Offspring ( no not the american punk group)

[Derfal Cadarn]

Currently playing the english in easy mode (told you im a coward, altho its the PoN this weekend sometime, after everyones suggestions from my very first post) and he's a randy old goat, however he must have a gene defect or something. Looking thru my list of heirs I have 10 princesses ranging from 2 years old to 13, when eventually at the age of 63, the kinf managed to get his wife to give birth to a son, the king then and went and had a heart attack from the excitement of managing to sire a male heir. good job that luckily the king had a very young brother to keep the kingdom dust free for a few years. If there was ever a case for reformation of the english church then this was it, my william iii could have been the TW verions of Henry viii, split from the church, hence no more excommunications from the pope, divorced his wife and found some nubile young slip of girl with fgood male child bearing hips. anyways just wanted to share that little story with you all as i just wandered what is the most children that any one king has produced, be they male or female, i must admit i was willing the old goat to carry on sowing his seeds until he was in his 80's but it was probably too much exertion at sex that killed him off when it did

[Vigi]

I had quite a few playing the Turks once. I believe I ended up having 7 or 8, although I can't remember it was a while ago. Of course, being the Turks they were all males, so I had a lot of heirs to risk in battle :o.

[twjunkie]

Also, why do the muslim nations not have princesses? I always found them handy to have as a Christian to keep unruly generals loyal or to reward good ones.

[Vigi]

This is just a guess, but I believe it is to respect Muslim laws of a woman's place in society. I am not going to place an opinion on it one way or another as I try to respect the beliefs of everyone and I don't want to offend anyone. But, yeah, I would imagine woman did not really have any sort of power in the medieval ages, in the Islamic world. Perhaps one of the history buffs here knows more.

[twjunkie]

I understand and would prolly agree with you Vigi, but I'm sure that muslim rulers still married off daughters for political reasons. Possibly even more so as they had less individual rights.

[Vigi]

Well then theres looking at it from the point of view of balance. Perhaps CA felt that the Muslims would need all those princes since they would probably have more of a tendency to be at war with a lot of people than the Catholic factions. I mean, think about it. If you're a Turk, what allies do you have? The egyptians will be competing with you. The Almohads, *maybe*. The Byzantines will probably see you as a threat. The Catholic factions, of course, will be eager to crusade and war against you. The point is you probably need all of the man power you can get, and you need some sort of insurance that your line will continue.

Again thats just a guess and I could probably think of other reasons as to why it is this way. When playing the Turks I know I don't mind having all of those princes, gives me more of a reason to use them as generals if I have a lot of them.

[twjunkie]

True. I'm playing my first campaign as the Turks right now. My last campaign was my first venture into the land of the muslim factions with Eygpt. I had 8 princes one time. I guess princesses would just come in handy as it seems that muslim generals have a larger drop in loyalty after a heir takes over than catholic or otho generals.Having a princess or two to buy some loyalty would be nice.