Westeros M2:TW mod

[Maester Yobjascz]

The CCG has that kind of info? Interesting. Although I rather suspect I know the source of it...

Hehe... I certainly don't.

I don't know how much validity that has... do you think it's sufficient for inclusion in the mod, or should we reduce the Dreadfort to a standard castle on more generic northern landforms? I ask because this quote is the basis for the Dreadfort being a Fortress(M) in the North... which puts it on par with Winterfell, which is a Fortress(E), in the current incarnation.

[Ran]

The only sources I can find on the Internet for the Dreadfort being built in a volcanic area are Wert. I'm sure he got the idea from somewhere, but I'd like to look at it myself. In December, Wert did post that, but there it's not at all clear that it's volcanic and it seems more speculative on his part. Can anyone dig up a solid source for this?

So, not sure what to make of it.

Now, ignoring whether the area is volcanic or not, yes, the Dreadfort can stand up to really long sieges. I can certainly see it as a fortress. The Boltons were rivals of the Starks for centuries.

[Curiousepic]

I haven't played enough to confirm this, but do resources have any effect on gameplay other than as sources of income for merchants, and where you can build mines? If not, I think it may be best to minimize if not completely ignore that part of the game, in favor of greater depth in other areas. Extra money produced by resource-rich areas could just be added to that settlement's income.

Merchants and resources simply don't play a big role in the books, IMO (except those of the seafaring kind which we can't really do until we have the eastern continent). Tywin doesn't say "ok we need more income to produce more soldiers, recruit a merchant and have him trade those sheep east of the gold tooth."

[Aplomb]

I think you'd want to keep resources just as a concession to make sure the gameplay retains depth and allows a player the choice to focus on that area, but I wouldn't go nuts to make it conform to the books, especially since the books don't emphasize resources and don't explain where they are much. I also think you could just use the vanilla resources, there aren't really any meaningful supplies of anything GRRM made up to interest a merchant.

Put what we know where it should go (gold in the West, wine in the Reach, iron on the Iron islands, probably fur in the North, wood in the Stormlands). Then focus on gameplay and put a decent and balanced spread of the more basic vanilla commodities, like textiles, grain, sheep, or fish everywhere else in reasonable places. Just avoid ones that don't exist in Westeros, like slaves and ivory.

Just because GRRM hasn't told us that certain areas of, say, the West do in fact produce grain, or that some areas of the Riverlands have a lot of textile industry, you have to imagine that's the case in order for people to feed and clothe themselves. Pretty much every major region is going to have an area that focuses on the real basics like food, textiles, wood, etc. And you can put more rare resources by extrapolating that you'd find copper and silver in the mountains, and other things in other geographically appropriate places.

I'd thus suggest bending more to gameplay balance here in spreading out a decent mix of resources than making sure everything is canon, especially since this is impossible as there isn't enough information to suggest you would be "wrong" to, say, put a dye resource in the Reach or some grain on the Green River in Dorne.

[MagtheMighty]

I think you'd want to keep resources just as a concession to make sure the gameplay retains depth and allows a player the choice to focus on that area, but I wouldn't go nuts to make it conform to the books, especially since the books don't emphasize resources and don't explain where they are much. I also think you could just use the vanilla resources, there aren't really any meaningful supplies of anything GRRM made up to interest a merchant.

Put what we know where it should go (gold in the West, wine in the Reach, iron on the Iron islands, probably fur in the North, wood in the Stormlands). Then focus on gameplay and put a decent and balanced spread of the more basic vanilla commodities, like textiles, grain, sheep, or fish everywhere else in reasonable places. Just avoid ones that don't exist in Westeros, like slaves and ivory.

Just because GRRM hasn't told us that certain areas of, say, the West do in fact produce grain, or that some areas of the Riverlands have a lot of textile industry, you have to imagine that's the case in order for people to feed and clothe themselves. Pretty much every major region is going to have an area that focuses on the real basics like food, textiles, wood, etc. And you can put more rare resources by extrapolating that you'd find copper and silver in the mountains, and other things in other geographically appropriate places.

I'd thus suggest bending more to gameplay balance here in spreading out a decent mix of resources than making sure everything is canon, especially since this is impossible as there isn't enough information to suggest you would be "wrong" to, say, put a dye resource in the Reach or some grain on the Green River in Dorne.

What Aplomb said makes a lot of sense to me.

[Werthead]

The only sources I can find on the Internet for the Dreadfort being built in a volcanic area are Wert. I'm sure he got the idea from somewhere, but I'd like to look at it myself. In December, Wert did post that, but there it's not at all clear that it's volcanic and it seems more speculative on his part. Can anyone dig up a solid source for this?

So, not sure what to make of it.

Now, ignoring whether the area is volcanic or not, yes, the Dreadfort can stand up to really long sieges. I can certainly see it as a fortress. The Boltons were rivals of the Starks for centuries.

I haven't seen the CCG myself, but it was absolutely ages ago (before I was online, when I lurked during my lunch hour in the internet cafe). Someone said they'd seen a picture of the Dreadfort from the CCG and it looked like it was built on a mound of volcanic rock. Some hefty Googling has failed to turn up the source for this, so it's probably best to disregard the volcanic bit. However, if someone does have the CCG, it could be worthwhile to take a look at the info in it, if it is reliable (was the CCG info checked by GRRM? I remember a con report with him asking the designers how they were going to handle Dany's dragons in the later books).

The four-year siege was info from a thread I was directed to by Ran

[Ran]

Yep, that one I distinctly recall, and even found it on here. It's spoiler stuff, so I haven't linked to it -- it's one of the ADwD chapter reports, though, for those who want to look. A search for 'Dreadfort' in the ADwD forum may turn it up more quickly.

[Maester Yobjascz]

So, now that that's settled...

Any word from our intrepid developers on what's next?

[Marcus]

Well...as far as the map goes, a few things left:

Generals

Settlement religions

Starting positions

Probably best to do the 2nd one, then the 1st, and the starting positions last.

We know what factiosn follow what religions, but we also know some deviate from the capital. White Harbour is tilted towards the Faith, for one. Should Night's Watch be under the Faith (likely) or the Old Gods? Do all of Stannis' bannerlords follow Rhllor (sp)? Anything like this is needed.

[Maester Yobjascz]

Hmmm... White Harbor should follow the Faith. The Blackwoods in the Riverlands, I believe, follow the Old Gods. Not all of Stannis' lords follow R'hllor... I know that House Sunglass held to the Seven... Conversely, House Florent went to R'hllor when they joined Stannis, though they're technically a house of the Reach (How's that going to be handled, btw?). I believe that the Royces of Runestone also follow the Old Gods, though most of the Vale follows the Seven.

As to the Night's Watch... that's tough. They're predominantly of the Seven... especially the leadership. However, Benjen and Mormont both followed the Old Gods, I believe.

How is religion going to be handled, with 'heretical' lords? It seems that only R'hllor is concerned with heresy... at least as it's practiced by Melisandre. Thoros is more accommodating in his approach. Will Blackwood generals be targets of inquisitors because they follow the Old Gods rather than the Seven? Or will they just have a loyalty penalty? What's the plan?

[Aplomb]

Religion is gonna be tough, the game mechanic is pretty far from what is happening in the books.

I don't know how much you can mod religion, so these are uniformed suggestions that assume you can't do much more than rename them, but here they are:

The Seven should be more or less transferred directly from Catholicism. Make priests Septons, cardinals Most Devout Septons, and the Pope High Septon. Factions that follow The Seven would compete to place the High Septon, which wouldn't hurt in Westeros politics so the game benefits of placing the Pope seem close enough for the mod. I wouldn't give the High Septon a province like the Papal States though, if that is possible in a mod (maybe place "High Septon States" in an invisible off screen province as a "cheat" to get around the coding). Also, I would turn down the number and power of Inquisitors if that is possible because (1) they aren't that aggressive in Westeros (although at the end of AFfC, heh . . .) and (2) Inquisitors are annoying as hell and almost ruin the game!!! Seven areas would be everywhere but The North, Iron Islands, Dragonstone and whatever you give Stannis to start, and those areas outside The North that follow the Old Gods. Buildings can be various sizes of septs ("small sept", "great sept", etc.)

Because The Seven and the Old Gods have a long history of peaceful coexistence, I would transfer the Old Gods directly from Orthodoxy. No reason The Seven would crusade against the Old Gods during this era, and the Old Gods faithful don't get mixed up in anything like the Catholic or Seven hierarchy politics, so it's a good fit. No idea what you would call an Old God "priest" though, maybe make up something like Worshiper or Greenseer, maybe? They would be The North (absent some areas like White Harbor) and those areas of the Riverlands or the Vale where the Old Gods are followed. Buildings would be various sizes of wierwood groves.

R'hllor can be transferred from Islam fairly cleanly. The Seven can "crusade" against them, and R'

R'hllor can "jihad" against The Seven and the Old Gods (although crusade and jihad would have to be renamed to things that don't occur to me right now). No hierarchy. Imams renamed Red Priests. Call the buildings . . . hmm . . . Circles of Light? Houses of Fire? I dunno. Initially predominate in whatever lands you give Stannis.

Now -- Drowned God. This gets tougher. If the modding process allows you to add another religion, I think I would make another copy of Islam, but one that is opposed to the other copy of Islam in R'Holler. Let them "jihad" against The Seven, The Old Gods, and R'hllor, and let The Seven "crusade" against them, and R'hllor "jihad" against them (all with appropriate names for these actions). If you can't simply make another copy of Islam and set it in opposition to the first Islam, I don't know what you do. If you can do it, Imams are Drowned Ones. Buildings are . . . you got me. Salt Sea Altars or something?

After all that, pagans and heretics and witches are just as they are in the game, except that there won't be very many majority pagan areas to begin with (Beyond the Wall, and maybe Mountains of the Moon?). But most areas can be some significant percent pagan just to have the Septons, Red Priests, etc. serve a function in the game -- provide stability bonus and ward off heretics and witch generation -- and to give The Seven factions the ability to earn piety on their own lands to compete for High Septon.

[aeoleron9]

Problem with jihads from R'hllor and Drowned God is that they both have only one faction, but Crusades and Jihads are fun because everyone can join. Crusades with the Seven would be easier, though we'll most of Westeros ganging up on Dragonstone and Pyke.

Myself I think the influence from religion could be tuned down in the mod. The books never really emphasized on religion, with none of the fanatic nonsense going on like our Medieval times thanks to Maegor, and some tension building up only in AFFC. Since we're basing this on the Five Kings, I'm supposing a religious structure buildable in settlements, and perhaps acquirable priest retinues for characters staying in that settlement. (Maesters I suppose could be retinues too, but that's another topic) Religious unrest and such should be tuned down too...maybe some for lands acquired by the Ironborn and Stannis and vice versa but that's it.

And since we don't have an excommunicating High Septon, the entire Papal state along with its pesky Inquisitors and cardinal schools could be swiped, and maybe the whole crusade/jihad system. Not sure with the pious effect in characters, maybe the less piety the more dread. Some holy missions could be left, like church building with smaller reward/punishments. It leaves us little to play with religion, but so did non-Christian factions in the original, and we'd stay true to the books.

[Curiousepic]

I agree completely. Some interesting things could happen with R'hllor and the Drowned God, but only in terms of religious unrest from the settlements they conquer. If we want to follow realism scaled from vanilla, religious conversion rates would be what... roughly 0.1% per turn due to the shorter time scale? As I stated before, I think merchants can be scaled back or scraped completely for similar reasons. Time not spent on fleshing these aspects out can be used fleshing out other more suitable aspects.

Should Stannis' faction truly have the Lord of Light as their religion? If we're beginning this mod in the middle of AGoT, Stannis hasn't exactly given over to Melisandre, correct? If it's possible, perhaps there would be a scripted event when the player could choose to convert as Stannis did, or refuse, each providing their own pros and cons. If you give in to Melisandre, she appears as an ancillary granting certain benefits (perhaps there could be red priest "mercenary units" available). But in each settlement you conquer, you must destroy the sept, or she will abandon you, something along those lines.

[luke_nicholas]

I absolutely love ASoF , and M2:TW, so i'm happy to contribute whatever I can. I definitely want this mod once its complete!

Maybe there is a way of disabling the Old Gods factions from having priests? Greenseers and such are possible I suppose, but I don't know.

[chewietobbacca]

Papal States are completely out so no inquistiors or cardinal system. We can remove jihads too by making it impossible to call one and yes we can remove priests from a religion if need be.

[Aplomb]

Ditching the cardinals and inquisitors makes sense I guess. I for one won't miss the freakin' inquisitors. It does take away a fairly important aspect of the game but for this mod it seems right.

But ditching priests for the Old Gods or any faction is a mistake I think -- they are too important a game mechanic for pacifying conquered lands (or setting up a conquest) and dealing with heretics and witches. The North would be really hamstrung without them -- I'd hate to rely on just religious buildings which are expensive and less flexible. I think the books have to bend to the game here.

As for jihads, I say keep them in. It will be tough for the Iron Islands and Stannis, but at least they have island homes to retreat to, and the AI is still pretty bad at sea invasions, and it is easy for a player to defend against them. M2:TW envisions that some factions have it tougher than others anyway. It would be fun for expert players to take on the challenge in the way some masochists enjoy withstanding the Mongols and Timurids.

I realize these two opinions might seem contradictory -- don't remove Old God priests because it would make it hard for The North, but keep jihad even though it would make it hard for The Iron Islands and Stannis. But the first goes to crippling The North in terms of a basic gameplay mechanic, and the second just goes to creating a situation where factions still have all the main gameplay tools at hand but find themselves in a tougher strategic situation. I would play a faction where I'm sure to get lots of enemies, as long as I have the same basic tools as everyone else.

Now in practical terms, that means only The Seven will Jihad, as The North, Iron Islands, and Stannis are single religion factions. I still think that's fair, that's an advantage to The Seven but Jihads peter out when the objective is captured, not everyone joins in, and it's easy to get peace from the others during and especially afterwards all things considered. The Seven factions are going to have their own additional burden being largely smashed together as they are while at least The North, Iron Islands and Stannis have defensible homes. Just my opinion, this would take some play to see if it is balanced.

[Curiousepic]

Actually, having looked at the unit text files, it may be possible for regular generals, or any unit for that matter, to act as a priest and cause a certain amount of conversion. I think that may be a good compromise.

I tried testing this, adding "denounce" to the abilities of other character types in descr_character.txt, and it didn't seem to work, but there's probably something else that needs to be changed... that, or conversion is hardcoded.

[aeoleron9]

The basic role of priests in the game are: 1 Converting, 2 Killing heretics and witches, 3 Becoming cardinals or popes. Mostly passive stuff done by standing on a region.

Meanwhile in the mod, their first and third roles are mostly out. No papacy; and quoting Curious, conversion at our turn rates would be minimal if we're going realism, so even the religious unrest with Stannis and Greyjoys would probably turn into a permanent happiness-minus obstacle. As for the second role...I'm not quite sure about heretics and witches in Westeros, it after all is a fantasy land that acknowledges Dragons and to some extent Magic. So...I don't really know what to do with the priests.

I admit, I'm not the biggest fan of the religious system in M2TW. But I'm no modder, just talking

Always happy if the team make something interesting out of this... they have the last call either way. If the religious abilities with generals work then maybe we could have real fighting monks(red priests? drowned men?) that convert and kill.. :drools at the concept:

I do like the idea of 'harder' factions because of cultural and religious differences...Dorne could be considered as well. So we have special factions with natural barriers but a harder gameplay from hostile crusades, and maybe the permanent unrest thing.

[Curiousepic]

Furthermore, for those that don't know, when you conquer a settlement, there is an option to either occupy, sack, or exterminate the settlement. Exterminating destroys almost all of the population and grants you some money, while sacking executes 30-50%(?) of the population and grants you even more money. Doing either of these options goes a long way to quelling unrest after settling in. This, along with garrisons to keep order where necessary (funded by the sacking), would be a suitable and really canonical way to play the Iron Isles without needing priests or churches.

I do wonder, in the far future when we get around to it, how we will deal with the multireligious Free Cities... Will having multiple religions in the same settlement incite religious unrest automatically? Or is there a balance when you have roughly equal proportions of each religion?

[luke_nicholas]

Off topic a bit, but when you have an army in the field without a character in command, it's leader is named Captain "Random first name".

Of course, those name lists will generate good names, but could we also change the title of these army leaders to "Ser" (might leave it out for the North?). Not relevant to game mechanics, but a nice touch : p