Another non PC idea, this time about the Princesse

[Horatius]

1. A princesse should be able to inherit the throne of your country if no sons are available, and if she is marrieid to a general of your faction her husband should inherit the throne, and you live on in the absence of sons.

2. You know how all the princess did in MTW 1 was either offer alliance, offer marriage to another faction, or make your generals more loyal?

You may also remember when occassionally in RTW a general had a good or bad wife as a virtue/vice (Good wife increases influence, bad one reduces it)?

Well I would like to see the princesse gain the ability to offer adultery in order to gain leverage for an alliance/ceasefire/agreement/bribe etc, either offering herself as a bribe (But you still have her. You could just offer the adultery to a nuetral/enemy king/prince (won't work with diplomats, they are not high ranking enough), it does nothing apart from makeing it a secret vice in both of them. Now naturally the princesse can now blackmail the prince or king she just went to bed with into accepting your terms!

Now the princesse also gets vices and virtues as these things go along. A princesse who can seduce plenty of princes gets seductive traits (Increases the chances for success in temporarily offering herself for her country), they also get easy traits the more they seduce (lessens their likeliness to be accepted into a marriage with another faction).

Naturally the higher her seductive traits the worse a wife virtue her husband will get so beware of giving her in marriage to your greatest general/highest acumen governor, since if you have used her enough he will get the "rumors", "cuckold wife", "Wife has no shame" etc etc etc traits.

However if you keep a princesse is innocent the general who marries her gets the "Wife beyond reproach" trait which unlike the others greatly helps his influence, and possibly acumen.

On top of the marriage penalties if you make your princesse a cuckold, remember she may one day be in line for a throne under my princesse upgrade suggestions and you don't want a woman who has a character trait of "Might as well work in a brothel" to be the Queen.

So how do you like the idea of the princesse as a super diplomat who uses her feminine charms, and also be in line for the throne of your country should there be no men available.

[Tamur]

Very interesting gameplay dynamic! I like this as an option. Of course, the Church Police will be after you pretty soon -- then again, given the nature of some monkish manuscripts (http://www.college.emory.edu/culpeper/MCMAHON/fortune_comment.html), perhaps this could be used to gain favour with the church as well ~:shock:

[Horatius]

That is a great addition to the idea mate.

[Horatius]

Anyone else like this idea?

[Ituralde]

Sounds a lot more interesting and thought-out than the currently proposed system where you can bribe/seduce/whatever enemy generals but can only do so once. Not that the CA system is bad, but I like the OPs suggestions better. A new set of decisions you can make to play your individual style! :2thumbsup:

[Oaty]

Medieval TotalPimp

^^Ituralde Probably can only be done once with each to stop it from being an exploit. Plus in those times virginity had a much higher value.

[Horatius]

That is why it would be realistic for that to be really tempting, I mean it is tempting to ruin another factions princesse.

[Nada]

I felt dirty just reading about your idea. Two thumbs up! ~:pimp:

[Ringeck]

Oh great. Medieval Total War turned into Sex In the City.

Seriously, this sort of would be a bad idea in the lineage-obsessed high society of the middle ages. Considering the amount of arranged marriages and the relative freedom of aristocratic women who had borne a few children, it's not something that likely would work very well as blackmail either - in the high trobadour tradition, it was even regarded as the highest "art" for someone to seduce a married woman (considerably more so than seducing a maiden).

It was vitally important for aristocratic women to show themselves faithful (though not necessarily virgins when they married - many ladies went through several marriages) until they had procured a few male heirs. If a royal daughter went around doing stuff like that, it would be the guy she seduced who had the grounds for blackmail!

Lucrezia Borgia, the 15th century italian starlet of political marriages, was primarily used by her father and brothers as something to marry away for political alliances - and when they tried to get her off her first marriage as her husband wasn't politically useful anymore, their argument was that the marriage hadn't been consummated. Her Sforza husband countered with allegations of infidelity on her part (with her brothers, no less). Men weren't really expected to remain entirely monogamous - good examples of that is the "Grand Bastard of Burgundy", Anthony, illegitimate half-brother to Charles the Bold, who, alongside the late Duke's daughter Mary, kept Burgundian lands out of the hands of the french. Everyone knew he was a bastards, and yet he was one of the great lords of the land.

Perhaps as an event, removing the princess as an eligible match for royalty (but still marriable to your generals).

[Myrddraal]

If a royal daughter went around doing stuff like that, it would be the guy she seduced who had the grounds for blackmail!


Quite. Who cares if a general has a mistress, but if that mistress turns out to be a princess, shame on her!

[Horatius]

Oh great. Medieval Total War turned into Sex In the City.

Seriously, this sort of would be a bad idea in the lineage-obsessed high society of the middle ages. Considering the amount of arranged marriages and the relative freedom of aristocratic women who had borne a few children, it's not something that likely would work very well as blackmail either - in the high trobadour tradition, it was even regarded as the highest "art" for someone to seduce a married woman (considerably more so than seducing a maiden). ).

That really depends on the period of the Middle Ages, however offering sex as a motive for accepting a treaty by a pretty young princesse would be a big thing, and it could be used as blackmail against a supposedly pious man, since pious men did not go around sleeping around.


It was vitally important for aristocratic women to show themselves faithful (though not necessarily virgins when they married - many ladies went through several marriages) until they had procured a few male heirs. If a royal daughter went around doing stuff like that, it would be the guy she seduced who had the grounds for blackmail!

That is why I said both would have grounds for blackmail, so this idea would be a lot more then justy a static constant, instead it would really make diplomacy a complex and worthwhile field to go to, in Medieval and Rome I would often have only 1, or even no diplomats at all.


Lucrezia Borgia, the 15th century italian starlet of political marriages, was primarily used by her father and brothers as something to marry away for political alliances - and when they tried to get her off her first marriage as her husband wasn't politically useful anymore, their argument was that the marriage hadn't been consummated. Her Sforza husband countered with allegations of infidelity on her part (with her brothers, no less). Men weren't really expected to remain entirely monogamous - good examples of that is the "Grand Bastard of Burgundy", Anthony, illegitimate half-brother to Charles the Bold, who, alongside the late Duke's daughter Mary, kept Burgundian lands out of the hands of the french. Everyone knew he was a bastards, and yet he was one of the great lords of the land.

Perhaps as an event, removing the princess as an eligible match for royalty (but still marriable to your generals).

That however goes within limits. If your ten cross piety prince commits adultry perhaps he loses a cross or two (If the princesse goes through with the blackmail)? Anyway my other point that sex could be used to
sell your proposition I take it from that that you agree with that?

Also I did not see any criticism of my suggestion of adding the Princesse to the line up to inherit the throne, so I assume you agree with that right?