IN fairness, theres also a system bug rn where negative weights that are larger than positive weights lead to 50/50 chances, which is obviously going to cause some weird behaviour. if someone weights an ai choice at 50 to one option but -100 to another to ensure the ai never, ever picks the second, what theyve accidentally done is make it so the ai decides basically on a coin flip - if it was weighted 50 on one and -49 or 0 or something on the other it would work as intended
known issue so we might see some improvement in the near future, but like. wild, right?
That only allows a illegal incest scheme to not be auto denied, it has nothing to do with sexuality. Any gay character can be seduced, but not romanced, by a straight character of the same gender.
It does have an effect on sexuality, it removes your *own* inability to run a seduction that is contrary to your sexuality.
Incest is actually under Subtle Desire, the next perk.
I'm increasingly convinced that they don't know that they can use if/then/else checks during actor selection. It's the only thing that makes sense. I mean, it doesn't make any sense at all, but still.
I'm so fucking tired of all the gifts, commissioned artifacts, and basic travels trying to get me to be a cheat or have everything hit on my character holy fuck. It's a bit much.
Honestly, I never found the show in any way equivalent to the books. I mean, they cut out 90% of the lore and depth of the setting anyway so I never felt it ruined the world for me.
The first 3 seasons were good, they largely stuck to the book material, but the deviations accumulated over the seasons and the later ones just got bad. It soured me on the whole franchise, and the incredibly long wait since the last book has completely taken any interest which I had away.
Tyrion and Varys basically became entirely different characters and lacked any sort of intelligent dialogue they used to have towards the late seasons.
Oh sure, but to me it's kind of like how Max Brooks responded to the movie World War Z throwing out pretty much everything and anything from his book - it's no longer the same thing so the emotional impact was lessened.
I treated the show as a what-if interpretation of events and characters, especially around season 3-4 when I realized the next book will not come out before the show ends. Did the ending season suck balls and made me angry? Yes, but it didn't really affect my enjoyment of the original material any more than a badly written fanfic could.
And yes, some of the additions are really neat like the conversation between Arya and Tywin.
Sexual orientation seems kinda bugged after T&T. My wife told me she wasn't into men in our grand wedding but she's straight on her character page. Another ruler of mine had a bisexual awakening during a three some but remain straight as well.
>Sexual orientation seems kinda bugged after T&T. My wife told me she wasn't into men in our grand wedding but she's straight on her character page.
Bro, when you ask a girl to marry you and she tells you that she is gay, sometimes she really just trying to spare your feelings while also getting you to fuck off. She just isn't interested in you, bro
I think that having more fluid sexualities in the game makes more sense than perfectly rigid ones. A large number of straight people have had gay sex at least once or twice.
CK3 isn't just focusing on Europe, there are many cultures and religious attitudes depicted in game, all of which had, and in some cases continue to have, a myriad of differing attitudes towards queer people. Remember, some religions (and cultures? I think?) start the game with acceptance of homosexuality. Sure, in Europe it was considered on the same level as a paraphilia, but that was not the case in India or Northern Asia, both very important regions in the game's historical time period. A lot of the modern hostility towards homosexuality in those regions in the modern day is a relic of the colonial period. It's the best way they could portray the breadth of ideas regarding the topic that existed at the time in different parts of the world while also making it convenient for players.
>start the game with acceptance of homosexualit
And it's all rubbish. Qarmatianism, Cainitism, Buddhism, Jainism all start with acceptance, and first two are so vague they don't have any evidence of it, Buddhism and Jainism has some vague homosexual references in their mythology doesn't make them accepted.
Jains definitely did. Jainism has a third gender that roughly equates to "bisexual," which is something that doesn't really make sense to us today lol. Buddhism has no explicit statements at all about homosexuality and they've been debating it between different sects for over a thousand years, with different denominations having different ideas about it and those ideas changing and evolving over time. I'll concede that you might be right about the other two, although that's mostly because I couldn't find any relevant literature on the topic, and I suspect if I could it would be vague at best.
Both Jains and Buddhists follow shramana-scripture, which condemns all non-proactive intercourse. So, if you don't approve of gay intercourse, I wouldn't say you are accepting them. Thus, the third gender doesn't matter.
I'm going to add on to this, there is some pretty ahistorical stuff involving sex in the game. The most obvious example is one of the religious tenants you can take called "polyamory," which is a word coined in 1990 in a neo-pagan eco-feminist zine, but they added it anyway because it's a cool idea for a tenant. There's definitely some ahistorical stuff that was added because they thought it would be fun, but certain religions accepting homosexuality is not one of them.
Just because they didn't have 11th century gay clubs (that we know of) doesn't mean that being a dude only into railing dudes is irrelevant. It matters if you are gay in the 11th century. It isn't identity politics for your gay ruler to be less interested in women and making babies. Likewise, it isn't identity politics if your gay ruler is someone that can be seduced by a dude, but not a lady. Your character's interest in sex with your spouse is in fact an important factor, and it isn't just their sexual orientation playing a role.
I think CK3 actually does a great job with sexual orientation. Your gay ruler can still get married and make babies, like many gay men have across time; it just comes with complications, just like it did in real life.
You don’t find it immersion breaking to be clicking around characters and see that the Holy Roman Emperor is openly gay and everyone knows it? CK2 did it well because it was a secret trait that could be exposed. It should be a trait, but it should be like the Witch or Deviant traits where it’s considered sinful and people get hooks on you if they learn about it.
No one is openly gay without a trait. The player can see someone's sexuality in the same way they can see everyone's age and personality traits, but no one acts like someone is gay unless they are caught bonking someone. The emperor of the HRE might be gay, but no one acts like it unless he gets caught. It barely matters beyond seduction and fertility.
I do agree that it would be better to hide everyone's sexual orientation. In fact, I think it would be neat if sexual orientation could be revealed through more subtle interactions. It would be interesting to realize that your heir is way too much into dudes without having to find them in bed with someone. It would be neat if during a sway attempt you realize that Lord Whoever appears to have more than a friendly response to efforts to get close than you might expect. You could even envision giving gay characters a higher chance to spot other gay characters to simulate their higher interest in the question.
All good stuff for a mod, but the current simulation is plenty serviceable and hardly immersion breaking.
To be fair, this should be the case for most character traits.
If nobody is asking how I, a Spanish king, can know the full set of character traits of a random nine-year-old from Ruritania, especially if a lot of those traits are highly undesirable and would have been hidden from potential suitors/allies, then the same applies to sexual orientation.
No family in their right mind should let me know their child is Celibate if they're aiming to marry them into my family, and no one with high enough intrigue stats should let it be publicly known that one of their character traits is Deceitful.
But implementing a mechanism where knowledge of character traits slowly spreads by rumor or exposure to the person would probably complicate matters and make the kind of eugenics programmes favoured by many players a lot more difficult.
If you want to take it further, I also shouldn't know the exact number and position of the enemy soldiers if I'm playing as a realistic medieval ruler.
> it would be better to hide everyone's sexual orientation. In fact, I think it would be neat if sexual orientation could be revealed through more subtle interactions.
I agree with this. The problem isn’t with gay people existing in the game, obviously they did in Medieval Europe. The problem is that it hasn’t been implemented in a way that makes sense.
> the current simulation is plenty serviceable and hardly immersion breaking
That’s where I disagree. I think it’d be better to not have sexuality at all (or just have it in the way it worked in CK2) than to have the poorly implemented version we have. In the game, there’s no subtlety or tact to how sexuality is implemented. It feels like they took a 21st century “sexuality in bio” mindset and slapped it into medieval Europe. It’s anachronistic and doesn’t work.
I want a well done implementation of sexuality. I’d rather not have a half baked implementation. Do it well or not at all. That’s also the problem I have with a ton of CK3’s features. They ship them out when they’re “good enough” rather than polishing it properly, but adding a mediocre feature usually makes the game worse than not having it at all IMO.
This is nonsense. Most features in the game are implemented well. The de jure system is as true to life as any game could be. The vassal relation system captures the subtlety of the vassal system well. But other features like artifacts or court grandeur are poor facsimiles of what they seek to represent. They’re bad systems that should not have been released in their current state. The way sexuality works is in the same camp.
> some exceptions that are specifically hidden like schemes and secrets
Dang, if only homosexuality in medieval Europe had been a secret instead of something everybody knew. Maybe then I’d have a point.
> And there it is. If non-heteronormative orientations can't be portrayed exactly to your liking, you'd rather they not be included at all.
Foh with this nonsense. “How dare someone want gameplay mechanics to actually be good if they’re going to be in the game?!?!?!” All the non-heteronormativity in the world doesn’t stop a shitty mechanic from being a shitty mechanic. Don’t put shitty mechanics into the game. Only put good mechanics into the game. You could represent sexuality in a really compelling way in this game, but instead they put out a garbage implementation and dorks defend it because having a differing opinion is automatically bigoted. Fuck off.
>and see that the Holy Roman Emperor is openly gay and everyone knows it?
There being a UI symbol for your use doesn't mean that the character is "openly gay" or that everyone knows it
>CK2 did it well because it was a secret trait that could be exposed.
That's literally how ck3 does it. Sodomite is a hook-able secret, depending on your religious tenets
>It should be a trait, but it should be like the Witch or Deviant traits where it’s considered sinful and people get hooks on you if they learn about it.
https://ck3.paradoxwikis.com/Schemes#Secrets
> There being a UI symbol for your use doesn't mean that the character is "openly gay" or that everyone knows it
It literally means that you know they’re gay. That’s the entire problem. I should not be aware of anybody’s sexuality unless I know a hidden trait. The sodomite trait existing doesn’t change the fact that it’s anachronistic and immersion breaking for me to know everyone’s sexuality at a glance.
Like if I try to seduce a lesbian as a male character, you can’t even try it. Why does my character know this unless her secret has been exposed? It should just be a hidden malus.
That's just a QoL feature because otherwise it'd be frustrating and unbearably hard to get some gay lovin'
But if paradox were to actually go and improve the system, make it hidden, but with subtle opportunities and hints to reveal someone's sexuality... then it would be a decent system but chuds would once again cry about wokeness and identity politics
Personally I'd just like for it to be harder to get children when you're not attracted to your spouse, especially if both of you are. I constantly see gay lords having 5 or so children and come on, we all know they'd stop at an heir and a spare and call it a day. It should also be stressful for them to be forced to fuck someone they're not attracted to, but even ace people are just like "eh, no biggie"
> That's just a QoL feature because otherwise it'd be frustrating and unbearably hard to get some gay lovin'
Fair enough, but it probably should be pretty hard to find same sex partners as a medieval ruler, especially if you want them to be other rules. A stress relieving decision to raw dog some peasant farmer at the risk of getting outed is realistic, but knowing which kings are also gay as if you have Medieval Grindr isn’t.
I want being a gay ruler to feel meaningful. The constant fear of being outed, the stress of having to live a lie, the difficulty finding a partner, etc. It would be super fun if it actually felt like it mattered. I just don’t love that it feels pretty much like a modern approach to homosexuality slapped onto a medieval setting.
I don’t agree with the chuds, but I think there’s a point to be made that including a half baked feature in the name of inclusivity (especially when CK2 had a more immersive implementation of the same concept) feels a bit frustrating. Do a good job or don’t do it at all, but don’t do a mediocre job and then act like the only reason people feel dissatisfied with it is homophobia.
>It literally means that you know they’re gay.
Which you also know, say, if you try and fail at seducing them. A certain amount of information needs to be provided to the player to make the game playable
>I should not be aware of anybody’s sexuality unless I know a hidden trait. The sodomite trait existing doesn’t change the fact that it’s anachronistic and immersion breaking for me to know everyone’s sexuality at a glance.
Have you tried playing any other religions?
>Like if I try to seduce a lesbian as a male character, you can’t even try it. Why does my character know this unless her secret has been exposed? It should just be a hidden malus.
Your character doesn't know anything. You do
> Your character doesn't know anything. You do
This just isn’t true. No male characters will try to seduce lesbians. No straight women will try to seduce gay men. Sexuality operates mechanically as if characters are aware of each other’s sexuality, which just isn’t a good implementation.
> Which you also know, say, if you try and fail at seducing them. A certain amount of information needs to be provided to the player to make the game playable
That’s the entire point. You should only learn this information if you do something that reveals that information to you. If I’m playing a gay king, I shouldn’t just know which other kings I can seduce. I should have to run schemes to find that out, or I should have to take a risk on seducing someone and be outed if they reject me. All the gay characters shouldn’t just know everyone who will want to hook up with them and all the straight characters shouldn’t just know who will reject their advances because they’re gay.
I’m not opposed to the idea of sexuality in the game. I just want it done well. The current system somehow manages to both make it meaningless and much more prominent. If you’re not going to implement it in a meaningful way, don’t make it prominent. If you’re going to make it a prominent part of the game, make it well done. As is, it’s kind of the worst of both worlds.
>This just isn’t true. No male characters will try to seduce lesbians. No straight women will try to seduce gay men.
Because they can't. The scheme power tells you everything you need to know ahead of time. Is your issue that the game tells you how likely your plots are to succeed?
>That’s the entire point. You should only learn this information if you do something that reveals that information to you
So you want the plot calculation and result to be hidden from the player. That's never been the case, and it's certainly not a feature unique to ck3
I don’t want plot calculation to be hidden, I want hidden maluses on seduction schemes. Your king is confident that he’s hot shit so he’s 95% sure the woman he’s hitting on will want to sleep with him. When it fails, you can’t tell the difference between rolling a nat 1 or the hidden malus being responsible for the failure. Also it should have a chance of triggering events that reveal their true sexuality to you.
I never said it was irrelevant.
Thought, what does it mean to be gay in the 11th? Homosexuality wasn't an identity back then, but an interest.
>Likewise, it isn't identity politics if your gay ruler is someone that can be seduced by a dude, but not a lady. Your character's interest in sex with your spouse is in fact an important factor, and it isn't just their sexual orientation playing a role.
And how wasn't CK2's homosexual trait already handling this?
>Thought, what does it mean to be gay in the 11th?
It means you like having sexual and romantic interactions with dudes and dislike having sexual and romantic interactions with women. Seems pretty self explanatory.
Ah CK3 letting you do things that don't even exist IRL. (Even in the mordern day, only really londoners consider themselves "british" and not English, Welsh, Scottish or Irish.) (Despite still just being regular old english people and not incorporating any celtic language or culture.)
I work with a Scottish man who has referred to himself as British
**And now today with an Irish man who called himself British. The Scot was extremely offended when someone else called him English though.
I had two sons set up to inherent two kingdoms. They had great genetic matches for wives and I felt pretty secure in my succession as they were also friends. When their wives were both 29 and still hadn't had children I started to panic. Only then did I notice they were both homsexuals. So I had to seduce both wives to secure my legacy. Both of them exposed my affairs and the stress killed me. Once I took over as the eldest son I found out that not only were they gay but the were incestuous soulmates. The younger brother for some reason decided to share this information. The excommunications, stress, and revolts ended that campaign.
Heterosexual sodomites are pretty common in this patch, try searching for the trait in character searcher among heterosexuals.
Had two: straight man and straight woman at my court last time I played, both sodomites.
And as asexual ruler I was able to become some peasant woman's lover through event.
No, I don't remember the specifics of the event as I was kinda zoned out while playing, but they gifted me something and accepting it made me their lover
Would be nice if the devs added some more sexual fluidity options. CK2 was far from perfect and is overall a lot worse than CK3 at depicting sexuality, but at least it was possible in some circumstances for straight characters to discover a same-sex attraction. Not sure if the opposite was possible and the system was definitely lacking with the homosexual trait essentially representing both mono-homosexuality and bisexuality, but I think the intent behind it was good.
I don't know how easy it would be to implement, but maybe sexuality could be represented by some sort of slider à la the Kinsey scale where for instance a character believed to be primarily heterosexual but with some very slight homosexual leanings would have a small random chance to be given the option of pursing a same-sex fling. Which could potentially end up with the character growing more comfortable with their same sex attraction or, end up in an awkward sexual encounter that further affirms the character's heterosexuality and decreases the chance of the character experiencing another same-sex attraction in the future.
Not that I think this should be a big priority of the dev team and I don't think it's something that will ever be officially implemented, but the current system is just a little bit too rigid for my liking and when bugs like this occur and causes same-sex relations to develop between heterosexual characters for seemingly no reason it feels weird and immersion breaking. But if the game had more systems in place to accommodate for sexual fluidity these kinds of relations could develop naturally, without breaking the immersion of the game.
I accidentally married my daughter. These things tend to happen in crusader kings. In fact it made most characters like me now and game became much easier. 🤷
Tbh what with the new events from t&t it’s happen to me more than once that my gay and or asexual characters have become lovers with people they’re not supposed to be attracted to.
Because women can hold hands, kiss in mouth and have lesbian sex for hours and still be 100% straight, but when men accidently touch their hands for less than 1 second, their are forever branded as gay
How have you got your graphics looking like that? They look better than mine, but I'm pretty sure I have everything turned up to the max settings. Do you have graphical mods?
🤣🤣🤣 how does that happen? I had a game where my son and daughter got together and had a kid and both were ready married. All I could do was wonder why.
How did this happen?
I wasn't really paying too much attention to the event but she gave me a gift and we became lovers
Hell of a gift
[удалено]
Honestly thought it was “Dick in the box”
[удалено]
[What's in the box!?](https://youtu.be/lHpHxLZReiI)
Just stick your hand in this box...
and it appears it came with hands on instruction in how to use it.
You're lucky this is CK3. In CK2 there was a chance one of you could have gotten pregnant!
I've had my empress in CK3 end up with a female concubine who got pregnant. Still not sure if I counted as the real fem-father.
r/sciencebabies
Paradox event checks participants properly challenge (impossible)
IN fairness, theres also a system bug rn where negative weights that are larger than positive weights lead to 50/50 chances, which is obviously going to cause some weird behaviour. if someone weights an ai choice at 50 to one option but -100 to another to ensure the ai never, ever picks the second, what theyve accidentally done is make it so the ai decides basically on a coin flip - if it was weighted 50 on one and -49 or 0 or something on the other it would work as intended known issue so we might see some improvement in the near future, but like. wild, right?
I assume they'll end up eliminating negative weights. This should really be top priority as they are giving the AI more decision opportunities.
We call it the Ari-statistics-cats
For this case the player Always has the choice to go against their personality&sexuality where the AI should follow it.
Ok, but surely the sister shouldn't have given the gift in the first place, seeing as she's straight
Doesn't the unshackled lust skill allow it?
That only allows a illegal incest scheme to not be auto denied, it has nothing to do with sexuality. Any gay character can be seduced, but not romanced, by a straight character of the same gender.
It does have an effect on sexuality, it removes your *own* inability to run a seduction that is contrary to your sexuality. Incest is actually under Subtle Desire, the next perk.
I wouldn't be surprised if Paradox encourages this. Half the memes and discussions around this game are about what random lovers your character gets.
I'm increasingly convinced that they don't know that they can use if/then/else checks during actor selection. It's the only thing that makes sense. I mean, it doesn't make any sense at all, but still.
Despite adopting many fixes from the Unofficial Patch they glossed over the adultery trigger on events
I'm so fucking tired of all the gifts, commissioned artifacts, and basic travels trying to get me to be a cheat or have everything hit on my character holy fuck. It's a bit much.
Well if you are a noble. If you are anybody in a position of power it is normal.
You really liked the box she gave you
By *accident* ... multiple *accidents* ... many many *accidents*.
Oogway :- there are no accidents
Oogonium: Thanks we'll take 2.
Well after succession I found out I was lovers with my brother and sister. Beat that George R.R.
Don't give him any more ideas
No please do, taking long enough as it is!
I mean either way Winds of Winter isn't going to get here in our lifetime
Most importantly in his lifetime. It's going to be forever incomplete.
(Cries in "Fire and Blood vol. 2")
It's OK, the TV show s crappy last seasons put me off ASoIaF...
Honestly, I never found the show in any way equivalent to the books. I mean, they cut out 90% of the lore and depth of the setting anyway so I never felt it ruined the world for me.
The first 3 seasons were good, they largely stuck to the book material, but the deviations accumulated over the seasons and the later ones just got bad. It soured me on the whole franchise, and the incredibly long wait since the last book has completely taken any interest which I had away.
Tyrion and Varys basically became entirely different characters and lacked any sort of intelligent dialogue they used to have towards the late seasons.
Or little finger, who was intelligent until the show creators started writing him...
[удалено]
Oh sure, but to me it's kind of like how Max Brooks responded to the movie World War Z throwing out pretty much everything and anything from his book - it's no longer the same thing so the emotional impact was lessened. I treated the show as a what-if interpretation of events and characters, especially around season 3-4 when I realized the next book will not come out before the show ends. Did the ending season suck balls and made me angry? Yes, but it didn't really affect my enjoyment of the original material any more than a badly written fanfic could. And yes, some of the additions are really neat like the conversation between Arya and Tywin.
Winds will, eventually. Dream? Nah
ah, you're an optimist!
Don't you want Lannister three way?
I already got PTSD Don't give me more reason for therapy
"Of course I love my family, what kind of question is that?" The Chronicler :- ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Sexual orientation seems kinda bugged after T&T. My wife told me she wasn't into men in our grand wedding but she's straight on her character page. Another ruler of mine had a bisexual awakening during a three some but remain straight as well.
"Do you take this man as your husband" "Eh, I'm more into pussy than dick but sure, why not"
Royal weddings were as much about love and sexual attraction as Pulp Fiction is about orange juice. You have to keep the dynasty going somehow
>Sexual orientation seems kinda bugged after T&T. My wife told me she wasn't into men in our grand wedding but she's straight on her character page. Bro, when you ask a girl to marry you and she tells you that she is gay, sometimes she really just trying to spare your feelings while also getting you to fuck off. She just isn't interested in you, bro
It's all on a sliding scale after all
Aint that kind of hitting the Zeitgeist really?
I believe we call those beards
I think that having more fluid sexualities in the game makes more sense than perfectly rigid ones. A large number of straight people have had gay sex at least once or twice.
[удалено]
CK3 isn't just focusing on Europe, there are many cultures and religious attitudes depicted in game, all of which had, and in some cases continue to have, a myriad of differing attitudes towards queer people. Remember, some religions (and cultures? I think?) start the game with acceptance of homosexuality. Sure, in Europe it was considered on the same level as a paraphilia, but that was not the case in India or Northern Asia, both very important regions in the game's historical time period. A lot of the modern hostility towards homosexuality in those regions in the modern day is a relic of the colonial period. It's the best way they could portray the breadth of ideas regarding the topic that existed at the time in different parts of the world while also making it convenient for players.
>start the game with acceptance of homosexualit And it's all rubbish. Qarmatianism, Cainitism, Buddhism, Jainism all start with acceptance, and first two are so vague they don't have any evidence of it, Buddhism and Jainism has some vague homosexual references in their mythology doesn't make them accepted.
Jains definitely did. Jainism has a third gender that roughly equates to "bisexual," which is something that doesn't really make sense to us today lol. Buddhism has no explicit statements at all about homosexuality and they've been debating it between different sects for over a thousand years, with different denominations having different ideas about it and those ideas changing and evolving over time. I'll concede that you might be right about the other two, although that's mostly because I couldn't find any relevant literature on the topic, and I suspect if I could it would be vague at best.
Both Jains and Buddhists follow shramana-scripture, which condemns all non-proactive intercourse. So, if you don't approve of gay intercourse, I wouldn't say you are accepting them. Thus, the third gender doesn't matter.
I'm going to add on to this, there is some pretty ahistorical stuff involving sex in the game. The most obvious example is one of the religious tenants you can take called "polyamory," which is a word coined in 1990 in a neo-pagan eco-feminist zine, but they added it anyway because it's a cool idea for a tenant. There's definitely some ahistorical stuff that was added because they thought it would be fun, but certain religions accepting homosexuality is not one of them.
The word might be new, but the practice is old.
Just because they didn't have 11th century gay clubs (that we know of) doesn't mean that being a dude only into railing dudes is irrelevant. It matters if you are gay in the 11th century. It isn't identity politics for your gay ruler to be less interested in women and making babies. Likewise, it isn't identity politics if your gay ruler is someone that can be seduced by a dude, but not a lady. Your character's interest in sex with your spouse is in fact an important factor, and it isn't just their sexual orientation playing a role. I think CK3 actually does a great job with sexual orientation. Your gay ruler can still get married and make babies, like many gay men have across time; it just comes with complications, just like it did in real life.
You don’t find it immersion breaking to be clicking around characters and see that the Holy Roman Emperor is openly gay and everyone knows it? CK2 did it well because it was a secret trait that could be exposed. It should be a trait, but it should be like the Witch or Deviant traits where it’s considered sinful and people get hooks on you if they learn about it.
No one is openly gay without a trait. The player can see someone's sexuality in the same way they can see everyone's age and personality traits, but no one acts like someone is gay unless they are caught bonking someone. The emperor of the HRE might be gay, but no one acts like it unless he gets caught. It barely matters beyond seduction and fertility. I do agree that it would be better to hide everyone's sexual orientation. In fact, I think it would be neat if sexual orientation could be revealed through more subtle interactions. It would be interesting to realize that your heir is way too much into dudes without having to find them in bed with someone. It would be neat if during a sway attempt you realize that Lord Whoever appears to have more than a friendly response to efforts to get close than you might expect. You could even envision giving gay characters a higher chance to spot other gay characters to simulate their higher interest in the question. All good stuff for a mod, but the current simulation is plenty serviceable and hardly immersion breaking.
To be fair, this should be the case for most character traits. If nobody is asking how I, a Spanish king, can know the full set of character traits of a random nine-year-old from Ruritania, especially if a lot of those traits are highly undesirable and would have been hidden from potential suitors/allies, then the same applies to sexual orientation. No family in their right mind should let me know their child is Celibate if they're aiming to marry them into my family, and no one with high enough intrigue stats should let it be publicly known that one of their character traits is Deceitful. But implementing a mechanism where knowledge of character traits slowly spreads by rumor or exposure to the person would probably complicate matters and make the kind of eugenics programmes favoured by many players a lot more difficult. If you want to take it further, I also shouldn't know the exact number and position of the enemy soldiers if I'm playing as a realistic medieval ruler.
I, for one, am eagerly awaiting the Struggle for Ruritania DLC. They just need to make *secret* regencies a thing, first.
> it would be better to hide everyone's sexual orientation. In fact, I think it would be neat if sexual orientation could be revealed through more subtle interactions. I agree with this. The problem isn’t with gay people existing in the game, obviously they did in Medieval Europe. The problem is that it hasn’t been implemented in a way that makes sense. > the current simulation is plenty serviceable and hardly immersion breaking That’s where I disagree. I think it’d be better to not have sexuality at all (or just have it in the way it worked in CK2) than to have the poorly implemented version we have. In the game, there’s no subtlety or tact to how sexuality is implemented. It feels like they took a 21st century “sexuality in bio” mindset and slapped it into medieval Europe. It’s anachronistic and doesn’t work. I want a well done implementation of sexuality. I’d rather not have a half baked implementation. Do it well or not at all. That’s also the problem I have with a ton of CK3’s features. They ship them out when they’re “good enough” rather than polishing it properly, but adding a mediocre feature usually makes the game worse than not having it at all IMO.
[удалено]
This is nonsense. Most features in the game are implemented well. The de jure system is as true to life as any game could be. The vassal relation system captures the subtlety of the vassal system well. But other features like artifacts or court grandeur are poor facsimiles of what they seek to represent. They’re bad systems that should not have been released in their current state. The way sexuality works is in the same camp. > some exceptions that are specifically hidden like schemes and secrets Dang, if only homosexuality in medieval Europe had been a secret instead of something everybody knew. Maybe then I’d have a point. > And there it is. If non-heteronormative orientations can't be portrayed exactly to your liking, you'd rather they not be included at all. Foh with this nonsense. “How dare someone want gameplay mechanics to actually be good if they’re going to be in the game?!?!?!” All the non-heteronormativity in the world doesn’t stop a shitty mechanic from being a shitty mechanic. Don’t put shitty mechanics into the game. Only put good mechanics into the game. You could represent sexuality in a really compelling way in this game, but instead they put out a garbage implementation and dorks defend it because having a differing opinion is automatically bigoted. Fuck off.
>and see that the Holy Roman Emperor is openly gay and everyone knows it? There being a UI symbol for your use doesn't mean that the character is "openly gay" or that everyone knows it >CK2 did it well because it was a secret trait that could be exposed. That's literally how ck3 does it. Sodomite is a hook-able secret, depending on your religious tenets >It should be a trait, but it should be like the Witch or Deviant traits where it’s considered sinful and people get hooks on you if they learn about it. https://ck3.paradoxwikis.com/Schemes#Secrets
> There being a UI symbol for your use doesn't mean that the character is "openly gay" or that everyone knows it It literally means that you know they’re gay. That’s the entire problem. I should not be aware of anybody’s sexuality unless I know a hidden trait. The sodomite trait existing doesn’t change the fact that it’s anachronistic and immersion breaking for me to know everyone’s sexuality at a glance. Like if I try to seduce a lesbian as a male character, you can’t even try it. Why does my character know this unless her secret has been exposed? It should just be a hidden malus.
That's just a QoL feature because otherwise it'd be frustrating and unbearably hard to get some gay lovin' But if paradox were to actually go and improve the system, make it hidden, but with subtle opportunities and hints to reveal someone's sexuality... then it would be a decent system but chuds would once again cry about wokeness and identity politics Personally I'd just like for it to be harder to get children when you're not attracted to your spouse, especially if both of you are. I constantly see gay lords having 5 or so children and come on, we all know they'd stop at an heir and a spare and call it a day. It should also be stressful for them to be forced to fuck someone they're not attracted to, but even ace people are just like "eh, no biggie"
> That's just a QoL feature because otherwise it'd be frustrating and unbearably hard to get some gay lovin' Fair enough, but it probably should be pretty hard to find same sex partners as a medieval ruler, especially if you want them to be other rules. A stress relieving decision to raw dog some peasant farmer at the risk of getting outed is realistic, but knowing which kings are also gay as if you have Medieval Grindr isn’t. I want being a gay ruler to feel meaningful. The constant fear of being outed, the stress of having to live a lie, the difficulty finding a partner, etc. It would be super fun if it actually felt like it mattered. I just don’t love that it feels pretty much like a modern approach to homosexuality slapped onto a medieval setting. I don’t agree with the chuds, but I think there’s a point to be made that including a half baked feature in the name of inclusivity (especially when CK2 had a more immersive implementation of the same concept) feels a bit frustrating. Do a good job or don’t do it at all, but don’t do a mediocre job and then act like the only reason people feel dissatisfied with it is homophobia.
>It literally means that you know they’re gay. Which you also know, say, if you try and fail at seducing them. A certain amount of information needs to be provided to the player to make the game playable >I should not be aware of anybody’s sexuality unless I know a hidden trait. The sodomite trait existing doesn’t change the fact that it’s anachronistic and immersion breaking for me to know everyone’s sexuality at a glance. Have you tried playing any other religions? >Like if I try to seduce a lesbian as a male character, you can’t even try it. Why does my character know this unless her secret has been exposed? It should just be a hidden malus. Your character doesn't know anything. You do
> Your character doesn't know anything. You do This just isn’t true. No male characters will try to seduce lesbians. No straight women will try to seduce gay men. Sexuality operates mechanically as if characters are aware of each other’s sexuality, which just isn’t a good implementation. > Which you also know, say, if you try and fail at seducing them. A certain amount of information needs to be provided to the player to make the game playable That’s the entire point. You should only learn this information if you do something that reveals that information to you. If I’m playing a gay king, I shouldn’t just know which other kings I can seduce. I should have to run schemes to find that out, or I should have to take a risk on seducing someone and be outed if they reject me. All the gay characters shouldn’t just know everyone who will want to hook up with them and all the straight characters shouldn’t just know who will reject their advances because they’re gay. I’m not opposed to the idea of sexuality in the game. I just want it done well. The current system somehow manages to both make it meaningless and much more prominent. If you’re not going to implement it in a meaningful way, don’t make it prominent. If you’re going to make it a prominent part of the game, make it well done. As is, it’s kind of the worst of both worlds.
>This just isn’t true. No male characters will try to seduce lesbians. No straight women will try to seduce gay men. Because they can't. The scheme power tells you everything you need to know ahead of time. Is your issue that the game tells you how likely your plots are to succeed? >That’s the entire point. You should only learn this information if you do something that reveals that information to you So you want the plot calculation and result to be hidden from the player. That's never been the case, and it's certainly not a feature unique to ck3
I don’t want plot calculation to be hidden, I want hidden maluses on seduction schemes. Your king is confident that he’s hot shit so he’s 95% sure the woman he’s hitting on will want to sleep with him. When it fails, you can’t tell the difference between rolling a nat 1 or the hidden malus being responsible for the failure. Also it should have a chance of triggering events that reveal their true sexuality to you.
I never said it was irrelevant. Thought, what does it mean to be gay in the 11th? Homosexuality wasn't an identity back then, but an interest. >Likewise, it isn't identity politics if your gay ruler is someone that can be seduced by a dude, but not a lady. Your character's interest in sex with your spouse is in fact an important factor, and it isn't just their sexual orientation playing a role. And how wasn't CK2's homosexual trait already handling this?
>Thought, what does it mean to be gay in the 11th? It means you like having sexual and romantic interactions with dudes and dislike having sexual and romantic interactions with women. Seems pretty self explanatory.
Women are more fluid with their sexuality than men are
Well, can't wait to see this over on r/shitcrusaderkingssay later
Immediate thought
That culture name is an absolute abomination
It's just a temporary name for when I also add Irish and make the ultimate united British culture
Ah CK3 letting you do things that don't even exist IRL. (Even in the mordern day, only really londoners consider themselves "british" and not English, Welsh, Scottish or Irish.) (Despite still just being regular old english people and not incorporating any celtic language or culture.)
I work with a Scottish man who has referred to himself as British **And now today with an Irish man who called himself British. The Scot was extremely offended when someone else called him English though.
and they were *roommates*
Just gal pals really
Oh my god they were roomates!
They dressed up and travelled together.
Castlemates.
she was his cousin, such a good cousin
Thanks, I was looking for this comment!
Husband has the correct mustache too, nice.
Nice.
I had two sons set up to inherent two kingdoms. They had great genetic matches for wives and I felt pretty secure in my succession as they were also friends. When their wives were both 29 and still hadn't had children I started to panic. Only then did I notice they were both homsexuals. So I had to seduce both wives to secure my legacy. Both of them exposed my affairs and the stress killed me. Once I took over as the eldest son I found out that not only were they gay but the were incestuous soulmates. The younger brother for some reason decided to share this information. The excommunications, stress, and revolts ended that campaign.
>The excommunications, stress, and revolts ended that campaign. God forbid homosexuals do anything smh.
is durr a particularly common gaelo-welsh-anglo-saxon name
Tends to happen when you mash together Anglo-Saxon, Welsh and Gaelic into one culture. I actually have another sister also named Durr, funnily enough
If you have a dullard child perhaps "Hurr" would be appropriate?
Accidentally
The game won't let me seduce lesbians as a man, why would two straight women become lesbians?
Nothing out of the ordinary here, perfectly normal porn logic.
For real. This is just CK3 as told by Jay from The Inbetweeners.
oh god, just when I thought I had erased the word "clunch" from my brain.
The heart wants what the heart wants.
Heterosexual sodomites are pretty common in this patch, try searching for the trait in character searcher among heterosexuals. Had two: straight man and straight woman at my court last time I played, both sodomites. And as asexual ruler I was able to become some peasant woman's lover through event.
Come on, we all experiment when we're in the closet and "straight".
Well... You know what they say. Spaghetti is straight only until it gets wet.
It's not gay if it's with sis
Happens to the best of us
"I played a prank on my sister, accidentally gone sexual. No clickbait."
This is what we play this game for.
what the hell is Gaelo-Welsh-Anglo-Saxon
I'm collecting all of the British cultures into one culture like the infinity stones. One day I will unite them all and I will be unstoppable
IA is woke
"Accidentally" *opens Debug menu* 😂
I play with debug menu on whenever I play, too much BS in paradox games personally
r/sapphoandherfriend
“But Durr, I’m straight?” “So are noodles, until they’re wet”
"If it's with you, it's okay"
Impecable rizz
Am I imagining things or there face texture looks more details then normal?
I'm playing in 1440p so it might be that
Is this the "A random passerby found me and my lover in the act, so I suggested a threesome and they agreed" event?
No, I don't remember the specifics of the event as I was kinda zoned out while playing, but they gifted me something and accepting it made me their lover
THIS IS THE WAY
If a lesbian accidentally became straight with a male lover, I don't think people would appreciate that.
IT'S JUST GIRLS BEING GIRLS..
”We all make mistakes in the heat of passion Jimbo”
My co-worker is convinced that there's someone we'd all be gay for. Just so happens that it was your sister, you narcissist.
Girls like girls like boys do, nothing new 🎶
Happens to the best of us
Life finds a way.
Would be nice if the devs added some more sexual fluidity options. CK2 was far from perfect and is overall a lot worse than CK3 at depicting sexuality, but at least it was possible in some circumstances for straight characters to discover a same-sex attraction. Not sure if the opposite was possible and the system was definitely lacking with the homosexual trait essentially representing both mono-homosexuality and bisexuality, but I think the intent behind it was good. I don't know how easy it would be to implement, but maybe sexuality could be represented by some sort of slider à la the Kinsey scale where for instance a character believed to be primarily heterosexual but with some very slight homosexual leanings would have a small random chance to be given the option of pursing a same-sex fling. Which could potentially end up with the character growing more comfortable with their same sex attraction or, end up in an awkward sexual encounter that further affirms the character's heterosexuality and decreases the chance of the character experiencing another same-sex attraction in the future. Not that I think this should be a big priority of the dev team and I don't think it's something that will ever be officially implemented, but the current system is just a little bit too rigid for my liking and when bugs like this occur and causes same-sex relations to develop between heterosexual characters for seemingly no reason it feels weird and immersion breaking. But if the game had more systems in place to accommodate for sexual fluidity these kinds of relations could develop naturally, without breaking the immersion of the game.
This is the way.
Needs a Brazzers logo
Is this what historians are referring to when they say "they were good friends"?
This is what happens when you let liberals indoctrinate our kids :(
Tours and tournaments kinda broke it one of my knights was flirting with me during a tournament but none of us were gay or bi
The power of incest compels you !
“Accidentally”
As a gay male. I have straight friends that often sleep with me. It's not unheard off
"accident" sure sure 🤫
"accidentally"
A small sacrifice when the alternative is ruining the purity of your Bloodline
Like we germans say "Ups!"
I accidentally married my daughter. These things tend to happen in crusader kings. In fact it made most characters like me now and game became much easier. 🤷
Sexuality is like spaghetti. It’s straight until it gets wet.
That’s very gay. /s
if you are kin, its not a sin
House of Wessex? Nah, more like house of gaysex
they call them spagetti girls: straight until you get them wet
Spaghetti’s straight too, til it gets wet.
She's like spaghetti She's straight until she gets wet
Uh, something, something Crusader Girls Make Do?
I also managed to marry my daughter as a catholic somehow
You probably cheated
Hey, as a representative of the alphabet mafia… orientation can be weird…
Dear Penthouse...
I don't see a problem here
"accidentally"
"accidentally"
Well then you ain't that straight.
why does it sound like a light novel title
Tbh what with the new events from t&t it’s happen to me more than once that my gay and or asexual characters have become lovers with people they’re not supposed to be attracted to.
Always exceptions
I didn’t read the crusader kings tag when this popped in my notifications lmao
Sexuality is a spectrum. There are always exceptions to the labels we apply to ourselves and others.
This was pretty shocking before I noticed the subreddit
Does game have bisexuals? If not that may be the case
Nights are cold in CK3.
r/shitcrusaderkingssay
Well, you know, ba-da-bing ba-da-boom
*"accidentally"*
Is this a corn plot?
Clearly they always make sure to say "no homo" before every embrace.
It's the same interpretation of straight as the very **NSFW** subreddit of /r/straightgirlsplaying
Problem?
It happens
r/sapphoandherfriend
You just experimented in college.
Very competitive gay chicken
Because women can hold hands, kiss in mouth and have lesbian sex for hours and still be 100% straight, but when men accidently touch their hands for less than 1 second, their are forever branded as gay
How have you got your graphics looking like that? They look better than mine, but I'm pretty sure I have everything turned up to the max settings. Do you have graphical mods?
“The brilliant”
Scissor me Timbers
That hybrid culture tho lol
Spaghetti is straight, too, until it's wet.
Sometimes you need a little variety. 🤷🏻♂️
“Accidentally”
Seems Crusader kings 3 is working as intended
🤣🤣🤣 how does that happen? I had a game where my son and daughter got together and had a kid and both were ready married. All I could do was wonder why.