Research Thread 2.3

[Cèsar de Quart]

Why not a killing monk. But a bit strange to me is Hildegard von Bingen. I think she is a very interesting character, but to see her riding on a horse killing soldiers is maybe too much. And I found out, she already died before 1200. So why not having a Bogomil priest? And maybe there is someone else for Hildegard. Is there a hero from Portugal or Toulouse? Or Bohemia?

A killing monk is what Domingo de Guzmán will portray. But I won't change Hildegard, first because I like her, and I think that if you don't like the idea of her killing people, just give her a bow and arrows and make her stay with the bowmen, or pretend she's not there. Second, because it's a character that was hard to develop. At first it was boring to write (a noun... what a drag), but later on I had an idea, I related her "unorthodoxness", her criticism to the Church and her scientific interest to create a William of Baskerville-like character. When I finished the writing, I loved her.

The more characters, the better, actually, because I will need not to relate them with the ones I have already made. Make up the relations between the characters, why they like and they hate each other, making it concord with their personalities, status, etc, is a hard work. I happen to be an amateur writer, so I found it an interesting challenge, but sometimes I just failed and went to the typical topics. So, changing the number of companions will always mean to change also some of the character's relatioships, and that's a mess. If I get 6 extra characters, I will be able to make another circle to the wheel of companions wit just altering two of the existing, or none.

So, more suggestions will be welcome! We have the Bogmil priest, a possible Jew...

 

[NikeBG]

Spoiler

There are two corrents of companions:

One: initiated by Cruger, addind famous legendary Medieval characters. At first, I didn't agree, but after playing a little bit, I think it's nice.
Two: the one I tried to make by choosing additional characters who lived around 1200.

The choice of Hildegard von Bingen and Margery Kempe, however, was mine, and none of them was alive in 1200, one was already dead and the other was not born yet. But I wanted some more woman characters, especially I wanted a doctor noun and a whore. I just found those two.

About El Cid and other characters similar, I'm against it: El Cid was a historical character who had an important role in the history of the Peninsula. One cannot use him like this. Robin of Locksley may had existed (and if he did, he was probably Roger Godberd, who lived in the early 1300'), and in the legend, in 1200, he is just a bandit, or a noble outcast.

Guillem de Montcada was a Catalan noble from Béarn who disappeared from all registries between 1199 and 1205, and historians have many theories about what did he do. He was surely hiding from the Church, and we have no clues of him being a Cathar, that was my invention, but given that his brother Gaston could have been one, I think it's likely.

Look at Roland and Astolfo, or Ogier the Dane: I made them become unknown characters of the timeline 1200, but keeping a little flavour of the Carolingian heroes. The same with Basil Akritas, Ibn Battuta... Actually, I though about depicting them (Ibn Battuta, Hildegard von Bingen, Niccolo Polo...) as not actually the famous characters, but just relatives, forefathers, etc.

Francesco d'Assisi, another example: you would expect him to be a priest, but it turns out that exactly in 1200 he was running away from a battle in which took part when he was 18-20 years old. Domingo de Guzmán, if added, will be a young and rather warlike priest. I'd like him to hate Guillem de Montcada too (Domingo de Guzmán was the first inquisitor), but that would be two people hating the same person, and I don't know if that's possible.

In synthesis: adding semi-legendary characters gave us quite an interesting start for character personality, which was very good form the point of the writer.

Take care!

I like your style of character creation, since in many cases it's pretty close to mine. F.e. my companions were in three groups: completely made up (Francesco, Miklos, Henric, Estienne, Narimantas, Stjepan, Altibars, Yesugei), partially made up (Eirik, Albertus, Husayn) and historical, "slightly" adjusted to our needs (Gjion, Alexandr, Mas'ud, Ibn Battuta). Some of those characters have some similarities with yours - besides the obvious Ibn Battuta, Gjion is also a parent of the much more famous, but later-born descendant of his, while Alexandr Peresvet is just beginning to develop his spiritual values which would later make him a monk (like St. Francisc). Besides those, we were thinking of using the legendary heroes (Krali Marko/Marko Kraljevic) as easter eggs, though that wasn't very well defined yet.
Btw, I'd like to take the chance and congratulate you (and the other dialogue-writers, if there were such) for the job well done. Some of those dialogues were masterpieces, giving great atmosphere to the game and "character to the characters", and I enjoyed them greatly. Just don't forget the difference between a "nun" and a "noun".

Also, looking at my old companions and considering we have the Baltic Duchies now, I think it would be practically obligatory to include a Lithuanian (or generally Baltic) Pagan.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

Btw, I'd like to take the chance and congratulate you (and the other dialogue-writers, if there were such) for the job well done. Some of those dialogues were masterpieces, giving great atmosphere to the game and "character to the characters", and I enjoyed them greatly. Just don't forget the difference between a "nun" and a "noun".

Thank you very much. Especially about the correction 

Also, looking at my old companions and considering we have the Baltic Duchies now, I think it would be practically obligatory to include a Lithuanian (or generally Baltic) Pagan.

Any suggestion? I know literally nothing about that. I could add Sargon of Akkad and someone would belive his as Lithuanian, I think.

 

[blowcrapup]

For a Baltic companion how about Bishop Albert of Riga. In 1201 he founded Riga and also built the cathedral there. He was also the head of the army that converted the eastern Baltic states to Christianity. He also founded the military order the Livonian Brothers of the Sword. For the purposes of the game his backstory could be that he is rasising cash to help the merchants to found Riga or something similar.

Wiki article with basic info - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_of_Riga

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

For a Baltic companion how about Bishop Albert of Riga. In 1201 he founded Riga and also built the cathedral there. He was also the head of the army that converted the eastern Baltic states to Christianity. He also founded the military order the Livonian Brothers of the Sword. For the purposes of the game his backstory could be that he is rasising cash to help the merchants to found Riga or something similar.

Wiki article with basic info - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_of_Riga

Mmmm... I'm not convinced by Albert of Riga. It may be interesting, but he is not the kind of character I'm looking for. Besides, he's German.

I'm thinking of making up a Pagan Lithuanian or Liv character. Maybe named Aitvaras, after the spirit of good and bad luck. He would be like a classical rogue character.

Take care!

 

[quapitty]

I'm thinking of making up a Pagan Lithuanian or Liv character. Maybe named Aitvaras, after the spirit of good and bad luck. He would be like a classical rogue character.

Take care!

So how about making the Aitvaras a couple with Wolfram von Eschenbach, a quite noble knight with a great education singing poems. More the straight guy. I guess they would probably dislike each other. Or if You want to make it more fictionary, call him Wolfram von Ebersbach or something. And for the Bogomil Monk You were looking for a jew. You know the character of Nathan the wise from a novel by Lessing? His name in the mod could be f.e. Nathan Rosenberg and his character would be already quite developed. The novel is also based in the 13 century.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

In the Hungarian army of 13th century, there wasn't huszár. It appeared in late 14th century. I think the term "Várjobbágy" could displace the Huszár, but it's true, the várjobbágy was unalike to huszár in the medieval army and society of Hungary. A várjobbágy got royal fundus (to use, not to own) in exchange of serving the king as a soldier. In the 13th century some of várjobbágys became noble. The earliest huszárs were Serbians who fought in the Hungarian army against the Ottoman Empire which conquered the bigger part of their home. In the 15th century the huszárs were mostly recruited from peasants.

Yes, now I found it: it was Jobbágy, the substitute of the Húszar.

About the companions, let me rest a little bit, today my head is about to explode.

 

[LarzAluphe]

Recently found this map. If it's correct, You divided the Kingdom of Navarra up right down he middle between the Kingdom of Leon and Castille and the Kingdom of Aragon.

Spoiler

 

[Cruger]

I think this map is more accuarte:

Spoiler

Also in 1200 Castille conquered the western part of Navarre, so I don't see the big problems with Navarre.

 

[Do not look here]

Finnally you've decided to get rid off polish heraldic mails, bravo! Also, using "Rycerze" and "Szlachta" gives right feeling.

So to start with Polish troops, just cause I thought that you would like to know.
one "Szlachcic" but more guys is "Szlachta"
one "Pancerny" and many "Pancerni"

And about "Pancerni". Here's big problem. You've decided to add them, but in wrong way unfortunately. Cause they're light, mounted skirmishers.
And "Pancerni" means armored cavalry, or heavy cavalry in rough translation. They were also from upper classes, Pancerni was unit which was slowly replaced with knights. So they should have haubergeon or scale armors and bows. And please, once again, more axes for polish horsemen.

Not being *****y, just thought that you would like to hear an opinion.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

Finnally you've decided to get rid off polish heraldic mails, bravo! Also, using "Rycerze" and "Szlachta" gives right feeling.

So to start with Polish troops, just cause I thought that you would like to know.
one "Szlachcic" but more guys is "Szlachta"
one "Pancerny" and many "Pancerni"

And about "Pancerni". Here's big problem. You've decided to add them, but in wrong way unfortunately. Cause they're light, mounted skirmishers.
And "Pancerni" means armored cavalry, or heavy cavalry in rough translation. They were also from upper classes, Pancerni was unit which was slowly replaced with knights. So they should have haubergeon or scale armors and bows. And please, once again, more axes for polish horsemen.

Not being *****y, just thought that you would like to hear an opinion.

Good to know all of this, but we need a light cavalry unit.

 

[Do not look here]

So I'll suggest some other changes. Maybe make the heavy cavalry tree "Pancerny" <-> "Rycerz" and for light cavalry make it "Konny kusznik" -> "Zbrojny"
                                                                                                                          ^ this thing, cause I'm not sure which should change in which.

It's a bit of disorder cause armor in polish is "pancerz". So "pancerny" suggests heavy cavalry (as it was).

 

[quapitty]

Well, but as not everyone is speaking polish, wouldn't it be good to have some hint what You are Your men upgrading to? For me it is like going to a polish restaurant and ordering something from the menue by chance. I mean it is also called 'Toulousian squire' or 'Imperial Mounted crossbowman', so You know what You are dealing with, without having all the troop trees in front of You. Otherwise all the troops should have their special native names. Or?

 

[Do not look here]

That's not bad idea, in the last edition you had Polish Noble which easily replaces "rycerz". If that guy would change in "Pancerny", it would be enough.

And "Konny kusznik"->"zbrojny" would be easily replaced with "Mounted crossbowman"->"Veteran mounted crossbowman" or "Man-at-arms" whom he is.
Translation here is a bit inappropriate, cause you still have archers and infantry instead of "Łucznicy" and "Piechurzy".
So if I was you, I would leave only "Pancerny" not translated and go with nobles, crossbowmen and so.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

Well, but as not everyone is speaking polish, wouldn't it be good to have some hint what You are Your men upgrading to? For me it is like going to a polish restaurant and ordering something from the menue by chance. I mean it is also called 'Toulousian squire' or 'Imperial Mounted crossbowman', so You know what You are dealing with, without having all the troop trees in front of You. Otherwise all the troops should have their special native names. Or?

The thing is that sometimes the name that a language has for a military unit is unique and refers exactly to the aspect and characteristics of that unit.

For Aragon, for example, you have the Alforrats and the Almughavars. The first name could be translated as "the quilted ones", because of the armor, and the second comes from the Arabian for "raider", "pillager". Translate them into "quilted light cavalry" and "pillager light infantry" would be rather inaccurate and ugly, and also prosthetic. Why do we want to translate those names if we already have the names for those units? We call the veteran sergeants "Veteran sergeats" because there's no specific name for them, otherwise we would.

In case of the Poles, as fas as I know, there were several classes or ranks of nobility. We cannot say "Polish Knights" because the word Knight in English has a social and political meaning: Knights is not only a well-armoured horseman, a knight is a low-rank noble, son of nobles, who has rights and duties in Feudal society. Polish feudalism was still backwards and did not have "knights", but still had some sort of semi-professional army, formed by the military companies of the nobles. "Polish heavy cavalry"? I don't like how non-Medieval it sounds. It's descriptive, but it does not help to put me in the athmosphere.

Anyway, we decided in a thread to leave the regular troops with a common name (sergeant, knight, spearman...) but make the special troops with their native names. Pancerny does not only mean "armoured horseman", it also reflects a background.

 

[IbnKhaldun]

Add documentation with unit lists in the package of the mod that also describes the unit? Would also help to be bring an education to the players. On a selfish note it might explain to me where you got the names Huffaz and Rumi from.

Or, if it all possible, have separate entries when you upgrade the unit and the unit when it's actually in your party. Have the ugly, not-truly-descriptive-but-gets-the-point-across generic names in the upgrade choices (That's the only major time when it's important I believe) and have the native names when your army forms. That is assuming that you CAN separate upgrade and army names.

 

[Cruger]

Or, if it all possible, have separate entries when you upgrade the unit and the unit when it's actually in your party. Have the ugly, not-truly-descriptive-but-gets-the-point-across generic names in the upgrade choices (That's the only major time when it's important I believe) and have the native names when your army forms. That is assuming that you CAN separate upgrade and army names.

Its a great idea, but as you mention, its impossible.

 

[IbnKhaldun]

Or, if it all possible, have separate entries when you upgrade the unit and the unit when it's actually in your party. Have the ugly, not-truly-descriptive-but-gets-the-point-across generic names in the upgrade choices (That's the only major time when it's important I believe) and have the native names when your army forms. That is assuming that you CAN separate upgrade and army names.

Its a great idea, but as you mention, its impossible.

I have made a bad habit of asking for things like that. This might not be the place, but is there any sort of modding tutorials then I tried searching and lo and behold there's an entire forum of helpful people! Never mind.

 

[Do not look here]

Quote removed to avoid quotocalypsa

O...kay. So maybe make it only "Konny kusznik" as light cavalry and then make:
Man-at-arms -> Rycerz
                    -> Pancerny

Cause if you are already talking bout historical names, you've got to remember that szlachta is term made to describe the feudals since late XVI century, that later came into use while referring to medieval times.
I would like to leave Pancerni in the mod, cause they were not only heavy cavalry. To fully understand term Pancerny you have to go way back into history of my country and check up the FIRST professional army called "Drużyna" that was made of two types of soldiers (Yes, soldiers. Drużynnik haven't got any other things to do, he was professional armyman then):
Tarczownicy - foot soldiers that was garrisoned in every settlement. The most powerful infantry these times.
Pancerni - heavy and versatile cavalry, that could be used either as a powerful chargers and mounted skirmishers. These was our equivalent of whole feudal Europe heavy cavalrymen.
Drużyna were able to crush most of enemies, that's why these times Poland was quite strong and kicked all neighbouring asses.

But it didn't last long. Actually it lasted only till death (1025) of our first king, Bolesław Chrobry. Unfortunately, Drużynnicy saw the western Knights and demanded money and lands from next king. He gave them what they asked and that's how feudalism begun here. And that's it. Instead of fully professional, good equipped, brave etc. soldiers, we had standard "Maybe I'll fight or maybe I won't" feudals.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

Add documentation with unit lists in the package of the mod that also describes the unit? Would also help to be bring an education to the players. On a selfish note it might explain to me where you got the names Huffaz and Rumi from.

Or, if it all possible, have separate entries when you upgrade the unit and the unit when it's actually in your party. Have the ugly, not-truly-descriptive-but-gets-the-point-across generic names in the upgrade choices (That's the only major time when it's important I believe) and have the native names when your army forms. That is assuming that you CAN separate upgrade and army names.

Huffaz and Rumi...

The first one I found as the name given to Bereber young noblemen in the book "The Islamic West", from the Osprey library, and they are mentioned to be part of the Almohad invading army.

Rumi, as far as I know, is the Arabian for Roman, which in some contexts meant "Christian". I know that in the Middle East it meant Byzantine or Greek (it still does in some parts, I think. At least, the last time I was in Istanbul they told me that Greeks living there were called Rum, while the Greeks in Greece were Yunan, from the Greek form for Ionian). They represent Christian horsemen made slaves. Sort of Western Mamluks, actually, but they were not forced to convert to Islam.

Take care!