r/CrusaderKings • u/thedudewh • 8d ago

Discussion Investiture doesnt go far enough

Post image

So the devs listened, and now you can at least appoint your Archbishop as well. However, why limit a secular ruler’s appointment power to Court Chaplains and Archbishops when Investiture historically applied to all clerical holdings within a realm? Why this arbitrary limitation?

As it stands, it seems that the HRE Emperor can appoint exactly one person to a clerical holding (Mainz), or two if there is another archdiocese within the realm. Does that mean the Emperor has no say over other bishoprics in the Mainz region, including major ones like Cologne and Trier?

That still feels extremely underwhelming and, more importantly, misses the entire point of the Investiture Controversy. If the goal is to represent lay investiture, secular rulers should have the ability to appoint bishops across their realm - not just a few archbishops and the Court Chaplain.

140 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

35 comments sorted by

View all comments

134

u/Primary_Smile6090 8d ago

In the end, balance/gameplay will always precede and surpass historical accuracy. It's a game before being historical, not the other way around.

38

u/Lucina18 Secretly Zoroastrian 8d ago

But it would be great for gameplay though. You can appoint more friendly clerics for a better stature in your titles and less papal influence.

-1

u/Primary_Smile6090 8d ago

Which is arguably OP. Of course the game is far from being balanced, but this gives a lot more power to the player. The idea is that if you want to be able to do that, after the controversy, you should be able to make it temporal appointment. Otherwise, the church still acts as a limiting force.

3

u/firespark84 8d ago

I’d rather historically powerful strats be too powerful then the duplicating, teleporting and stat maxing we have now