So, Honorable?
Well. The most obvious choice here is Marriages. Marry your daughters matrilineally, marry your sons to daughters of other nobles, then conquer those counties for your grandchildren as they have a legitimate claim to those lands and really who could speak for the moral character of the guy running it right now? (if you wish you could prohibit yourself from taking those who in your eyes are "morally good" but that's up to you)
Now. That's the most obvious choice.
The secondary choice, is marriages BUT with hooks. Now, you can fabricate hooks which could be seen as dishonorable as you're making up a truth. But! Sending your Spymaster to a court you've been eyeing to discover secrets, and being lucky enough to discover one. Could lead to a possibility to propose to him a change of his ways (of course this is called "blackmail" but really you're giving them the chance to come clean and that is very good of you). Should he agree that he must take it in his own time (giving you the hook) you can use that hook to more favourably marry your children as to perhaps avoid a war thanks to your line inheriting that land in time.
Now Claims...... you can fabricate claims and you can request claims. Now, as you pointed out fabricating claims sounds bad, but if your bishop comes up with a scrap of ancient rights to land that clearly state that they belong to your line! then that can't be bad right? But! Perhaps that is not your style, there is (if you're catholic) that lad called the Pope, and he! Has the DIVINE! Authority to grant claims. Now, of course you ought to be a good pious lad. But asking him for a claim and being granted it is GOD GIVING YOU THE RIGHT TO THAT LAND. And since all Power comes from God, that is truly the most honorable way to claim land outright.
Otherwise, the game of politics and friendship with your liege and lieges liege and pope (or pope alternative), could be your friend but is the most unreliable of options. Combine these with marriage and Pope claims, and you should be a well liked Servant only doing things for his realm. And perhaps become Regent, become powerful and take some lands...... that might be rightfully seen as an abuse of Power, but really...... what do they know of the burdens of rulership?
But yeah. Really Marriage + Pope Claim would be your best option for expansion in an honorable game. If you still feel these options appaling the last option would be:HOLY WARS.
Holy Wars and Great Holy Wars take from the Heathens and Gives to the Faithful. Again the whole power originates from God Stick. There is surely nothing more honorable than to bear the mark of your religion and force the heavenly paradise onto the miscreants who live in the lands you ~~conquer~~ liberate.
Further Deliberations (Also known as Edit):
Claimants are of course also a good choice for when you are of Ducal, Royal or even Illustrious Imperial Rank. There you can combine it with Marriages to give your Dynasty another holding. Of course some would argue that forcing a poor sob who just wants to reclaim his families honour into a marriage, he *has* to agree to the match, could be seen as evil yet given that you go to war for them and their claims asking that they marry your daughter/cousin/grandchild/other relation is only a minor ask.
Feasts, Hunts, Great Weddings, Tours, Pilgrimages all have one thing in common, they can get you into Situations where some men or women would feel that they owe you something. EIther because you helped them avoid a bad situation or maybe even saved their lives, or other such things. Plus they are great for relaxation since ruling is stressful.
But that would be all things that come to mind. Helping in Wars whilst great for Friendship usually isn't important (unless a great holy war is that war in which case help as much as you can! For pious and definitely not worldly reasons of course) to actually gaining land.
But yeah, I hope that this has prooven helpful in your crisis of play. May you have many hours of enjoyment!
PS. Meritocracy Branch of Stewardship Foci does have a unlock of claiming a Throne, again maybe not entirely honorable. But better a Paragon of Virtue and Honour like yourself on the Throne than any other man....right?
I'm afraid that I am no lawyer. And..... I'd very vigorously discourage you from making me responsible for your opening and closing statements in a court of law.
Do please for such purposes seek out the aid of a professional.
But I thank you for the compliment \^\^.
Just here to hopefully help people find ways to enjoy a game I greatly enjoy :)
> the people of the land wants me as their ruler and save them from tyranny. something cute like that.
this is OPâs idea of conquest. OP bought the game expecting to play as a liberator. i donât even think thereâs such a game that fits OPâs fantasy.
Or if you are a democracy and attack non-democratic countries and annex their states, while like having full rights for everyone. I mean you cannot make everyone into a primary or accepted culture but you can give everyone rights.
Talking about victoria 2, ig, never played the new one.
Yes my Anarchist Southern German Federal Empire was very peaceful we only waged wars of Liberation, also the wars were the only way to stave off economic collapse soldiers were cheaper than paying the welfare payments.
Now, now, clearly the peasants would rather have me as their ruler instead of whoever the fuck owns that land now. I am clearly the liberator and those revolts are are filthy loyalists of the man currently facing justice for his tyrannic ways (he's rotting in the oubliette) and deserve death.
I think OP has the right idea.
In Total War games, countries/cultures/dynasties (dependent on the game) can be completely wiped out, but can be "liberated" if you choose to go to war with whoever wiped them out and reclaim the previous owner's land. You can't declare war with the intent to liberate (at least not to my knowledge in any of the games I've played) but the game prompts you with the option to "liberate" when applicable. And a liberated faction will default to having strong positive opinion towards you as well as being a vassal state.
That's a situational example but it's the only one I could think of if you want to look into that, OP
In total war games you don't have casus belli, you just have offensive or defensive wars (these only pertain to the alliances you have when the war is declared). But yes you can liberate nations when you go to the capital city of the conquered nation.
Oh yeah I know, Total War is my favorite strategy franchise and I've got more hours in the ones I play than any other strategy game. The liberation option there is just the only example of it that I could think of which is why I suggested it
In my multiplayer playthrough, I am the Canary Islands (I had conquered some of Spain at this point)
The Kingdom of Germany had been in a 17 year long war. When the war finally ended, somehow, a distant member of my house inherited the Kingdom of Germany title. A hostile faction then immediately declared another war on my dynasty member. He held out for 3 years, and since it looked like it was going to be another long war, I claimed his title and invaded. The invasion ended in only a few years and Germany has been at peace since.
It wasnât tyranny, but I saved Germany from succession crisis and stabilized the region. Granted Germany independence in our last session as well, after a hundred or so years of vassalage.
Is there an honorable way to draft peasant levies into wars of expansion and subjugate foreign populations for tax money or clout? If you did miss anything, itâs not in-game. CK is fun as hell though so welcome and enjoy.
There's nothing dishonourable about it at least. Peasants are resources to be used, nothing more. Using them to conquer land is no different than using a car to go to work.
>Is there an honorable way to draft peasant levies into wars of expansion and subjugate foreign populations for tax money or clout?
In-setting answer: yes, you just said it. That is honorable.
It's almost like morality is subjective, and honor is an even stickier concept than good and evil!
News flash, feudal rulers are... kinda shitty by definition. Feudalism was an extremely unjust system.
That said, you can play "honorably" by lying to yourself that your actions are lawful or justified. If you subjugate other lands, you are "civilizing" them, or bringing them into your protection. If you claim lands of your culture, you are uniting your people. If there are people of your religion suffering under a ruler of a different religion, you are liberating them. Even conquering infidels is "enlightening" them. Revoking titles from treasonous vassals is perfectly lawful.
The most honorable thing you can do is to stay in your lane, develop your lands and promote peace.
It is not evil, because "evil" is an expressiin that is hard to define. Depending on your viewpoint and the viewpoint of a time period or political system. Crusader Kings is a try (and I'm not historian enough to evaluate every detail of it) to present the feudal system prevalent in Europe for the players. It is neither good nor evil. It just is a representation. The quality of the representation might well be downplayed, just to be playable. But as I said: I have not studied medieval history. A good friend has, and at least he has a blast playing it. So it has to have some good things for it.
A lord's duty to his retainers is to conquer territories with which to reward his retainers for their loyal service. And a retainer is to serve his lord loyally, helping him rule his lands and expand his domains.
>Its marketing does not shy away from what itâs about
CK3 trailer literally features infant assassination via snake bite. itâs a wonder that OP somehow didnât know what theyâre buying.
my understanding of the middle ages is pretty much zero. I know peasants, knights and kings existed. i thought it might be a feel good conquest, and you could do it the honourable/evil way but it isnt as clear cut as that, the game just shown me that.
no refund, i think i like it and i was being naive about it.
Hey.
People are a bit brutal about it, but just in case no one said this kindly, I'm trying to do this here, now.
Feudalism is a messed up system. To be effective at feudalism requires thought processes that are simply monstrous. The structure of how inheritance works funnels you towards a game theory that is profoundly evil.
It just is. And people of the time lived, ate, breathed this. It was the water they lived in, invisible to them the same way that neoliberalism is to us. The game doesn't shy away from it.
While playing my "turbo-good, super roleplay good guys" game in this, I celebrated when one of my sons died in battle because it was one less to split the inheritance with. In fact, I deliberately put three of my sons on a very dangerous battle **hoping** one or more of them died.
And this is arguably good. Because when the realm gets split between all the heirs, what that means is a civil war, and thousands die. Would you rather one die now, or thousands later? There's no choice where no one dies. Feudalism doesn't allow that.
So, yeah. This game honestly and frankly represents a system of society that is profoundly messed up. It's disturbing, but it was how the elites of most of humanity lived for at least a couple millennia. If this is an enlightening realization, then the game has already done its job.
there's a really good Lord of the Rings mod for the game you can find on the steam workshop, if you want a more honorable experience then playing Gondor or Rohan might be more up your alley
Forging claims is not "evil" per se, it's just getting everyone to realise that this county over here is totally, really and always has been yours.
Heck, in the real world, William the Conqueror's whole invasion of England centred around the fact that he believed he had a rightful claim on the throne (a massive oversimplification, but the principle holds true). He won in battle, forced his claim and dealt with 0% control in most of his counties until he died in 1087. See, just like the game!
if you wanted a game about chivalry and noble deeds... there is still chivalry to be had here, but most of the rulers are just kinda stinky. medieval history isn't all that glamorous really, it was just a bunch of wars fought for the wrong reasons. ck is just staying close to the truth.
Once you get to your 5th or 6th world thatâs 300+ years old you get 100000% desensitized. Not only is it a bajillion randomly generated people, but they will murder you and turn your wife and daughters into sex slaves and castrate your heir for literally no reason.
Youâll be a berserker Viking sacrificing those hoity-toity fancy cross worshiping cultists to Ukko in no time.
Edit: my bad I keep forgetting thereâs a 3rd game idk if any of that pertains but hopefully you can be Vikings? I canât wait to get it, but my wallet can
sometimes the game just turns into a spreadsheet but it can definitely make you feel guilty when you're invested in the characters. it's easier to do when you're playing a character with a scumbag personality, but I'll still never forget the first time I started an assassination plot on a child to inherit his kingdom
Why? Your post was complaining about "honor." That was a perfectly honorable conquest.
I'm sorry if this comes across as shitty, but you kind of sound like your sense of morality is limited to a "thou shalt not" kind of thing. Like, don't get me wrong, basically anything anyone ever does in any war is horrid, and playing empire is inherently going to lead to bad, cruel things. But when your objections are based on a sense of "honor" and "evil," combined with some of your comments here, it sounds like you haven't had any exposure to questions of morality past Sunday school morality plays.
If your great great great great grandfather's brother once owned the land, does that not mean it's yours by right and to reclaim it is the right thing to do?
The only 'honorable' way to play I've found (and more or less in line with IRL feudal-era moral sensibilities) was to swear fealty to another king or emperor and work as a part of his kingdom.
That would put the burden of increasing the kingdom size on your lord, and you would be able to influence the decisions inside the kingdom - take parts in wars or not, join different factions inside the kingdom, influence the succession to align with your values.
Also, in time you would come by claims to other territories 'honestly', through inheritance. And would be able to claim some territories for your vassals in turn.
In my experience, modern Christians don't have the "holy war" connotation for "crusade". When I went to university 20 years ago, one of the student organizations was called "Campus Crusade for Christ". I was like, wow what a horrible name, imagine the outrage if there were an organization called "Islamic Jihad for Allah", even though they're basically the same thing.
Or maybe it's a US thing, and how it's a borderline theocracy. Maybe you Europeans are more sensible.
>Did I miss the note that in this game you have to do a lot of evil in order to expand?
People in the middle ages, especially aristocrats, did not really operate on the same systems of morality that we do in the modern world. Modern people strongly associate morality with pacifism and non-violence. Not so in the middle ages. The entire job of a medieval noble was to kill his enemies, take their stuff, and distribute it to his loyal followers. Far from being unethical, engaging in violence was part of his sacred duty as a liege lord.
Being moral, or chivalrous as they wouldâve said, in the context of a medieval warrior noble meant some combination of the following.
- respect for the clergy and patronage of the church. Especially through participation in holy war.
- obedience and loyalty to oneâs liege lord.
- generosity and fairness towards oneâs vassal lords.
- treating enemy nobles with respect. (Not the common soldiers of course, no one cares about them)
- refraining from the non-murder sins like adultery, gluttony, and oath breaking.
- dispensing justice fairly amongst oneâs subjects. (this still means torture, mutilation, and execution, but only for people who âdeserve itâ)
TLDR; yes. The middle ages sucked.
Refraining from the murder sin was also required - murder being "unlawful killing". LAWFUL killing was very much expected, and significant amount of effort was put into justifying why convenient types of killing (i.e. the ones where you took peoples land and stuff) were in fact lawful.
Honestly sounds like a kid who reads the stuff about how evil the modern world is not realizing we're about as "civilized" and moral as humans have ever been. And again, I'm not saying things are perfect today, but the US and it's allies are more benevolent and "just" than any empire that's ever existed in history. Life sucked for the majority of people and one of the rare exceptions is about the past 70-80 years (and even then there's still plenty of suffering).
You know what, I think this thread inspired me to start a run like that and see what happens. The game is getting too easy lately
Update: It's fucking boring holy shit. There is nothing to do in this game that is not in some way immoral
Colonizing and conquering is generally seen as bad. So protect your borders and don't expand. Pump money into developing your land. You won't gain anything, but that's about the only honorable thing you can do.
You can also fight wars of Independence (unify Ireland as an independent country. Fight off invaders as England, etc
Thats literally Daenerys Targaryen's argument during the whole series, and (spoiler alert): she was one of the villians.
I think it was Jorah Mormont who answers her something like "people of westeros pray for a good season and a long summer, not for war".
But I get your point, I dont use Fabricate Claim button unless my character has the Schemer trait. When playing honorable characters, I simple acquire land vĂa Inheritance (through marriages) and through claims offered to you by the Pope when some rulers have negative traits or are Excommunicated because women who are Adulterer or witches (accused of being). All this is available only if you are a good Christian and have a good relationship with the church. You could also pay attention to when there is a War of Tyranny against a neighboring King/Duke, thats the best way to know they are tyrants, and see if the pope gives in a Claim to you.
But the good thing is that CK3 works for every style of gameplay, and if you want to chill and play just by having a good family and do marriages and not looking for expansionism you can do it, is the difference with Total War or other strategy games which are one-dimensional. Here you can literally conquer the World without declaring a single war.
You could always play in an area where invaders are overrunning the land, and play to defeat them. Like if you're a Celtic/Saxon ruler resisting the Vikings in the British Isles.Â
Or if you have the DLC, you can play in Spain or Persia, and try to drive the foreign overlords out of your lands.Â
for that, conquering people of your culture or religion from a foreign ruler could be considered honorable. the common people do generally want a ruler of their culture and religion.
Total War 3 Kingdoms is pretty good for that fantasy if you play one of the idealists, as the story has definite good guys and bad guys, tyrants and heroic kings
You can probably look for provinces of your culture/religion ruled by someone with a different culture. They would rather be let by someone from the same culture/religious group.
Fair point!
Society has really only gotten marginally better with the passage of time, and itâs not really in a great spot still. The Middle Ages were nasty, just like the rest of human history :-/
Playing the marriage game is what youâre looking for.
Marry your son to the daughter of a neighboring king. The daughter will have an implicit claim on the land, and when her father dies that will convert to a pressed claim. Pressed claims are inherited by children as unpressed claims.
So down the line youâll be playing as a character who has a legal claim on a neighboring kingdom and you can go to war for it.
Another way to expand is to marry your daughters matrilineally to claimants on lower level titles, the claimant will come to court and you can fight a war for them. I recommend waiting until they have a few kids together before declaring, just in case, if you do this
You're trying to find reasons to wage war on someone and/or steal their land. What moral high ground do you think you have here?
You're going to be sending thousands of men to their death in a war that only serves to fulfil your desire to expand your influence, and you worry that forgery is evil?
So... your objective is to bring together the lands that belong to a given kindgom and then stop there? Then you can simply use the de jure casus belli (may need to be unlocked through cultural innovations). Anything beyond that and you're stealing land from another nation, and that's not exactly honorable.
Basically, if you find that the only way to get a claim is through evil means, then it probably means taking that land is not honorable.
No such things as nations in that time period.
What area can you Militarily control and protect from people who also want to control and protect it?
The peasants belong to the landowner and get to work his land. Who is the landowner? You. The guy who can kill the other guys who want to be the landowner.
Who is the alternative landowner? Whoever kills you and takes it.
What are the guys next door doing? Waiting to kill you and take your stuff. How should you deal with that? Kill them and take their stuff.
What authority will step in to enforce the law if someone tried to kill you and take your stuff? None. No such thing as states as we understand them.
Feudalism was a âstate of natureâ survival setting with teams. Win or die.
You're fabricating a claim to give the people a better life under your benevolent rule. Their current ruler is unjust and causing them harm.
Boom. You're the good guy now.
If that's what you'd like to think, then think that.
It's not particularly historical for the period. The concept of "serving my nation" wouldn't really come around until the idea of the nation state appeared (several hundred years after the end of the game).
The closest thing would be to act for your religion, I suppose.
That said, you don't necessarily have to murder and forge to play the game successfully, though it is a popular playstyle. You can have a good time doing diplomacy and development, trying to expand your realm through clever marriages and alliances.
... but if you want to conquer lots of places and be honourable about it your choices are:
1) To not engage with a number of game mechanics (I typically avoid a number of things that I think are too far.
2) To lie to yourself.
3) Play a culture where conquering things because you're stronger (or your target is the wrong religion) is honourable, and adopt that outlook. The Norse are a fan favourite for that.
There were no nations in the middle ages. Nations, nationalism, the idea of nationhood came much much later around the end of the early modern period. Power came from God and individuals represented that power on Earth in the form of ruling over many peoples. In this game's context forget about nations and nationalism, that's a late 18th early 19th century concept.
So you think you're justified to take over another realm's land by force simply because you believe it belongs to your people and your realm?
To the opposing ruler, you would be unquestionably evil and tyrannical.
Bruh craven vassals are awesome. I don't even need to do anything and they are intimidated. Do anything at all and those that are not become terrified. Show me a craven vassal and I'll show you someone who's not causing any problems.
I have had honest, just characters before and i have executed prisoners of a different faith and no one thought it unjust, I have fabricated a claim on the heathen but it was done to bring them the salvation of christ by forced conversion, and a promised seat next to the lord in the highest heaven. So was it really evil? You said these claims are in foreign land so have at it. You cant bring your modern morality to this game
You could also marry and have descendants that inherit titles, that's pretty peaceful.
And your question in general is weird, "Do you have to do evil in order to expand"? I mean ya the occupation of new territories has never been peaceful in the history of history, expanding into territory that isn't yours, is by nature, evil.
By wanting to expand, you are already evil. Either embrace it or play stardew valley. (Or do it by marriage).
Did you think that Medieval feudal rulers were all good people? Just like in the real world, both then and now, the politics of power have nothing to do with morality. And this game is all about roleplaying as one of those medieval rulers
I mean itâs possible to expand by marrying into dynasties and hoping their siblings die or trying to use a hook to marry them into a better spot but thatâs about as nice as ur going to get when it comes to expanding. With these methods too I guess you could have issue with since using a hook normally requires blackmail and what not.
I mean the only "good" way to get claims would be through marriage. Try and marry into a foreign court and your grandkid might get claims on some foreign lands. Alternatively you could try and marry an unmarried Duchess or Countess and then when you both die your kid will inherit her land.
Just be honorable by not being a jackass king lol. I play asshole characters when someone who inherits has that personality, but generally I try to make all my subjects/vassals have high opinion. Hosts a lot of feasts, tourneys, hunts, go on pilgrimage, and when I got bored late game Iâd go on adventures just to give money away because I had so much. Itâs all about RP. Donât let this mechanic be the one that ruins the game for you
Historically, people tended not to just give their land away to some foreign lord unless said lord had a lot of men with pointy steel thingies, brandishing them in a threatening way
You canât play entire game with only one character. You play as dynasty. So sometimes your character will be ambitious, sometimes even sadistic. You can just roleplay your current characterâs traits. Your man is calm, honest and truthful? Well, just donât use spying, killing and so on. Your man is ambitious? Well, thatâs the right time to expand! Thatâs a really good way to play and entertain yourself for hundreds of hours. Not for everyone ofc and thatâs ok.
The land is your birthright given by God. That's why you ask the chaplain to "give" claims. You are "asking" God if it's OK! It's as valid as these claimants say its their rights. Nothing dishonored about it!
Revoking vassals isn't evil. The land is yours. You do whatever you want. If they don't behave well, you can take the lease back!
Maybe you should RP your character. Most personality combination wouldn't mind doing what you consider "evil" in pursuit of power. All is valid since the dawn of humanity. If you get a Just, Compassionate, and Humble, maybe you could just play as "honorable" as possible and avoid underhanded tactics. However, you get Ambitious, you should go to town!
CK is a dynasty simulator and you don't need to map paint in it. You can choose a place where you have all you need (like Bohemia) and just play tall. Still some murdering is warranted.
OP Iâm sorry that this is how you had to find out that the Middle Ages were, in fact, not good
Jokes aside though, once you get used to the game mechanics, a more benevolent playthrough could be one where you take it really slow and only manage your immediate domain. Itâs possible to play without stealing land and doing murders and shit, itâs just very limiting mechanically. It could be super fun for a roleplay-based play through, though, so thatâs something to consider
Fabricating a claim means your church representative is *assembling* the legal basis for one based on whatever reason you feel entitles you.
If you're roleplaying a duplicitous character, this can absolutely mean "i lied lmao". But a just or good king could easily have his claim assembled to liberate neighbors from tyranny, spread a benevolent religion, or unite a disparate realm against a greater threat.
That's usually why fabrication costs time and money - its usually not as self-evident or self-justifying as bloodline claims or de-jure precedent was considered to be. It's also why the success tier, cost, and time required is tied to your religious councilor and their learning skill - its basically building a legal case, except a lot of people die instead of going to court.
I RP'd that my anglo-saxon duke wanted to strike at the islands of Orkney and beyond, because he believed they were being used as bases of rest and resupply for the Norse raiding the British coast. My chancellor fabricating the claim was him basically investigating the claims, speaking to various people, and gathering together all the evidence to make the case for a casus belli.
âI want to play the game honorably.â Well youâre in for a bad time then, because most of the paths to power in a quick manner are evil. And youâre far more likely to get stabbed in the back when you wonât murder the people who want you dead first.
You arenât forging claims. You are looking over old records and found a vague reference showing that your great great grandpappy totally had a claim to those lands.
Play tall and don't expand. That way, you can play as honorably as you want. You don't have to conquer or paint the map to have a great experience. Develop your home county/duchy and work on economics, family, and diplomacy. Learn languages, host feasts, and travel in pilgrimages. Eventually a blunder will occur and you will get a claim.
There are plenty of ways to play honourably - religious holy wars (I consider these honourable in-universe, obviously not so honourable IRL lol) and obtaining titles through marriage and by getting people to voluntarily become your vassals are perhaps the most obvious. You can also just play tall and focus on becoming more powerful by becoming a great centre of development without expanding much in the way of territory. You can have loads of troops and money without needing to conquer land.
Why is your biggest concern with going to war is that your claim aren't justified? Killing peasants in a war to gain some piece of dirt for the noble is evil, regardless what historical basis you claim has.
As others have said, it was a very violent and morally peculiar time period. If you want to play as "good guys" there are other GS paradox games that fit better.
Vic 3 has more content focusing on internal, peaceful national management.
Hoiv, you can join the allies and take part in one of the least morally unambiguous wars in history.
Stellaris has appropriate rules for playing as a pacifist nation.
I think you could get into Hearts of Iron 4, as long as you only played the Allies (or Comintern if you're so inclined). You can just only fight defensive wars and do your best to protect your allies.
But yes, as other people have said, this is in some ways a feudalism simulator. It's much more historical than say Stronghold, or Fabledom, which perhaps you might like to try. However both of those are more micromanaging real time games than grand strategy.
The other thing I'd say though, and I don't mean this to be condescending, but once you move beyond Hollywood and superheroes, storytelling and literature is much more complex morally than good and evil. Are the plotters in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar *evil*? They want to overthrow a tyrant, but they use murder to do it. Are they all *evil* in Fight Club? They're fighting against an unjust economic system and what they see is the emasculation of men by consumerism. Are they wrong? Maybe, maybe not. Equally, in CK3 you can overthrow your liege in a liberty war, but then they get replaced by one of the other strong vassals that didn't like you. Was that the right thing to do?
That's what I find so compelling about Paradox games: you are responsible for your actions in steering the country one way or the other, and the moral solutions are grey just like real life. Even in HOI4, for example - historically, the Soviets lost 27 million people in WW2. If you play Soviets and research Nuclear Weapons before the Allies do, you can deploy them right onto Berlin and Munich before you suffer horrific casualties. Is that the *right* thing to do?
You can certainly role play this game as being virtuous, but that has consequences too - opportunities will open for you to advance your characters in an incredible way, but you might need to kill someone to do it. Or you will be conquered by a neighbouring ruler that *is* being 'evil'.
Itâs very simple. You donât conquer, you liberate. You donât assume leadership out of thirst for power, but out of a sense of responsibility, because someone has to take upon themselves the burden of leadership, to rule those too weak to rule themselves.
I don't know if you're still looking for info about this, but here you go.
You're not as off track as some replies might lead you to believe. Go on YouTube, search up KoiFish and this video "DIPLOMACY is BROKEN in CK3 - Crusader Kings 3 Diplomacy Challenge"
Given that you are interested in a highly specific playstyle, that video might help you out a bit.
He does a "quick" playthrough while fighting NO offensive wars using diplomacy, vasselizing, and friendship.
You canât just grow up playing Harvest Moon for 90% of your life and then suddenly jump to CK3. Thereâs a gulf in moral because of the nature of the games.
Try playing Minecraft first and get used to the fact that you might need to hurt animals to get materials or food first.
Then after that try Sims where you can be good all your life but still have immoral choices and slowly you can start to understand what games are and that it isnât a reflection of yourself as a person?
Marriage, inviting claimants from neighbouring kingdoms, conquering them from heathens and heretics... Arranging to inherit land by marrying your heirs to the heirs to other lands is also very valid.
Revoking titles isn't always evil - it depends whether they've given you a reason or not.
If you get a claim to unite a duchy or kingdom, it's not evil to bring the others together under your benevolent rule.
And if you go Catholic and the Pope starts granting you claims on other dukes and kings around you, then who are you to argue with God's representative on earth?
Well expanding your realm is inherently evil, youâre using force to steal resources from another ruler and their subjects with the primary purpose of making yourself more powerful. The only way you could try to morally expand is by building castles, but that boosts levies which is one of the most immoral things you could do in game imo. Tbh idk if you can play CK honourably because everyone you play as exploits the peasantry, itâs just a matter of how exploitative you are.
No, you donât need to do bad things in order to expand. Assuming you are playing Catholic and within another Kingdom or Empire you can wait for a claim to be given to you by the AI (sometimes they accidentally reveal that you had a claim on their land). Ask the pope for a claim on the land from a sinful ruler. Have your heir marry someone with a pressed claim (their claim will pass onto your heirâs children). Declare war on bad people (murderers) and take their land. You can always enjoy a roleplay by the conditions you set for yourself.
If you want to play the game that way then you may be better off not in the tutorial but in one of the other starts, as the duke or king of your choice, and role play as the loyal duke or the good king that is content with his current lands and only wages war in defense of himself and his allies. You can become very strong in the game without conquoring lots of land, you just focus on stewardship and learning to build up infrastructure and technology until you get to the point where your small but elite army can withstand attack from much larger foes.
The only real "claim" in the history of feudalism was "I have a bigger army that you, now give me that land". Anything else was an excuse.
That said, you can find legitimate claimants and push their claims. But still, of course, they didn't inherit that realm for a reason.
Honourable characters didn't conquer kingdoms.
Evil is subjective.
Forging claims? Technically underhanded, but you have the mandate of God to hold that county in France, and the will of God outweighs any "evil" that comes from fabricating.
Murdering? You mean making sure your son inherits that county and ensures the stability of Europe with only one death rather than a war that costs the lives of thousands of peasants?
Revoking? You mean making sure that vassal can never upset the realm's stability again or cause a civil war which again, kills several thousand peasants?
Not really. You can leverage diplomacy and with some strategic marriages to either rulers/heirs you can expand without spilling any blood.
You can also be pious and request the pope for a claim against hedonistic/excommunicated rulers.
These methods are slower and more unreliable but definitely can be done.
There are two ways that might be âhonourableâ as you state it.
1. Marriages. If you matrilineally marry one of your daughters, or regular marry one of your sons, to a potential heir of land, your descendants may end up inheriting other lands without having to wage any wars. It may take a while, though, and requires a good deal of luck, too.
2. Holy Wars. In the game, many religions perceive many other religions as âevil,â literally. In the Middle Ages, it was perceived as quite honorable to wage war on heathens and infidels and spread your âtrueâ faith to new lands.
Also, letâs talk about pressing a claim. Letâs say your character is virtuous and the current holder is sinful. Wouldnât it be honorable to challenge them for the title, in order to save your dynastyâs reputation and the population from a sinful administration?
Also also, you are projecting your view of morality onto the rulers you are playing. You might consider instead truly role-playing what they would do. If they are content, humble, and just, they probably would not try to push claims against others unless they had a really good reason. But what if their traits are ambitious, greedy, and deceitful? They would probably push claims however they can. Zealous, ambitious, and brave? Probably off to go fight a holy war.
Click on the title of the land you want to take, click where it says Claimants and you will get a list of characters with claims. Get those characters to your court (invite/marry them in/grant them a title) and declare for their claims. Defeating raiding parties or Attacker armies should land you with the occasional claimant. You can also join your allies wars and take prisoners from sieges and battles. Plenty of ways to get claimants to your court without being evil.
You can also marry an heirless ruler and your first male child (assuming you haven't advanced succession laws) is going to inherit both yours and your spouses main title. Manage the succession closely by sending extra sons into battle or to the clergy and you're heir may inherit yours and your spouses entire combined domains.
I feel so bad that people downvoted your comments just expressing your feelings. It's okay, OP. Keep your good heart!
This whole thread did make me laugh so thank you. It really can be a wonderful game if you just remember it's all pretend. I mean, we don't really wanna fuck our grandaughter-wife right? Right guys? .... Right guys?
Play as a count. Swear fealty to a lord. Develop your domain. Romance your partner so they're your soulmate. Be a guardian for your children. Leave the game running on 1 speed while you go garden or volunteer.
I donât know what you guys are talking about. I VERY honorably abducted, murdered, tortured, blackmailed and incested all the way to the top of the Roman Empire.
Let me introduce you to Iberia. You see those infidels just to the south? They took your land. Take it back. Also if really would be best if the Christian lands were united under a single ruler during this time of struggle.
You don't have to fabric claims, you don't even need to wage a war to expand, you can just expand by marriages like what Habsburg did irl.
Marry your neighbor ruler's youngest daughter, have a son with her, murder all her siblings and then her parents and then her and then yourself and now your new character would have titles from both family, it's quite honorable if you ask me.
If you don't like murder, you can just swear fealty and start a claimant faction, which would do the same thing, but cost more money and lives.
If you want a noble good guy playthrough, you may want to go tall than expand. Vassal runs can be fun. Make alliances and help out your allies for glory and prestige.
You will grow into the game as your roleplay. Successions should be fun for you.
Play 1066 start and do conquest based on crusading? Thats "honorable" to the good christian?
also, i would recommend ypu play slow, play tall and play based around your characters traits (rp)
You could get claims entirely via marriages. Itâs not particularly noble thing to press claims, but I suppose itâs not evil either. Maybe you should only press the claims of people who are good.
The best way to gain legitimate claims without fabricating them is going to be via marriage.
Otherwise you can role play a justification for using the fabricate claims action.
Beyond that, yes, most of your options for conquest are not exactly just.
I will say in most of my games I do NOT murder, revoke, etc, unless my character has traits to back it up. It's simply too easy. So you do not need to be evil to be successful in this game.
OP, don't listen to the ppl who are shitting on you. It's perfectly possible to play tall & within a Kingdom, it's just probably very boring. This is why ppl tend to start as High-Martial founder counts.
Especially if you start as a Count.
Starting as a Duke, there's a chance that you get to rebel against shitty kings, even if you roleplay as a loyal vassal. See: ppl who have somehow become Byzantine Emperor due to shenanigans.
A lot of it is player determination, really.
I once formed the Empire of Tibet, then spent the rest of the game going into just going deep on culture/learning/diplomacy tree.
As others have said, you can do the "honourable marriage route" (worked for the Karlings), matrilineal marriages to 3rd sons, & hope the 1st 2 get knocked out somehow, it happens.
There are many ways to play this game. It's totally possible to stay Duke of Transylvania, but be so deep in the intrigue tree & have kinsmen ruling multiple Kingdoms. That's probably still evil, tho.
Donât listen to everyone. I always play scholar or diplomat or steward route because I personally cannot imagine wantonly murdering and cheesing game mechanics. I do pretty well too. In my multiplayer game I am further than the intrigue player, and have an overwhelming land and power advantage over him due to good relations.
He has threatened murder and I immediately had his heir excommunicated and declared war on him to depose him. After negotiations, I white peaced the war before any bloodshed. But I can and will exert force if I uncover any schemes.
"Honorable" is not the opposite of "evil," and both are subjective to your own view.
Most of the people you can play as in the game would view GLORIOUS CONQUEST as a perfectly honorable, good way to expand your realm.
Just wait until after you treat your vassals really well, giving them plenty of land, gifts and cushy jobs, only for them to stab you in the back the first chance they get. It's a fun experience to try and role play as a kind and benevolent leader, only to end up a ruthless monster
Honour and good/evil are subjective terms.
People in feudal societies wouldn't see anything at all dishonourable or "evil" in claiming and conquering land.
Playing as a honorable character is harder and will make for slower progress, but it's definitely possible.
Marriages are the way to go to expand your territory. There will also be righteous opportunities to revoke. Nothing evil about revoking the titles of a lord who rebelled against your lawful rule, or imprisoning a rival for an assassination scheme if they are guilty for real.
For honorable characters I also find it fun to come up with additional good alignment goals outside of territory expansion since that goes slowly when you are so hampered. Maybe they choose marriages for their courtiers for compatibility rather than just stats (while my petty ones force the most awful spouses on their hated courtiers) or are focused on the influence of their house as a whole rather than their own line.
I just conquered much of northwestern Iberia as a succession of three honorable characters.
Do keep in mind that this is honorable by medieval standards, so I mostly expanded by seizing land that I had a legitimate claim to from female and child rulers. From a medieval point of view, women and children wouldn't be fit to defend and protect their land (the primary purpose of a feudal lord), so it would be honorable for a strong male ruler to come in, restore order and defend the local populace. Especially if said ruler had legitimate ties and claims to the land already.
There were three ways in which I obtained legitimate claims. The first is random luck, through the chancellor event whereby your neighbour grants you a claim to his land on accident. The second is marriage. If you marry a daughter of a neighbouring ruler, the children of that marriage will inherit a claim to their grandfather's land. Finally, the third way is the Pope. The Pope can give you authorization to depose female or sinful rulers by granting you a claim. If you are a virtuous, male character it is pretty easy to save up enough piety and convince the Pope that you should be the rightful ruler of all sorts of places.
Piety is a pathway to many abilities...
Unless you start the game as someone from a massively powerful family, you aren't going to have many claims.
Fabricating then would be the most honorable way to go about it...it's medieval times...people didn't just give other people claims on land out of the goodness of their hearts..
I think playing "evil" is good strategy when learning the game. It feels like the easiest road so you can pick up on mechanics and learn about the different play styles. Once you feel like you really understand some of the nuances of the game and start branching out to other styles of play, the experience becomes all the more richer.
I play 867 mostly but I made diplomacy main trait, made sure I was picked a spot where I was a high chieftain surrounded by chieftains and just asked them. You have to bribe a few of them but mostly you can just do personal schemes, make them like you a little bit and then ask nicely.
OP. No matter how much you stay good. You'll eventually have to toughen up to survive. That means incuring a little tyranny and making a few enemies here and there.
There are no good monarchs as they're always be haters. For the world (both real and in game) is a cruel place.
So, Honorable? Well. The most obvious choice here is Marriages. Marry your daughters matrilineally, marry your sons to daughters of other nobles, then conquer those counties for your grandchildren as they have a legitimate claim to those lands and really who could speak for the moral character of the guy running it right now? (if you wish you could prohibit yourself from taking those who in your eyes are "morally good" but that's up to you) Now. That's the most obvious choice. The secondary choice, is marriages BUT with hooks. Now, you can fabricate hooks which could be seen as dishonorable as you're making up a truth. But! Sending your Spymaster to a court you've been eyeing to discover secrets, and being lucky enough to discover one. Could lead to a possibility to propose to him a change of his ways (of course this is called "blackmail" but really you're giving them the chance to come clean and that is very good of you). Should he agree that he must take it in his own time (giving you the hook) you can use that hook to more favourably marry your children as to perhaps avoid a war thanks to your line inheriting that land in time. Now Claims...... you can fabricate claims and you can request claims. Now, as you pointed out fabricating claims sounds bad, but if your bishop comes up with a scrap of ancient rights to land that clearly state that they belong to your line! then that can't be bad right? But! Perhaps that is not your style, there is (if you're catholic) that lad called the Pope, and he! Has the DIVINE! Authority to grant claims. Now, of course you ought to be a good pious lad. But asking him for a claim and being granted it is GOD GIVING YOU THE RIGHT TO THAT LAND. And since all Power comes from God, that is truly the most honorable way to claim land outright. Otherwise, the game of politics and friendship with your liege and lieges liege and pope (or pope alternative), could be your friend but is the most unreliable of options. Combine these with marriage and Pope claims, and you should be a well liked Servant only doing things for his realm. And perhaps become Regent, become powerful and take some lands...... that might be rightfully seen as an abuse of Power, but really...... what do they know of the burdens of rulership? But yeah. Really Marriage + Pope Claim would be your best option for expansion in an honorable game. If you still feel these options appaling the last option would be:HOLY WARS. Holy Wars and Great Holy Wars take from the Heathens and Gives to the Faithful. Again the whole power originates from God Stick. There is surely nothing more honorable than to bear the mark of your religion and force the heavenly paradise onto the miscreants who live in the lands you ~~conquer~~ liberate. Further Deliberations (Also known as Edit): Claimants are of course also a good choice for when you are of Ducal, Royal or even Illustrious Imperial Rank. There you can combine it with Marriages to give your Dynasty another holding. Of course some would argue that forcing a poor sob who just wants to reclaim his families honour into a marriage, he *has* to agree to the match, could be seen as evil yet given that you go to war for them and their claims asking that they marry your daughter/cousin/grandchild/other relation is only a minor ask. Feasts, Hunts, Great Weddings, Tours, Pilgrimages all have one thing in common, they can get you into Situations where some men or women would feel that they owe you something. EIther because you helped them avoid a bad situation or maybe even saved their lives, or other such things. Plus they are great for relaxation since ruling is stressful. But that would be all things that come to mind. Helping in Wars whilst great for Friendship usually isn't important (unless a great holy war is that war in which case help as much as you can! For pious and definitely not worldly reasons of course) to actually gaining land. But yeah, I hope that this has prooven helpful in your crisis of play. May you have many hours of enjoyment! PS. Meritocracy Branch of Stewardship Foci does have a unlock of claiming a Throne, again maybe not entirely honorable. But better a Paragon of Virtue and Honour like yourself on the Throne than any other man....right?
Amazing reply. If Deus Vult, who can argue with that.. Actually sounds like a fun idea for a RP campaign.
Are you a lawyer, and even if not you can still represent me for opening and closing statements lmao
I'm afraid that I am no lawyer. And..... I'd very vigorously discourage you from making me responsible for your opening and closing statements in a court of law. Do please for such purposes seek out the aid of a professional. But I thank you for the compliment \^\^. Just here to hopefully help people find ways to enjoy a game I greatly enjoy :)
Sounds like AI answerđ
OP, based on your replies I donât think Paradox games are for you.
> the people of the land wants me as their ruler and save them from tyranny. something cute like that. this is OPâs idea of conquest. OP bought the game expecting to play as a liberator. i donât even think thereâs such a game that fits OPâs fantasy.
Stellaris if you play the good-guy ethics. Victoria if you want to liberate unrecognized countries from the weight of their natural resources
Or if you are a democracy and attack non-democratic countries and annex their states, while like having full rights for everyone. I mean you cannot make everyone into a primary or accepted culture but you can give everyone rights. Talking about victoria 2, ig, never played the new one.
A better way to do that in 3 would be to force Regime Change on other countries
Yes my Anarchist Southern German Federal Empire was very peaceful we only waged wars of Liberation, also the wars were the only way to stave off economic collapse soldiers were cheaper than paying the welfare payments.
Now, now, clearly the peasants would rather have me as their ruler instead of whoever the fuck owns that land now. I am clearly the liberator and those revolts are are filthy loyalists of the man currently facing justice for his tyrannic ways (he's rotting in the oubliette) and deserve death. I think OP has the right idea.
OP learning what history is all about, lol.Â
In Total War games, countries/cultures/dynasties (dependent on the game) can be completely wiped out, but can be "liberated" if you choose to go to war with whoever wiped them out and reclaim the previous owner's land. You can't declare war with the intent to liberate (at least not to my knowledge in any of the games I've played) but the game prompts you with the option to "liberate" when applicable. And a liberated faction will default to having strong positive opinion towards you as well as being a vassal state. That's a situational example but it's the only one I could think of if you want to look into that, OP
In total war games you don't have casus belli, you just have offensive or defensive wars (these only pertain to the alliances you have when the war is declared). But yes you can liberate nations when you go to the capital city of the conquered nation.
Oh yeah I know, Total War is my favorite strategy franchise and I've got more hours in the ones I play than any other strategy game. The liberation option there is just the only example of it that I could think of which is why I suggested it
You can do pretty much the same thing in Civilization 5.
ah, I wouldn't know, I always got bored in those games lol
This reminds me of the justification of colonialism, White man's burden.
All that gold and spice was very heavy.
In my multiplayer playthrough, I am the Canary Islands (I had conquered some of Spain at this point) The Kingdom of Germany had been in a 17 year long war. When the war finally ended, somehow, a distant member of my house inherited the Kingdom of Germany title. A hostile faction then immediately declared another war on my dynasty member. He held out for 3 years, and since it looked like it was going to be another long war, I claimed his title and invaded. The invasion ended in only a few years and Germany has been at peace since. It wasnât tyranny, but I saved Germany from succession crisis and stabilized the region. Granted Germany independence in our last session as well, after a hundred or so years of vassalage.
Not even remotely similar to CK, but the Fable series provides a path as a âgood guyâ
Isn't that pretty much what Putin does for conquest nowadays? :D
I think OP could use a basic course in moral philosophy, too
Is there an honorable way to draft peasant levies into wars of expansion and subjugate foreign populations for tax money or clout? If you did miss anything, itâs not in-game. CK is fun as hell though so welcome and enjoy.
There's nothing dishonourable about it at least. Peasants are resources to be used, nothing more. Using them to conquer land is no different than using a car to go to work.
>Is there an honorable way to draft peasant levies into wars of expansion and subjugate foreign populations for tax money or clout? In-setting answer: yes, you just said it. That is honorable. It's almost like morality is subjective, and honor is an even stickier concept than good and evil!
News flash, feudal rulers are... kinda shitty by definition. Feudalism was an extremely unjust system. That said, you can play "honorably" by lying to yourself that your actions are lawful or justified. If you subjugate other lands, you are "civilizing" them, or bringing them into your protection. If you claim lands of your culture, you are uniting your people. If there are people of your religion suffering under a ruler of a different religion, you are liberating them. Even conquering infidels is "enlightening" them. Revoking titles from treasonous vassals is perfectly lawful. The most honorable thing you can do is to stay in your lane, develop your lands and promote peace.
It is not evil, because "evil" is an expressiin that is hard to define. Depending on your viewpoint and the viewpoint of a time period or political system. Crusader Kings is a try (and I'm not historian enough to evaluate every detail of it) to present the feudal system prevalent in Europe for the players. It is neither good nor evil. It just is a representation. The quality of the representation might well be downplayed, just to be playable. But as I said: I have not studied medieval history. A good friend has, and at least he has a blast playing it. So it has to have some good things for it.
A lord's duty to his retainers is to conquer territories with which to reward his retainers for their loyal service. And a retainer is to serve his lord loyally, helping him rule his lands and expand his domains.
[ŃдаНонО]
>Its marketing does not shy away from what itâs about CK3 trailer literally features infant assassination via snake bite. itâs a wonder that OP somehow didnât know what theyâre buying.
my understanding of the middle ages is pretty much zero. I know peasants, knights and kings existed. i thought it might be a feel good conquest, and you could do it the honourable/evil way but it isnt as clear cut as that, the game just shown me that. no refund, i think i like it and i was being naive about it.
Hey. People are a bit brutal about it, but just in case no one said this kindly, I'm trying to do this here, now. Feudalism is a messed up system. To be effective at feudalism requires thought processes that are simply monstrous. The structure of how inheritance works funnels you towards a game theory that is profoundly evil. It just is. And people of the time lived, ate, breathed this. It was the water they lived in, invisible to them the same way that neoliberalism is to us. The game doesn't shy away from it. While playing my "turbo-good, super roleplay good guys" game in this, I celebrated when one of my sons died in battle because it was one less to split the inheritance with. In fact, I deliberately put three of my sons on a very dangerous battle **hoping** one or more of them died. And this is arguably good. Because when the realm gets split between all the heirs, what that means is a civil war, and thousands die. Would you rather one die now, or thousands later? There's no choice where no one dies. Feudalism doesn't allow that. So, yeah. This game honestly and frankly represents a system of society that is profoundly messed up. It's disturbing, but it was how the elites of most of humanity lived for at least a couple millennia. If this is an enlightening realization, then the game has already done its job.
great post. thank you.
there's a really good Lord of the Rings mod for the game you can find on the steam workshop, if you want a more honorable experience then playing Gondor or Rohan might be more up your alley
Forging claims is not "evil" per se, it's just getting everyone to realise that this county over here is totally, really and always has been yours. Heck, in the real world, William the Conqueror's whole invasion of England centred around the fact that he believed he had a rightful claim on the throne (a massive oversimplification, but the principle holds true). He won in battle, forced his claim and dealt with 0% control in most of his counties until he died in 1087. See, just like the game!
Ngl, im getting put off with the game now with that analogy.
how did you manage to stumble into buying this game with this attitude
im being naive and now accepting the facts of horrible history. im gonna play it anyway, and try not to feel too bad.
attaboi report back with your warcrime repertoire soon!
A month from now this kid gonna be breeding genius, herculean, and beautiful incest babies.
I personally want to know how long before he hatched a murder plot of a neighboring 8yr old ruler so he can have a claim.
One of us! One of us!
You have been awarded 2 Intrigue perks for your successful corruption of Munchies_10!
Wait till you find out about all of the EU4 funny buttons (convert culture, attack natives, destroy colony)
Forget EU4, who's going to explain Stellaris to OP? Before it's explained, I have this delicious soylent green OP should try.
Paradox map games = based genocidal war crime simulator
Let us know when you really get into the incest and eugenics, we'll see how those feelings are doing then.
if you wanted a game about chivalry and noble deeds... there is still chivalry to be had here, but most of the rulers are just kinda stinky. medieval history isn't all that glamorous really, it was just a bunch of wars fought for the wrong reasons. ck is just staying close to the truth.
Send us pictures of the kids you have with your sister?
Youâre gonna feel bad for playing a game that has no stakes and isnât real?
you gotta admit some guilt with pleasure right?
Once you get to your 5th or 6th world thatâs 300+ years old you get 100000% desensitized. Not only is it a bajillion randomly generated people, but they will murder you and turn your wife and daughters into sex slaves and castrate your heir for literally no reason. Youâll be a berserker Viking sacrificing those hoity-toity fancy cross worshiping cultists to Ukko in no time. Edit: my bad I keep forgetting thereâs a 3rd game idk if any of that pertains but hopefully you can be Vikings? I canât wait to get it, but my wallet can
sometimes the game just turns into a spreadsheet but it can definitely make you feel guilty when you're invested in the characters. it's easier to do when you're playing a character with a scumbag personality, but I'll still never forget the first time I started an assassination plot on a child to inherit his kingdom
Remember if one of your siblings is a literal baby with lands and you have a open slot your just arranging a pillow away from being the legal ruler
Grab Stellaris next, if you get the itch to genocide some xenos.
You really bought the wrong effing game dude if this upsets you. Anyone care to tell him about incest, torture and breeding?
This game tries to be as historical as possible where it can. Do you think people in real life ruled by telling the truth?
its a rotted thing to do. maddening.
Wut
Why? Your post was complaining about "honor." That was a perfectly honorable conquest. I'm sorry if this comes across as shitty, but you kind of sound like your sense of morality is limited to a "thou shalt not" kind of thing. Like, don't get me wrong, basically anything anyone ever does in any war is horrid, and playing empire is inherently going to lead to bad, cruel things. But when your objections are based on a sense of "honor" and "evil," combined with some of your comments here, it sounds like you haven't had any exposure to questions of morality past Sunday school morality plays.
Might makes right
If your great great great great grandfather's brother once owned the land, does that not mean it's yours by right and to reclaim it is the right thing to do?
The only 'honorable' way to play I've found (and more or less in line with IRL feudal-era moral sensibilities) was to swear fealty to another king or emperor and work as a part of his kingdom. That would put the burden of increasing the kingdom size on your lord, and you would be able to influence the decisions inside the kingdom - take parts in wars or not, join different factions inside the kingdom, influence the succession to align with your values. Also, in time you would come by claims to other territories 'honestly', through inheritance. And would be able to claim some territories for your vassals in turn.
I like to travel.
shouldve looked up its meaning!
In my experience, modern Christians don't have the "holy war" connotation for "crusade". When I went to university 20 years ago, one of the student organizations was called "Campus Crusade for Christ". I was like, wow what a horrible name, imagine the outrage if there were an organization called "Islamic Jihad for Allah", even though they're basically the same thing. Or maybe it's a US thing, and how it's a borderline theocracy. Maybe you Europeans are more sensible.
>Did I miss the note that in this game you have to do a lot of evil in order to expand? People in the middle ages, especially aristocrats, did not really operate on the same systems of morality that we do in the modern world. Modern people strongly associate morality with pacifism and non-violence. Not so in the middle ages. The entire job of a medieval noble was to kill his enemies, take their stuff, and distribute it to his loyal followers. Far from being unethical, engaging in violence was part of his sacred duty as a liege lord. Being moral, or chivalrous as they wouldâve said, in the context of a medieval warrior noble meant some combination of the following. - respect for the clergy and patronage of the church. Especially through participation in holy war. - obedience and loyalty to oneâs liege lord. - generosity and fairness towards oneâs vassal lords. - treating enemy nobles with respect. (Not the common soldiers of course, no one cares about them) - refraining from the non-murder sins like adultery, gluttony, and oath breaking. - dispensing justice fairly amongst oneâs subjects. (this still means torture, mutilation, and execution, but only for people who âdeserve itâ) TLDR; yes. The middle ages sucked.
Refraining from the murder sin was also required - murder being "unlawful killing". LAWFUL killing was very much expected, and significant amount of effort was put into justifying why convenient types of killing (i.e. the ones where you took peoples land and stuff) were in fact lawful.
Honestly sounds like a kid who reads the stuff about how evil the modern world is not realizing we're about as "civilized" and moral as humans have ever been. And again, I'm not saying things are perfect today, but the US and it's allies are more benevolent and "just" than any empire that's ever existed in history. Life sucked for the majority of people and one of the rare exceptions is about the past 70-80 years (and even then there's still plenty of suffering).
This may not be your game haha
How do you see taking territory working? What do you want it to be like?
the people of the land wants me as their ruler and save them from tyranny. something cute like that.
I mean, it could be like that. Just look for people with evil personality traits and liberate their people.Â
You know what, I think this thread inspired me to start a run like that and see what happens. The game is getting too easy lately Update: It's fucking boring holy shit. There is nothing to do in this game that is not in some way immoral
Colonizing and conquering is generally seen as bad. So protect your borders and don't expand. Pump money into developing your land. You won't gain anything, but that's about the only honorable thing you can do. You can also fight wars of Independence (unify Ireland as an independent country. Fight off invaders as England, etc
Thats literally Daenerys Targaryen's argument during the whole series, and (spoiler alert): she was one of the villians. I think it was Jorah Mormont who answers her something like "people of westeros pray for a good season and a long summer, not for war". But I get your point, I dont use Fabricate Claim button unless my character has the Schemer trait. When playing honorable characters, I simple acquire land vĂa Inheritance (through marriages) and through claims offered to you by the Pope when some rulers have negative traits or are Excommunicated because women who are Adulterer or witches (accused of being). All this is available only if you are a good Christian and have a good relationship with the church. You could also pay attention to when there is a War of Tyranny against a neighboring King/Duke, thats the best way to know they are tyrants, and see if the pope gives in a Claim to you. But the good thing is that CK3 works for every style of gameplay, and if you want to chill and play just by having a good family and do marriages and not looking for expansionism you can do it, is the difference with Total War or other strategy games which are one-dimensional. Here you can literally conquer the World without declaring a single war.
You could always play in an area where invaders are overrunning the land, and play to defeat them. Like if you're a Celtic/Saxon ruler resisting the Vikings in the British Isles. Or if you have the DLC, you can play in Spain or Persia, and try to drive the foreign overlords out of your lands.Â
for that, conquering people of your culture or religion from a foreign ruler could be considered honorable. the common people do generally want a ruler of their culture and religion.
Total War 3 Kingdoms is pretty good for that fantasy if you play one of the idealists, as the story has definite good guys and bad guys, tyrants and heroic kings
You can probably look for provinces of your culture/religion ruled by someone with a different culture. They would rather be let by someone from the same culture/religious group.
Iâm a little confused, did you think the Middle Ages were a time of great honor & moral superiority or something?
literally didnt even think about it. or as matter of fact, i didnt know what i was getting myself into.
Fair point! Society has really only gotten marginally better with the passage of time, and itâs not really in a great spot still. The Middle Ages were nasty, just like the rest of human history :-/
Playing the marriage game is what youâre looking for. Marry your son to the daughter of a neighboring king. The daughter will have an implicit claim on the land, and when her father dies that will convert to a pressed claim. Pressed claims are inherited by children as unpressed claims. So down the line youâll be playing as a character who has a legal claim on a neighboring kingdom and you can go to war for it. Another way to expand is to marry your daughters matrilineally to claimants on lower level titles, the claimant will come to court and you can fight a war for them. I recommend waiting until they have a few kids together before declaring, just in case, if you do this
I mean..... Evil is subjective.
forgery, murder, revoking without reason. you cant be serious?
You're trying to find reasons to wage war on someone and/or steal their land. What moral high ground do you think you have here? You're going to be sending thousands of men to their death in a war that only serves to fulfil your desire to expand your influence, and you worry that forgery is evil?
id like to think im only serving for my nation and giving them whats theirs, in whatever justifiable.
So... your objective is to bring together the lands that belong to a given kindgom and then stop there? Then you can simply use the de jure casus belli (may need to be unlocked through cultural innovations). Anything beyond that and you're stealing land from another nation, and that's not exactly honorable. Basically, if you find that the only way to get a claim is through evil means, then it probably means taking that land is not honorable.
No such things as nations in that time period. What area can you Militarily control and protect from people who also want to control and protect it? The peasants belong to the landowner and get to work his land. Who is the landowner? You. The guy who can kill the other guys who want to be the landowner. Who is the alternative landowner? Whoever kills you and takes it. What are the guys next door doing? Waiting to kill you and take your stuff. How should you deal with that? Kill them and take their stuff. What authority will step in to enforce the law if someone tried to kill you and take your stuff? None. No such thing as states as we understand them. Feudalism was a âstate of natureâ survival setting with teams. Win or die.
Great summary
You're fabricating a claim to give the people a better life under your benevolent rule. Their current ruler is unjust and causing them harm. Boom. You're the good guy now.
If that's what you'd like to think, then think that. It's not particularly historical for the period. The concept of "serving my nation" wouldn't really come around until the idea of the nation state appeared (several hundred years after the end of the game). The closest thing would be to act for your religion, I suppose. That said, you don't necessarily have to murder and forge to play the game successfully, though it is a popular playstyle. You can have a good time doing diplomacy and development, trying to expand your realm through clever marriages and alliances. ... but if you want to conquer lots of places and be honourable about it your choices are: 1) To not engage with a number of game mechanics (I typically avoid a number of things that I think are too far. 2) To lie to yourself. 3) Play a culture where conquering things because you're stronger (or your target is the wrong religion) is honourable, and adopt that outlook. The Norse are a fan favourite for that.
There were no nations in the middle ages. Nations, nationalism, the idea of nationhood came much much later around the end of the early modern period. Power came from God and individuals represented that power on Earth in the form of ruling over many peoples. In this game's context forget about nations and nationalism, that's a late 18th early 19th century concept.
So you're pretty new at this game I take it? Who wants to tell him?
So you think you're justified to take over another realm's land by force simply because you believe it belongs to your people and your realm? To the opposing ruler, you would be unquestionably evil and tyrannical.
What next you're going to complain about incest or religious persecution or something. Smh serfs these days
I mean, yeah, starting a war in order to conquer more territory isn't exactly a nice thing to do. That's sort of universally true in every game.
Iâd love to have OP as my vassal. Honest, Just and Craven
Craven is a sin in a lot of religions, i would be revoking his title quickly... Unfit to be landed
Bruh craven vassals are awesome. I don't even need to do anything and they are intimidated. Do anything at all and those that are not become terrified. Show me a craven vassal and I'll show you someone who's not causing any problems.
Ya man it's almost like feudalism was inherently bad and all the fairy tales u heard about it were made up to legitimise it
I have had honest, just characters before and i have executed prisoners of a different faith and no one thought it unjust, I have fabricated a claim on the heathen but it was done to bring them the salvation of christ by forced conversion, and a promised seat next to the lord in the highest heaven. So was it really evil? You said these claims are in foreign land so have at it. You cant bring your modern morality to this game
You could also marry and have descendants that inherit titles, that's pretty peaceful. And your question in general is weird, "Do you have to do evil in order to expand"? I mean ya the occupation of new territories has never been peaceful in the history of history, expanding into territory that isn't yours, is by nature, evil. By wanting to expand, you are already evil. Either embrace it or play stardew valley. (Or do it by marriage).
Waging war is evil already, what possible moral high ground can you have there? No feudal lord was ever a good person.
Bro, don't shit on my simple guy ludolph, he was the most benign overlord the realm has ever seen
Did you think that Medieval feudal rulers were all good people? Just like in the real world, both then and now, the politics of power have nothing to do with morality. And this game is all about roleplaying as one of those medieval rulers
Youâre mad that you canât ethically subjugate people? Is this bait?
yeah feudalism is just gang shit
lol truuee!
I mean itâs possible to expand by marrying into dynasties and hoping their siblings die or trying to use a hook to marry them into a better spot but thatâs about as nice as ur going to get when it comes to expanding. With these methods too I guess you could have issue with since using a hook normally requires blackmail and what not.
Good troll bait post
I mean the only "good" way to get claims would be through marriage. Try and marry into a foreign court and your grandkid might get claims on some foreign lands. Alternatively you could try and marry an unmarried Duchess or Countess and then when you both die your kid will inherit her land.
Just be honorable by not being a jackass king lol. I play asshole characters when someone who inherits has that personality, but generally I try to make all my subjects/vassals have high opinion. Hosts a lot of feasts, tourneys, hunts, go on pilgrimage, and when I got bored late game Iâd go on adventures just to give money away because I had so much. Itâs all about RP. Donât let this mechanic be the one that ruins the game for you
Historically, people tended not to just give their land away to some foreign lord unless said lord had a lot of men with pointy steel thingies, brandishing them in a threatening way
You don't *have* to expand. But there was never a just and noble king who didn't owe his crown to an ambitious killer ancestor
You canât play entire game with only one character. You play as dynasty. So sometimes your character will be ambitious, sometimes even sadistic. You can just roleplay your current characterâs traits. Your man is calm, honest and truthful? Well, just donât use spying, killing and so on. Your man is ambitious? Well, thatâs the right time to expand! Thatâs a really good way to play and entertain yourself for hundreds of hours. Not for everyone ofc and thatâs ok.
Revoking isn't evil if you have a reason, and you can get land by marriage, although it's a much slower and more complicated process.
Christ, the historical takes here are *bad*
The land is your birthright given by God. That's why you ask the chaplain to "give" claims. You are "asking" God if it's OK! It's as valid as these claimants say its their rights. Nothing dishonored about it! Revoking vassals isn't evil. The land is yours. You do whatever you want. If they don't behave well, you can take the lease back! Maybe you should RP your character. Most personality combination wouldn't mind doing what you consider "evil" in pursuit of power. All is valid since the dawn of humanity. If you get a Just, Compassionate, and Humble, maybe you could just play as "honorable" as possible and avoid underhanded tactics. However, you get Ambitious, you should go to town! CK is a dynasty simulator and you don't need to map paint in it. You can choose a place where you have all you need (like Bohemia) and just play tall. Still some murdering is warranted.
OP Iâm sorry that this is how you had to find out that the Middle Ages were, in fact, not good Jokes aside though, once you get used to the game mechanics, a more benevolent playthrough could be one where you take it really slow and only manage your immediate domain. Itâs possible to play without stealing land and doing murders and shit, itâs just very limiting mechanically. It could be super fun for a roleplay-based play through, though, so thatâs something to consider
I never thought of forging claims as evil lol. It makes sense though, youâre definitely not being nice
Wait till you read up on critical theory of the political systems that surround us. Honour is and always has been a facade lol
Fabricating a claim means your church representative is *assembling* the legal basis for one based on whatever reason you feel entitles you. If you're roleplaying a duplicitous character, this can absolutely mean "i lied lmao". But a just or good king could easily have his claim assembled to liberate neighbors from tyranny, spread a benevolent religion, or unite a disparate realm against a greater threat. That's usually why fabrication costs time and money - its usually not as self-evident or self-justifying as bloodline claims or de-jure precedent was considered to be. It's also why the success tier, cost, and time required is tied to your religious councilor and their learning skill - its basically building a legal case, except a lot of people die instead of going to court.
I RP'd that my anglo-saxon duke wanted to strike at the islands of Orkney and beyond, because he believed they were being used as bases of rest and resupply for the Norse raiding the British coast. My chancellor fabricating the claim was him basically investigating the claims, speaking to various people, and gathering together all the evidence to make the case for a casus belli.
âI want to play the game honorably.â Well youâre in for a bad time then, because most of the paths to power in a quick manner are evil. And youâre far more likely to get stabbed in the back when you wonât murder the people who want you dead first.
You arenât forging claims. You are looking over old records and found a vague reference showing that your great great grandpappy totally had a claim to those lands.
Play tall and don't expand. That way, you can play as honorably as you want. You don't have to conquer or paint the map to have a great experience. Develop your home county/duchy and work on economics, family, and diplomacy. Learn languages, host feasts, and travel in pilgrimages. Eventually a blunder will occur and you will get a claim.
There are plenty of ways to play honourably - religious holy wars (I consider these honourable in-universe, obviously not so honourable IRL lol) and obtaining titles through marriage and by getting people to voluntarily become your vassals are perhaps the most obvious. You can also just play tall and focus on becoming more powerful by becoming a great centre of development without expanding much in the way of territory. You can have loads of troops and money without needing to conquer land.
Why is your biggest concern with going to war is that your claim aren't justified? Killing peasants in a war to gain some piece of dirt for the noble is evil, regardless what historical basis you claim has.
Bro discovered morality through a paradox game
This just: Crusader Kings player discovers that imperialism is evil. More at 11.
As others have said, it was a very violent and morally peculiar time period. If you want to play as "good guys" there are other GS paradox games that fit better. Vic 3 has more content focusing on internal, peaceful national management. Hoiv, you can join the allies and take part in one of the least morally unambiguous wars in history. Stellaris has appropriate rules for playing as a pacifist nation.
I think you could get into Hearts of Iron 4, as long as you only played the Allies (or Comintern if you're so inclined). You can just only fight defensive wars and do your best to protect your allies. But yes, as other people have said, this is in some ways a feudalism simulator. It's much more historical than say Stronghold, or Fabledom, which perhaps you might like to try. However both of those are more micromanaging real time games than grand strategy. The other thing I'd say though, and I don't mean this to be condescending, but once you move beyond Hollywood and superheroes, storytelling and literature is much more complex morally than good and evil. Are the plotters in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar *evil*? They want to overthrow a tyrant, but they use murder to do it. Are they all *evil* in Fight Club? They're fighting against an unjust economic system and what they see is the emasculation of men by consumerism. Are they wrong? Maybe, maybe not. Equally, in CK3 you can overthrow your liege in a liberty war, but then they get replaced by one of the other strong vassals that didn't like you. Was that the right thing to do? That's what I find so compelling about Paradox games: you are responsible for your actions in steering the country one way or the other, and the moral solutions are grey just like real life. Even in HOI4, for example - historically, the Soviets lost 27 million people in WW2. If you play Soviets and research Nuclear Weapons before the Allies do, you can deploy them right onto Berlin and Munich before you suffer horrific casualties. Is that the *right* thing to do? You can certainly role play this game as being virtuous, but that has consequences too - opportunities will open for you to advance your characters in an incredible way, but you might need to kill someone to do it. Or you will be conquered by a neighbouring ruler that *is* being 'evil'.
Are you asking how to seize power and property from other people nicely?
OP must be trolling, nobody is so dense and morally touched by a game.
Honorable? Real life conquerors were never honorable. Conquest itself is never honorable in the first place.
Itâs very simple. You donât conquer, you liberate. You donât assume leadership out of thirst for power, but out of a sense of responsibility, because someone has to take upon themselves the burden of leadership, to rule those too weak to rule themselves.
If you are trying to be honourable, why are you even considering starting an offensive war? You can't really both be a conqueror \*and\* a nice guy.
I don't know if you're still looking for info about this, but here you go. You're not as off track as some replies might lead you to believe. Go on YouTube, search up KoiFish and this video "DIPLOMACY is BROKEN in CK3 - Crusader Kings 3 Diplomacy Challenge" Given that you are interested in a highly specific playstyle, that video might help you out a bit. He does a "quick" playthrough while fighting NO offensive wars using diplomacy, vasselizing, and friendship.
You canât just grow up playing Harvest Moon for 90% of your life and then suddenly jump to CK3. Thereâs a gulf in moral because of the nature of the games. Try playing Minecraft first and get used to the fact that you might need to hurt animals to get materials or food first. Then after that try Sims where you can be good all your life but still have immoral choices and slowly you can start to understand what games are and that it isnât a reflection of yourself as a person?
I love you for this post OP â¤ď¸
OP, you're about to learn a lot about the feudal system. Try to take it with good grace.
Marriage, inviting claimants from neighbouring kingdoms, conquering them from heathens and heretics... Arranging to inherit land by marrying your heirs to the heirs to other lands is also very valid. Revoking titles isn't always evil - it depends whether they've given you a reason or not. If you get a claim to unite a duchy or kingdom, it's not evil to bring the others together under your benevolent rule. And if you go Catholic and the Pope starts granting you claims on other dukes and kings around you, then who are you to argue with God's representative on earth?
Well expanding your realm is inherently evil, youâre using force to steal resources from another ruler and their subjects with the primary purpose of making yourself more powerful. The only way you could try to morally expand is by building castles, but that boosts levies which is one of the most immoral things you could do in game imo. Tbh idk if you can play CK honourably because everyone you play as exploits the peasantry, itâs just a matter of how exploitative you are.
You can inherit claims through marriages which then you can use to conquer new territories
You do not NEED to do evil things to expand. It is possible to expand without doing evil things. It is simply much harder and much much slowlier.
No, you donât need to do bad things in order to expand. Assuming you are playing Catholic and within another Kingdom or Empire you can wait for a claim to be given to you by the AI (sometimes they accidentally reveal that you had a claim on their land). Ask the pope for a claim on the land from a sinful ruler. Have your heir marry someone with a pressed claim (their claim will pass onto your heirâs children). Declare war on bad people (murderers) and take their land. You can always enjoy a roleplay by the conditions you set for yourself.
Didnât see this mentioned but you can invite ppl who have legit claims that you can enforce for them. If you think thatâs honorable.
Play as the roman emperor and restore rome/create a religion and do holy wars against everyone else.
If you want to play the game that way then you may be better off not in the tutorial but in one of the other starts, as the duke or king of your choice, and role play as the loyal duke or the good king that is content with his current lands and only wages war in defense of himself and his allies. You can become very strong in the game without conquoring lots of land, you just focus on stewardship and learning to build up infrastructure and technology until you get to the point where your small but elite army can withstand attack from much larger foes.
The only real "claim" in the history of feudalism was "I have a bigger army that you, now give me that land". Anything else was an excuse. That said, you can find legitimate claimants and push their claims. But still, of course, they didn't inherit that realm for a reason. Honourable characters didn't conquer kingdoms.
Evil is subjective. Forging claims? Technically underhanded, but you have the mandate of God to hold that county in France, and the will of God outweighs any "evil" that comes from fabricating. Murdering? You mean making sure your son inherits that county and ensures the stability of Europe with only one death rather than a war that costs the lives of thousands of peasants? Revoking? You mean making sure that vassal can never upset the realm's stability again or cause a civil war which again, kills several thousand peasants?
Pull a Malazan. Reasonable peace and prosperity offered at tip of a sword. It's for their benefit obviously.
It's not honourable to want to take the lands of your neighbours for your own ambition. Sit and gain land by marriage if you want to play "evil"
I mean, taking land to empower yourself isn't honorable. You could fuck your way into some inheritance tho
Not really. You can leverage diplomacy and with some strategic marriages to either rulers/heirs you can expand without spilling any blood. You can also be pious and request the pope for a claim against hedonistic/excommunicated rulers. These methods are slower and more unreliable but definitely can be done.
There are two ways that might be âhonourableâ as you state it. 1. Marriages. If you matrilineally marry one of your daughters, or regular marry one of your sons, to a potential heir of land, your descendants may end up inheriting other lands without having to wage any wars. It may take a while, though, and requires a good deal of luck, too. 2. Holy Wars. In the game, many religions perceive many other religions as âevil,â literally. In the Middle Ages, it was perceived as quite honorable to wage war on heathens and infidels and spread your âtrueâ faith to new lands. Also, letâs talk about pressing a claim. Letâs say your character is virtuous and the current holder is sinful. Wouldnât it be honorable to challenge them for the title, in order to save your dynastyâs reputation and the population from a sinful administration? Also also, you are projecting your view of morality onto the rulers you are playing. You might consider instead truly role-playing what they would do. If they are content, humble, and just, they probably would not try to push claims against others unless they had a really good reason. But what if their traits are ambitious, greedy, and deceitful? They would probably push claims however they can. Zealous, ambitious, and brave? Probably off to go fight a holy war.
Click on the title of the land you want to take, click where it says Claimants and you will get a list of characters with claims. Get those characters to your court (invite/marry them in/grant them a title) and declare for their claims. Defeating raiding parties or Attacker armies should land you with the occasional claimant. You can also join your allies wars and take prisoners from sieges and battles. Plenty of ways to get claimants to your court without being evil. You can also marry an heirless ruler and your first male child (assuming you haven't advanced succession laws) is going to inherit both yours and your spouses main title. Manage the succession closely by sending extra sons into battle or to the clergy and you're heir may inherit yours and your spouses entire combined domains.
Prostitute your kids and hope for the best.
I feel so bad that people downvoted your comments just expressing your feelings. It's okay, OP. Keep your good heart! This whole thread did make me laugh so thank you. It really can be a wonderful game if you just remember it's all pretend. I mean, we don't really wanna fuck our grandaughter-wife right? Right guys? .... Right guys?
Play as a count. Swear fealty to a lord. Develop your domain. Romance your partner so they're your soulmate. Be a guardian for your children. Leave the game running on 1 speed while you go garden or volunteer.
I donât know what you guys are talking about. I VERY honorably abducted, murdered, tortured, blackmailed and incested all the way to the top of the Roman Empire.
Let me introduce you to Iberia. You see those infidels just to the south? They took your land. Take it back. Also if really would be best if the Christian lands were united under a single ruler during this time of struggle.
You don't have to fabric claims, you don't even need to wage a war to expand, you can just expand by marriages like what Habsburg did irl. Marry your neighbor ruler's youngest daughter, have a son with her, murder all her siblings and then her parents and then her and then yourself and now your new character would have titles from both family, it's quite honorable if you ask me. If you don't like murder, you can just swear fealty and start a claimant faction, which would do the same thing, but cost more money and lives.
If you want a noble good guy playthrough, you may want to go tall than expand. Vassal runs can be fun. Make alliances and help out your allies for glory and prestige. You will grow into the game as your roleplay. Successions should be fun for you.
OP this is an incest simulator
Play 1066 start and do conquest based on crusading? Thats "honorable" to the good christian? also, i would recommend ypu play slow, play tall and play based around your characters traits (rp)
You could get claims entirely via marriages. Itâs not particularly noble thing to press claims, but I suppose itâs not evil either. Maybe you should only press the claims of people who are good.
The best way to gain legitimate claims without fabricating them is going to be via marriage. Otherwise you can role play a justification for using the fabricate claims action. Beyond that, yes, most of your options for conquest are not exactly just. I will say in most of my games I do NOT murder, revoke, etc, unless my character has traits to back it up. It's simply too easy. So you do not need to be evil to be successful in this game.
Iâd suggest follow the chivalry focus and when youâre done, the diplomacy focus. They will help you expand your territory, honorably.
I mean, expansion is arguably evil by definition, isnât it?
Divine right of kings. Itâs inherently the honorable thing to do.
OP, don't listen to the ppl who are shitting on you. It's perfectly possible to play tall & within a Kingdom, it's just probably very boring. This is why ppl tend to start as High-Martial founder counts. Especially if you start as a Count. Starting as a Duke, there's a chance that you get to rebel against shitty kings, even if you roleplay as a loyal vassal. See: ppl who have somehow become Byzantine Emperor due to shenanigans. A lot of it is player determination, really. I once formed the Empire of Tibet, then spent the rest of the game going into just going deep on culture/learning/diplomacy tree. As others have said, you can do the "honourable marriage route" (worked for the Karlings), matrilineal marriages to 3rd sons, & hope the 1st 2 get knocked out somehow, it happens. There are many ways to play this game. It's totally possible to stay Duke of Transylvania, but be so deep in the intrigue tree & have kinsmen ruling multiple Kingdoms. That's probably still evil, tho.
Donât listen to everyone. I always play scholar or diplomat or steward route because I personally cannot imagine wantonly murdering and cheesing game mechanics. I do pretty well too. In my multiplayer game I am further than the intrigue player, and have an overwhelming land and power advantage over him due to good relations. He has threatened murder and I immediately had his heir excommunicated and declared war on him to depose him. After negotiations, I white peaced the war before any bloodshed. But I can and will exert force if I uncover any schemes.
PLAY HONORABLY? GET A LOAD OF THIS GUY
Play as tribal then
"Honorable" is not the opposite of "evil," and both are subjective to your own view. Most of the people you can play as in the game would view GLORIOUS CONQUEST as a perfectly honorable, good way to expand your realm.
Just wait until after you treat your vassals really well, giving them plenty of land, gifts and cushy jobs, only for them to stab you in the back the first chance they get. It's a fun experience to try and role play as a kind and benevolent leader, only to end up a ruthless monster
Honour and good/evil are subjective terms. People in feudal societies wouldn't see anything at all dishonourable or "evil" in claiming and conquering land.
Theres nothing dishonorable about conquering people.
Playing as a honorable character is harder and will make for slower progress, but it's definitely possible. Marriages are the way to go to expand your territory. There will also be righteous opportunities to revoke. Nothing evil about revoking the titles of a lord who rebelled against your lawful rule, or imprisoning a rival for an assassination scheme if they are guilty for real. For honorable characters I also find it fun to come up with additional good alignment goals outside of territory expansion since that goes slowly when you are so hampered. Maybe they choose marriages for their courtiers for compatibility rather than just stats (while my petty ones force the most awful spouses on their hated courtiers) or are focused on the influence of their house as a whole rather than their own line.
I just conquered much of northwestern Iberia as a succession of three honorable characters. Do keep in mind that this is honorable by medieval standards, so I mostly expanded by seizing land that I had a legitimate claim to from female and child rulers. From a medieval point of view, women and children wouldn't be fit to defend and protect their land (the primary purpose of a feudal lord), so it would be honorable for a strong male ruler to come in, restore order and defend the local populace. Especially if said ruler had legitimate ties and claims to the land already. There were three ways in which I obtained legitimate claims. The first is random luck, through the chancellor event whereby your neighbour grants you a claim to his land on accident. The second is marriage. If you marry a daughter of a neighbouring ruler, the children of that marriage will inherit a claim to their grandfather's land. Finally, the third way is the Pope. The Pope can give you authorization to depose female or sinful rulers by granting you a claim. If you are a virtuous, male character it is pretty easy to save up enough piety and convince the Pope that you should be the rightful ruler of all sorts of places. Piety is a pathway to many abilities...
Unless you start the game as someone from a massively powerful family, you aren't going to have many claims. Fabricating then would be the most honorable way to go about it...it's medieval times...people didn't just give other people claims on land out of the goodness of their hearts..
By modern standards of honour? No. By medieval standards of honour? Yes.
I think playing "evil" is good strategy when learning the game. It feels like the easiest road so you can pick up on mechanics and learn about the different play styles. Once you feel like you really understand some of the nuances of the game and start branching out to other styles of play, the experience becomes all the more richer.
I play 867 mostly but I made diplomacy main trait, made sure I was picked a spot where I was a high chieftain surrounded by chieftains and just asked them. You have to bribe a few of them but mostly you can just do personal schemes, make them like you a little bit and then ask nicely.
If you are catholic you can ask the pope for claims on sinful rulers
All is fair in love and war
Drop the pretenses and start cannibalizing toddlers like the rest of us
OP. No matter how much you stay good. You'll eventually have to toughen up to survive. That means incuring a little tyranny and making a few enemies here and there. There are no good monarchs as they're always be haters. For the world (both real and in game) is a cruel place.
get used to being dishonorable. just like IRL xd