What if Medieval Europe, but less bigoted?
September 4, 2020 1:02 PM Subscribe
"Epic grand strategy role-playing game Crusader Kings 3 is one of the best PC games in a generation. In our review, we described it as an elastic storytelling engine — one that rewards improvisation, while also heaving in a hefty amount of randomness. But, at its core, the game is a simulation custom-made to allow players to explore alternate histories. That includes letting them tinker with the sexual and religious norms common to the feudal world.
“We are huge believers in allowing players as much freedom as possible to shape the game world in their image,” Paradox said in that April blog post. “When trying to model history reasonably accurately as we do in CK3, your starting environment might be a far cry from the just and equal Realm you wish to rule, but determined players should be able to change the mores of their society over time — if that is their fantasy.”"
Nate Crowley:
The way I’d summarise Crusader Kings 3 depends heavily on where you’re coming at the game from. If you never played Crusader Kings 2, but were always interested, then I heartily recommend this extremely long, in-depth strategy/RPG hybrid about managing the successive lives of a dynasty of medieval problem people. It’s very complex, but it does a better job than its predecessor of explaining itself, and offers more rewards along the learning curve. Similarly, if you tried CK2 but bounced off, now would be your cue to come back for another bite of the turkey leg. . .
I guess the point I’m making is that, while there’s obviously not as much in it as there was in CK2 after 15 expansions, you’d have a hard time calling CK3 sparse. My second playthrough, for example (which I’m saving for a diary), featured an Estonian clan obsessed with breeding a horde of well-read, horny giants. But there’s room for more, clearly. Will Paradox release more mechanics and systems as paid-for DLC? Of course. Does that mean the game isn’t “complete” on launch? I don’t think so at all.
Ian Boudreau:
Over the past several years, the idea of keeping politics out of videogames has gained a certain amount of traction, and Crusader Kings III continues in the tradition of vividly demonstrating the absurdity of that notion. The American political scientist Harold Lasswell wrote that politics is the process of determining “who gets what, when, and how,” and that’s a decent summation of what Crusader Kings is about. Every decision you make is inherently political, and the politics of the middle ages is a swirling vortex of relationships, tradition, violence, and wealth in which you immediately find yourself fighting for dominance – or in many cases, mere survival. . .
It pains me to point out these flaws because Crusader Kings III is brilliant. It’s a game that makes me happy to own a beard, because it’s the perfect thing for some good beard-stroking. You can set your own goals when you begin, but in general what you’ll be doing is managing the accretion of those titles to your family’s name. The ‘game’ part of Crusader Kings III is, as ever, the wobbly balancing act of picking which titles to hold onto and which to hand out in order to placate the jealous vassals, and doing this in a constantly shifting world of competing houses, cultures, and personalities. You’ll also be worried about defending your realm against forces eager to chip off a juicy county, or perhaps absorb you entirely. It’s a legalistic game in which a certain amount of rule-breaking is accounted for in the rulebook. A perfect example: you can’t go to war without an officially recognized casus belli, but you can always send your cleric off to simply make one up.
Charlie Hall:
Crusader Kings 3, the latest offering from Paradox Interactive, successfully aligns the desires of its fictional rulers with its real-world players. The player starts by controlling a single ruler, eventually leading and growing their dynastic line over hundreds of years of feudal history. Throughout, the game balances randomness with the opportunity for real improvisation on the part of the player. The result is an elastic storytelling engine that brings into focus the kinds of personal conflicts that make it so fascinating to study real history. . .
At one point, while playing as Matilda of Tuscany around the year 1100, my own son offered to marry me. Politically and militarily it was the right thing to do, as it would have consolidated our dynastic holdings following the death of my husband. But neither my religious obligations to my faith (the Pope frowns on incest, as you can imagine) nor my ongoing love affair with the Holy Roman Emperor (with whom I shared a venereal disease, by the way) provided an incentive for me to get in bed with my own son. In gameplay terms, the hit to my reputation (both Piety and Prestige) would have been catastrophic. It would also have increased my stress, driving me ever closer to madness.
Morality has an in-game cost, but so does inaction. I did what any other conscientious ruler in the 12th century would do — and murdered my younger son instead.
Fraser Brown:
I've become completely tangled up in Crusader Kings 3's plots and family trees. It's my jailer, keeping me far too busy orchestrating murders and becoming pen pals with the King of France to leave the flat. I should probably do something about that, but I've got this succession crisis to sort out. You know how it is. . .
The lovely Mediterranean powerhouse I'd spent a lifetime building ended up ruined when my big mouth of a brother outed me for killing our other, stupider brother. I did the deed, I'll admit it. I sent my spymaster to dig around for secrets I could use as hooks to make people do my bidding. I seduced my brother's vassal and bribed one of his knights to join me in the plot. And when he was dead, I used the secrets I'd gathered to force my cowed nobles into making shitty deals and giving me more cash. So when my surviving brother found out about the deed, he tried to blackmail me and, failing that, he told everyone. All my vassals with their bruised egos rode up against me, naturally. I met a nasty end. That's what I get for dragging my 70-year-old ass into battle.
Previously, previously, previously, previouslier. (shoutout to Fizz really)
Nate Crowley:
The way I’d summarise Crusader Kings 3 depends heavily on where you’re coming at the game from. If you never played Crusader Kings 2, but were always interested, then I heartily recommend this extremely long, in-depth strategy/RPG hybrid about managing the successive lives of a dynasty of medieval problem people. It’s very complex, but it does a better job than its predecessor of explaining itself, and offers more rewards along the learning curve. Similarly, if you tried CK2 but bounced off, now would be your cue to come back for another bite of the turkey leg. . .
I guess the point I’m making is that, while there’s obviously not as much in it as there was in CK2 after 15 expansions, you’d have a hard time calling CK3 sparse. My second playthrough, for example (which I’m saving for a diary), featured an Estonian clan obsessed with breeding a horde of well-read, horny giants. But there’s room for more, clearly. Will Paradox release more mechanics and systems as paid-for DLC? Of course. Does that mean the game isn’t “complete” on launch? I don’t think so at all.
Ian Boudreau:
Over the past several years, the idea of keeping politics out of videogames has gained a certain amount of traction, and Crusader Kings III continues in the tradition of vividly demonstrating the absurdity of that notion. The American political scientist Harold Lasswell wrote that politics is the process of determining “who gets what, when, and how,” and that’s a decent summation of what Crusader Kings is about. Every decision you make is inherently political, and the politics of the middle ages is a swirling vortex of relationships, tradition, violence, and wealth in which you immediately find yourself fighting for dominance – or in many cases, mere survival. . .
It pains me to point out these flaws because Crusader Kings III is brilliant. It’s a game that makes me happy to own a beard, because it’s the perfect thing for some good beard-stroking. You can set your own goals when you begin, but in general what you’ll be doing is managing the accretion of those titles to your family’s name. The ‘game’ part of Crusader Kings III is, as ever, the wobbly balancing act of picking which titles to hold onto and which to hand out in order to placate the jealous vassals, and doing this in a constantly shifting world of competing houses, cultures, and personalities. You’ll also be worried about defending your realm against forces eager to chip off a juicy county, or perhaps absorb you entirely. It’s a legalistic game in which a certain amount of rule-breaking is accounted for in the rulebook. A perfect example: you can’t go to war without an officially recognized casus belli, but you can always send your cleric off to simply make one up.
Charlie Hall:
Crusader Kings 3, the latest offering from Paradox Interactive, successfully aligns the desires of its fictional rulers with its real-world players. The player starts by controlling a single ruler, eventually leading and growing their dynastic line over hundreds of years of feudal history. Throughout, the game balances randomness with the opportunity for real improvisation on the part of the player. The result is an elastic storytelling engine that brings into focus the kinds of personal conflicts that make it so fascinating to study real history. . .
At one point, while playing as Matilda of Tuscany around the year 1100, my own son offered to marry me. Politically and militarily it was the right thing to do, as it would have consolidated our dynastic holdings following the death of my husband. But neither my religious obligations to my faith (the Pope frowns on incest, as you can imagine) nor my ongoing love affair with the Holy Roman Emperor (with whom I shared a venereal disease, by the way) provided an incentive for me to get in bed with my own son. In gameplay terms, the hit to my reputation (both Piety and Prestige) would have been catastrophic. It would also have increased my stress, driving me ever closer to madness.
Morality has an in-game cost, but so does inaction. I did what any other conscientious ruler in the 12th century would do — and murdered my younger son instead.
Fraser Brown:
I've become completely tangled up in Crusader Kings 3's plots and family trees. It's my jailer, keeping me far too busy orchestrating murders and becoming pen pals with the King of France to leave the flat. I should probably do something about that, but I've got this succession crisis to sort out. You know how it is. . .
The lovely Mediterranean powerhouse I'd spent a lifetime building ended up ruined when my big mouth of a brother outed me for killing our other, stupider brother. I did the deed, I'll admit it. I sent my spymaster to dig around for secrets I could use as hooks to make people do my bidding. I seduced my brother's vassal and bribed one of his knights to join me in the plot. And when he was dead, I used the secrets I'd gathered to force my cowed nobles into making shitty deals and giving me more cash. So when my surviving brother found out about the deed, he tried to blackmail me and, failing that, he told everyone. All my vassals with their bruised egos rode up against me, naturally. I met a nasty end. That's what I get for dragging my 70-year-old ass into battle.
Previously, previously, previously, previouslier. (shoutout to Fizz really)
I have bought it and haven't played it yet (tomorrow! I have nothing else scheduled tomorrow!) but I am very much enjoying reports of games like this chronicle of ill-advised horniness.
posted by restless_nomad at 1:35 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by restless_nomad at 1:35 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
I've bought it and so far am having a hard time getting into it. Never played the previous games, the closest I've come is Stellaris. The UI is much improved from what I've seen but the game is still very dense and opaque, it hasn't clicked for me yet.
posted by Nelson at 2:11 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by Nelson at 2:11 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
I bought this and have been trying to explore ways to make it accessible for the blind, which is a fairly tedious task in some ways. Still, I'm having a lot of fun, and can't wait to see how far I can go.
posted by Alensin at 2:21 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by Alensin at 2:21 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
I played a bunch of ck2 earlier inthe pandemic. It took about four tries to get through the tutorial, but then I fell in pretty hard, constructing an alternate history where the Norse bootstrap from being viking raiders to being a Venetian-style merchant republic with a trading empire spanning Northern Europe.
My plan is to let the bugs settle on this one a bit, and then dive on in! I am excite. (but also working a bit too hard on oxygen not included right now...)
posted by kaibutsu at 2:41 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
My plan is to let the bugs settle on this one a bit, and then dive on in! I am excite. (but also working a bit too hard on oxygen not included right now...)
posted by kaibutsu at 2:41 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
Looking forward to this, it's sitting, waiting in my library. It was also nice to read from the developers why they included settings for patriarchal/neutral/matriarchal, sexuality commonality and acceptance, and some other interesting things. They were basically like, "Sure you can make it like history, but this is a game, so we made it so you can configure it like everything else. Why not? It's fun."
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 3:14 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 3:14 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
What if Medieval Europe, but less bigoted?
Hey. In my game the Anglo-Saxons were on their last legs in their own lands and they still wouldn't have their daughter marry someone who wasn't a Catholic. So much for the tolerant Mercians.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 3:28 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
Hey. In my game the Anglo-Saxons were on their last legs in their own lands and they still wouldn't have their daughter marry someone who wasn't a Catholic. So much for the tolerant Mercians.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 3:28 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]
"if you tried CK2 but bounced off" - that's me.
I'm a longtime strategy game player, and CK2 just kept rubbing me the wrong way. The mix of RPG and 4X never clicked.
posted by doctornemo at 3:36 PM on September 4, 2020
I'm a longtime strategy game player, and CK2 just kept rubbing me the wrong way. The mix of RPG and 4X never clicked.
posted by doctornemo at 3:36 PM on September 4, 2020
For me, the joy of CKIi came when I realized it was an alternate history generator; that the trick wasn’t to scramble after more titles, but to work to keep your family with some land and watch how different Europe, the Middle East, and Northern Africa turned out.
I had games where the Aztecs invaded (yes, I play with Sunset Kingdoms turned on) and took most of northern France and pretty much all of England; in others, they are thrown back into the sea before they get a toehold. I’ve seen the great Khan take large chunks of Europe (larger than historical) and then persist. Sometimes I’ve wound up a king, other times I stay a mere count. It’s a sandbox, and once I accepted that, the game clicked for me.
posted by nubs at 8:47 PM on September 4, 2020
I had games where the Aztecs invaded (yes, I play with Sunset Kingdoms turned on) and took most of northern France and pretty much all of England; in others, they are thrown back into the sea before they get a toehold. I’ve seen the great Khan take large chunks of Europe (larger than historical) and then persist. Sometimes I’ve wound up a king, other times I stay a mere count. It’s a sandbox, and once I accepted that, the game clicked for me.
posted by nubs at 8:47 PM on September 4, 2020
What I want to see is a combination of Crusader Kings + Hearts of Iron.
WW2 Alternate History Sim. Work to create power circles within your given factions. Play Trotsky and get Stalin killed first. Play Bogdanov, and win the philosophical war watch Proletkult succeed and thrive with Lunacharsky and the Vpered faction moving forward.
I suppose you could do something similar if you played nazis and led a Strasserist faction, or perhaps led a pacifist faction in the US, say Lindbergh gaining power. I might play that far more than I would CK series. But I realizee that's not quite the same scale and you don't really have heredity. It'd be more party based factionalism. Still wish the politics of those games could play out in a similar way. Maybe you could have "conversions" of actors, so IDK, maybe Molotov becomes a White instead a Red.
posted by symbioid at 9:06 AM on September 5, 2020
WW2 Alternate History Sim. Work to create power circles within your given factions. Play Trotsky and get Stalin killed first. Play Bogdanov, and win the philosophical war watch Proletkult succeed and thrive with Lunacharsky and the Vpered faction moving forward.
I suppose you could do something similar if you played nazis and led a Strasserist faction, or perhaps led a pacifist faction in the US, say Lindbergh gaining power. I might play that far more than I would CK series. But I realizee that's not quite the same scale and you don't really have heredity. It'd be more party based factionalism. Still wish the politics of those games could play out in a similar way. Maybe you could have "conversions" of actors, so IDK, maybe Molotov becomes a White instead a Red.
posted by symbioid at 9:06 AM on September 5, 2020
So I did in fact play for seven straight hours yesterday, and I am enjoying it. My attempts to set up a Lesbian Viking Empire were somewhat thwarted by the fact that even if you set same-sex to accepted and reverse the gender roles, most of the religions frown on relationships outside the recognized ones (marriage and consortship/concubinage) and the official ones are all het. Has anyone found a workaround for that? I don't mind sinning as such but it is very annoying to not actually be able to have a queer romance without suffering penalties, that's the entire point of changing the ruleset around.
posted by restless_nomad at 9:08 AM on September 6, 2020
posted by restless_nomad at 9:08 AM on September 6, 2020
(Not sure about changing the religious expectations overall, but playing the various pagan religions in ck2 was definitely a bit less, uh, catholic. My favorite part was using proselytizing christians as a side income scheme: "No, you can't convert my people; have a nice stay in the dungeon, and your pope or whatever can buy you back for 50 gold, please and thank you.")
posted by kaibutsu at 11:36 AM on September 6, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by kaibutsu at 11:36 AM on September 6, 2020 [1 favorite]
Miscellanea: My Thoughts on Crusader Kings III by Bret Devereaux.
While I've never played the games myself, I found the perspective of a historian on this latest entry in the series interesting.
posted by Strutter Cane - United Planets Stilt Patrol at 1:55 AM on September 11, 2020 [1 favorite]
While I've never played the games myself, I found the perspective of a historian on this latest entry in the series interesting.
posted by Strutter Cane - United Planets Stilt Patrol at 1:55 AM on September 11, 2020 [1 favorite]
restless_nomad, it is hidden in the "Game Rules" option window (which I have only seen by going the "Play Any Ruler" route instead of taking one of the suggested rulers), but there is a setting to fix that. Sounds like you selected that but maybe it was one of the different settings?
posted by exogenous at 9:01 AM on September 14, 2020
posted by exogenous at 9:01 AM on September 14, 2020
Adamitism is the best religion and the one true faith. It has everything. Gender equality. Lay clergy. Acceptance of same sex marriage. Full frontal nudity.
It's like Fully Equal Naked Gay Medieval Feudalism.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:07 AM on September 14, 2020
It's like Fully Equal Naked Gay Medieval Feudalism.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:07 AM on September 14, 2020
Sounds like you selected that but maybe it was one of the different settings?
No, that settings makes it not a crime for the relationships to be specifically gay, but there isn't a setting to make relationships outside of marriage (or consortship/concubinage) acceptable. Those are all specific to the religions, and outside from a few small sects (Adamitism! heh) they all start off with "fornication" being shunned or criminal. Since you can't take same-sex consorts/concubines, let alone spouses, you have to start the game, either reform your religion or switch to one of the few religions that allow screwing around, and *then* begin the Fabulous Gay Empire. It's a lot of work and frankly I'm pretty bad at the game and haven't pulled it off yet.
posted by restless_nomad at 9:13 AM on September 14, 2020
No, that settings makes it not a crime for the relationships to be specifically gay, but there isn't a setting to make relationships outside of marriage (or consortship/concubinage) acceptable. Those are all specific to the religions, and outside from a few small sects (Adamitism! heh) they all start off with "fornication" being shunned or criminal. Since you can't take same-sex consorts/concubines, let alone spouses, you have to start the game, either reform your religion or switch to one of the few religions that allow screwing around, and *then* begin the Fabulous Gay Empire. It's a lot of work and frankly I'm pretty bad at the game and haven't pulled it off yet.
posted by restless_nomad at 9:13 AM on September 14, 2020
Ah, I get it. That is unfortunate - sounds the game need fixing!
posted by exogenous at 12:04 PM on September 14, 2020
posted by exogenous at 12:04 PM on September 14, 2020
« Older it really whips the llama's ass | 'the best most average songs in British music... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Most fun so far has been starting as a lowly count of Worms and working my way up to Duke of West Franconia, Upper Lorraine, and now Bavaria. Sadly that realm is gonna split unless I can find a way to scramble to a kingdom crown under the HRE. It's both very familiar if you've played CK2, but I think a lot of the core decision cycles are better implemented and more thought out.
posted by Carillon at 1:11 PM on September 4, 2020 [1 favorite]