ones deceased previous character and perhaps also close relatives, preferably varying in cost and effect based on title level.
for example Norse pagans could build a mound for the prominent dead or a ship burial (sometimes even burnt). a mound as a monument could give a monthly prestige bonus over time, while ship burial a one time increase.
could you please add a few more mechanisms to help decrease threat level faster.
i realize Paradox made this so to hamper blobbing, but it is way overactive and the defensive pacts themselves are enormous blobs. at least on the level of a reunited Roman empire one can hardly do anything before threat rise to 100. even gaining a one-county de jure vassals by diplomacy and peaceful vassalization increase ones threat level a bunch, while vassals waging foreign wars thus increasing my realm and relative power does not seem to increase my threat level, there is no logic.
when reconquest CBs run out and one has to attack small realms based on vassal claims and fabrications, one get to fight 1-2 tiny expansive wars each generation without the whole world turning on you. the campaign turns stale when resorting to micromanagement of vassals, handing out viceroyalties and fighting small bands of rebels for decades on end, while waiting for massive pacts to disband.
there should at least be an ambition to lower threat level, with a chain of events helping to bring it down faster. the "rule realm in peace for 5 years" ambition should have some effect to that end.
also underaged rulers should get a decrease i threat.
for example there is Søndre land in Oppland, which is certainly not in the south of Norway. and there is Sørlandet which is the southern part of Norway.
what about adding an option for Roman realms to erect a triumphant arc upon the event where on get to hold a triumph after a major victory, the effect being something like the Norse pagan runestone.
also adding a funeral rite for ones deceased previous character and perhaps also close relatives, preferably varying in cost and effect based on title level.
for example Norse pagans could build a mound for the prominent dead or a ship burial (sometimes even burnt). a mound as a monument could give a monthly prestige bonus over time, while ship burial a one time increase.
could you please add a few more mechanisms to help decrease threat level faster.
i realize Paradox made this so to hamper blobbing, but it is way overactive and the defensive pacts themselves are enormous blobs. at least on the level of a reunited Roman empire one can hardly do anything before threat rise to 100. even gaining a one-county de jure vassals by diplomacy and peaceful vassalization increase ones threat level a bunch, while vassals waging foreign wars thus increasing my realm and relative power does not seem to increase my threat level, there is no logic.
when reconquest CBs run out and one has to attack small realms based on vassal claims and fabrications, one get to fight 1-2 tiny expansive wars each generation without the whole world turning on you. the campaign turns stale when resorting to micromanagement of vassals, handing out viceroyalties and fighting small bands of rebels for decades on end, while waiting for massive pacts to disband.
there should at least be an ambition to lower threat level, with a chain of events helping to bring it down faster. the "rule realm in peace for 5 years" ambition should have some effect to that end.
also underaged rulers should get a decrease i threat.
it is something of the same in modern Norwegian. one can use vest for west and vestre for western, sør for south and søndre for southern. i suppose there is no definite rule, but it seem most correct to use Vestregate for a street to the south of something and Vestgata for a street going vest.
for example there is Søndre land in Oppland, which is certainly not in the south of Norway. and there is Sørlandet which is the southern part of Norway.
While surveying the event files, it occurred to me that the Insular/Pelagian pilgrimage to Canterbury doesn't really make a whole lot of sense: Canterbury doesn't seem to have become remotely important, certainly not in a religious sense, until Saxon times when Augustine was dispatched there by Pope Gregory I in 597. I think Insular/Pelagian pilgrims should have options to instead go to:
-Verulamium/St Albans, the province of Bedford (site of the martyrdom of Saint Alban, the first British martyr)
-Armagh, the province of Oriel (Saint Patrick's seat & main shrine)
-Caerleon, Gwent (site of the martyrdom of Saints Julius & Aaron, who were killed sometime after Alban's death)
-Iona, Innse Gall (although there is the slight issue of Saint Columba not having been born until 521, well after the start date, so it'd obviously be pretty silly for Insular/Pelagian rulers to be able to make a pilgrimage to venerate him in 476)
As for other flavor...for Pelagianism I was thinking that, given its emphasis on human free will, austerity, the performance of good works to achieve salvation and the idea that Jesus' life & death are mostly important just to set a good example for humanity to follow (the reason Pelagius himself came up with this doctrine was his disgust at Roman aristocrats wallowing in sin & luxury with the excuse that they were born depraved), rulers could have an 'alms-giving' decision as a modified version of the Muslim sadaqah: coughing up a large chunk of their treasury for a piety boost, and maybe a 'good works' or 'ruler sets a good moral example' province modifier that reduces the risk of revolt?
Last edited:
Your presence is of course appreciated, and it is always kind of you to provide help both with regards to coding, sources and input.
Good idea, noted. Are you referring to a Legacy of Rome event when you mention an event where you get to hold a triumph after a major victory?
That is also a good idea which we will note.
As I have said in the past, this is beyond the scope of WtWSMS. If you find threat to be problematic you have the option of disabling it. What we have done is that for some dynamic events threat can be reduced, but as our focus is on the Early Middle Ages/Late Antiquity altering threat isn't the main priority, especially since it features in game rules. Sub-mods can however be started if anyone wants to make take a personal initiative in this regard.
That is correct, thank you for pointing out. I think Canterbury must be an oversight in relation to an old setup, which since has been rendered obsolete.
Good ideas, we will note them as future additions.
Speaking of Rome, is there no event for the Western Roman Empire title to be taken away from the duke of Dalmatia if Nepos dies without an heir? Have seen some very odd imperial dynasties arise out of that if I start in 476 or 477. Some events to get the Ostrogoths and Langobards off their asses and expanding into Italy would also be appreciated, it seems everyone are attacking poor Odoacer but them.
PS: I know this isn't the bug reporting thread and you've probably heard this a million times, but I just redownloaded the mod and noticed the theocracy bug is still around. I don't understand how that happens, especially with the major powers (e.g. the Vandals) who have preset realm and crown laws.
PS: I know this isn't the bug reporting thread and you've probably heard this a million times, but I just redownloaded the mod and noticed the theocracy bug is still around. I don't understand how that happens, especially with the major powers (e.g. the Vandals) who have preset realm and crown laws.