Brittania Tweak Idea: Bards

**DorosTheConqueror** · September 03, 2007, 08:58 PM

Here's an idea for a mod- well, not really so much a "mod" as a small adjustment to the Brittania campaign. As we all know by now, there's no priests and no religion in Britain, just a bunch of different "cultures" battling it out. So why not add in a new type of agent, basically a remodeled priest, who promotes culture instead of religion? The Welsh, Scottish, and Irish could get bards, the Norwegians could get skalds, and the English could get... God knows what, minstrels maybe? Dancing bears in Union Jack waistcoats? Rapping chavs? Think of something for them.

Anyways, you could tweak the cultural conversion rates so that natural and governor influenced cultural shifts are diminished (so you'll be encouraged to use bards to promote your own culture), and maybe weaken bards a little (compared to priests) so it'll be harder to convert 95% of the enemy population with agents (I don't care how clever your songs are, you're not turning the entire population of East London Scottish THAT easily). You could also give the Welsh some bonuses to their bards (say, an inherent +2 to their "storytelling/faith" skill and access to some special traits/ ancillaries), for two reasons: 1) Wales was famous for their bards, much more famous than either Ireland or Scotland 2) Wales has a tough enough time as it is, what with their horrible start position and weak armies, so an edge in the culture wars could be a useful balancing trick. You could also make a special "culture guild" (cross between a tavern and church) that serves as a replacement for the Theologians guild, and for Wales and Norway, can produce special "combat bard/skald" units who can inspire troops and die in melee.

Oh, and maybe change the churches to something more appropriate- just assume that each settlement has churches already, and instead make cultural changes/ agent recruitment occur from some other type of building (maybe a culture-specific building). This will have the added bonus of playing more like the vanilla game: what with capturing enemy settlements, destroying rival churches, and building up a new tier of cultural buildings, instead of just capturing any old settlement and using their old cultural buildings to promote your own.

So, what do you think? If I ever feel the muse, I'll try my hand at making it, but if anyone wants to try and whip up a Bards of Britain mod before I do, be my guest!

**Hellbent** · September 03, 2007, 09:25 PM

Yeah, this is a great idea! I personally think the conversion at the moment is too fast, that it doesn't even impact gameplay that much. Doing this would also lengthen the time so we can recruit the other faction's units before it disappears because of culture.

**DorosTheConqueror** · September 04, 2007, 02:55 PM

Alright, here are some tentative traits. The layout is pretty self-explanitory: trait ID name, followed by the display names for each rank, effect of each rank, trait description, and at the end, conditions for acquiring the trait etc etc.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

No idea if that'd be balanced, but w/e, like I said, I'm probably not going to get around to finishing this mod myself. Also, is it possible to have "heretic" untis convert to other cultures? That might be useful for the BardTolerant trait list... like the priests UnOrthodox trait, except instead of converting to a heretic, they convert to whatever rival culture is currently dominant in the land they're visiting.

Working on some ancillaries next!

**DorosTheConqueror** · September 04, 2007, 04:19 PM

Annnnnd some ancillaries.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

More on the way later, maybe.

**finneys13** · September 04, 2007, 04:34 PM

Have to disagree with your Welsh idea, Ireland has a very strange tradition as well, just as strong as Wales if not more, the same with Scotland.

If you got rid of the Welsh idea, then you have a good idea.

**DorosTheConqueror** · September 04, 2007, 04:54 PM

Well, Ireland and Scotland certainly had a strong national culture (as did England), but the Welsh were still more known for their storytelling prowess than anyone else in Britain. While the Scots and Irish could each boast national epics and heroes and independent bodies of work, Wales had them beat. Think about it: King Arthur and the Mabinogion, or the Ulster Cycle? Taliesin and Dafydd ap Gwilym, or... dunno, can't think of any famous Irish and Scottish blokes who were either alive or popular around the high Middle Ages offhand. Plus on top of that, does Ireland really need any more of an edge? They've already got the best starting position and some of the strongest soldiers in the game, anything else would be tantamount to cheating.

You do have a bit of a point, however, and if you'll notice, the traits and ancillaries slightly favor Ireland and Scotland over England (in particular, they get access to better ancs). Norway gets no special advantage or disadvantage, aside from warrior skalds.

**finneys13** · September 04, 2007, 05:01 PM

Ulster Cycle is inferior to King Arthur? What about the Fenian Cycle?

The culture between the three Celtic nations was the same, you can't give one, ie. Wales, an advantage.

**DorosTheConqueror** · September 04, 2007, 06:48 PM

Originally Posted by finneys13

Ulster Cycle is inferior to King Arthur? What about the Fenian Cycle?

Pretty much, yeah. Ditto with the Fenian cycle, only arguably more so as the Ulster cycle at least caught on overseas. Now don't get me wrong, I appreciate the Irish cycles as much as the next guy (assuming the next guy even knows what they are) but trying to compare them to the literary and cultural juggernaut that is the Arthurian cycle is like trying to compare Wesley Willis and Mozart. Both are good in their own respect, but there's a clear and unmistakable hierarchy there.

The culture between the three Celtic nations was the same, you can't give one, ie. Wales, an advantage.

No it wasn't, and yes we can. Each of the three "Celtic" nations was distinct from one another, both then and now- hence the reason we can talk about "Welsh culture", "Irish culture", and "Scottish culture", instead of "nondescript not-English culture". While there was some overlap (particularly between Ireland and Scotland) there's no question that they were different from one another. As for the advantage, why give anyone an advantage? Why give the Scots so many pikes? Why give the Irish such a good starting position and balanced troop types? Why give the Norwegians their powerful infantry, or the English their economic and territorial edge, not to mention all their knights and longbows? It all comes down to A) historical "realism" (which is maleable) and B) game balance, to ensure that each faction is playable and feels distinct. As such, it's totally justified to give the Welsh a slight edge in the culture wars, the English a slight penalty, and the rest of 'em neither a big advantage nor a handicap. (the Scots and Irish by giving them access to some special ancs, and the Norwegians by giving them a new unit)

**FoxFreeze** · September 05, 2007, 09:25 AM

I have to agree with Doros. There was no 'pan-Celtic' identity amongst Ireland, Wales or Scotland. Perhaps the one unifying factor would be that all 3 were subject to Celtic Catholicism. The Picts weren't 'celtic' until the 10th century, becoming the Fir Alban - The men of Scotland. While sharing similar art with what is popularly perceived as 'celtic', they were their own distinct social group. The same goes for Wales and Ireland.

What I'm getting at before this becomes too long winded is that simply because they share similarities in culture doesn't mean they aren't culturally distinct. Wales lays claim to King Arthur, and it doesn't mean Ireland gets just as much claim as they have to Cuchulain.

One more, and I'll shut up: America and England have VERY similar cultures, yet you'd never once here an American be called an Englishman because we're perceived as being so 'different'.

**finneys13** · September 05, 2007, 09:29 AM

That's what I meant, they had plenty of similarities and differences, and many legends were shared between all three, like the Wolfhound killing the Wolf to save the child story.

And Arthur and the Ulster Cycle are just as epic, Arthur is just better known as it was adopted by the English.

**FoxFreeze** · September 05, 2007, 09:48 AM

'The culture between the three Celtic nations was the same, you can't give one, ie. Wales, an advantage.'

I'm sorry, but you obviously didn't understand me.

**finneys13** · September 05, 2007, 10:22 AM

I wasn't clear enough, they weren't the same, but not different enough to give Wales an advantage.

**DorosTheConqueror** · September 05, 2007, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by finneys13

I wasn't clear enough, they weren't the same, but not different enough to give Wales an advantage.

Yes they were. We know that the Welsh cycles were the most succesfull (whether it was because they were inherently "better" or because they had better literary agents through England) and we also know that most of the famous bards, storytellers, and songsmiths of the Dark and Middle Ages in Britain were Welsh. Heck, even CA itself acknowledges that fact- note the campaign opening movie, where it clearly states that the Welsh are "a people of song and sword". Furthermore, we know that their cultures are different enough to be recognised as distinct and seperate entities- both from basic sense, and because otherwise we'd have three cultures in the campaign: English, Norwegian, and pan-Celtic.

So, if you really want to convince me that Wales doesn't deserve an edge (bearing in mind that this edge is only a small one, and one which will likely be offset by their lack of territories and proximity to the English), you should do two things. One, give us some examples of famous Scots/Irish bards of either that period or preceding ones (like I said, I can't think of any worth mentioning off-hand, and even a cursory Google search only turns up more examples of the major mythological cycles instead of specific people) and two, justify the horribly anti-Welsh campaign balance that currently exists in the game. Or you could ignore all that and bypass the arguments altogether by making the mod yourself and telling me and my BardWelsh trait to suck it.

**Mechstra** · September 05, 2007, 12:47 PM

Enough of the pedantry, those traits and ancillaries are bloody fantastic.

**riadach** · September 15, 2007, 08:31 PM

I actually had this idea as well, rather suspiciously actually :-)

http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=90970

As for famous Irish bards, hmm

Muireadhach Albanach Ó Dálaigh
Godfraidh Fionn Ó Dálaigh
Tadhg Dall Ó hUiginn
Fearghal Óg Mac an Bháird.
Seán MacCraith
Donnchadh Mór Ó Dálaigh
Gearóid Iarla
Eochaidh Ó hEodhusa

and many more besides. Each Irish prince or lord was expected to employ a poet to extol his own virtues, and reward them handsomely for their efforts.

There are 2,000 poems extent in Irish from the period 1250-1600 alone.
Many lords established schools for the training of poets, judges and historians. It was the historians job (senchae or ollamh re senchus) to transmit both oral and written history from generation to generation. This is from where the Irish oral literal tradition developed.