Fear mechanic

[Headshotkill]

This game needs a system of fear from authority, as of now it is impossible to properly lead a realm with an iron fist and absolute rule.
I thought of a little system loosely based on the principles of Machiavelli.
"Better to be feared than loved"

Basicly we need a second factor that influences interaction between characters, like the opinion factor. I'm not sure it should be called the fear factor as a more appropriate name could be authority in most situations.
It's just like the opinion factor ranging from -100 to +100, -100 meaning pathetic, +100 meaning terrifying or awe inspiring depending on interaction with the opinion factor, it would be influenced by traits, military power and how you deal with various situations in the past involving prisoners and uprisings. quick example: a clean situation where you either raise or lower authority is letting a faction archieve it's goal without resistance, or fighting and beating it, losing a war against a faction is even worse than submitting in the first place. Prisoner treatment would further influence it.

Believe it or not but even Machiavelli thinks being hated by everyone is a bad idea, it tends to reduce your life expectancy significantly if you know what I mean.
The system is a bit more fleshed out than simply a second factor, the fear or authority factor as I invision it cannot work without interacting with the opinion factor, on their own they don't mean a lot in the complete picture.

Let's look at some of the extreme situations:

Opinion +100 + authority +100 = RESPECT, ruling with an iron fist and principles, people know they shouldn't mess with you but also trust you leading the realm as you've proven yourself a rational person. Pretty much traitors and sinners can expect execution but beyond that lower vassals of vassals who simply followed their liege into rebellion should be spared on ground of simply abiding the feudal system along with women and children. I imagine glory hounds really loving this kind of leader and expecting him to lead the realm to greatness. Expect lots of prestige but mild piety. Getting to this point though is very difficult as you have to navigate a slippery slope of iron rule and tyranny.

Opinion +100, authority -100 = DOORMAT, even though people know you're nice an humble even moderate vassals will take their chances to rise in power and tremble over you like a doormat starting many diferent factions for their own benefit but not a real coordinated revolution. A way to get out of this would be using a revolt to make an example and executing the traitors though this could initially make the realm even more unstable now that your kind reputation has been smeared and you're still a sissy.

Opinion -100, authority +100 = TYRANT, people are convinced of your evil sadistic nature and wouldn't want anything more but to see you gone and if possible in multiple pieces. Even though they might think this I imagine these types of realms to be relativly stable yet explosive, large conspiracies along your vassals vying to kill or overthrow you. Most vassals either keep their head down or handle in the shadows but a brave warrior among them could possible start a massive revolution. Beating said revolution could spell a long time of controlled peace though.

Opinion -100, authority -100 = DEAD, I don't think such situations last very long, this is the recipe for total chaos and likely a lot of ugly border gore of vassals fighting for the throne or independence or a load of other sh*t. You're an evil and pathetic excuse of a ruler easily replaced.



That's my central concept, I'm still thinking about how things would function inbetween the extremes and how you could swith between them but this has been the main system I've imagined for years now. You might get the impression the only way to peacefully lead a realm would be through RESPECT or in a way TYRANT but of cours most kings would be in a balanced zone where king and council have more or less power and the realm slides though the years with a couple of hiccups along the way that need intervention.
There's a couple of smaller parts to it like brave characters only being affect for 50% by authority and thus less afraid of rising up and craven characters being affected for 200% but that's not part of the foundation.

[sortulf]

It is in the game already - If you have a big army (or potential levy), then nobody will rebel.
But, beware - once that army is gone, the they no longer fear you....

[Random]

I like your suggestions, but as the previous posted pointed out its already within the game granted to a limited extent.

army strength is used in faction calculations and diplomatic vassal requests. and opinion is already influenced by traits so adding effectively a second opinion system is a little redundant.

CK2 is extremely complex as it is and I'm sure the devolopers would cry tears of blood if they were asked to implement your suggestions in the current game. :P

A fleshing out of the opinion system is effectively what you are asking, but I feel it would likely compound the already daunting learning curve for any new or novice players.

Im sure CK3 should it occur would provide a chance to expand upon systems, within a new fresh engine with a more developed foundation as opposed to the current expansive module code of ck2 which is comparable to a slum city with people building corregated iron houses atop existing corregated iron houses :D

Streamlining game mechanics (as opposed to complicating) and cleaning up clutter/bugs/codeinefficiency should be the only real focus for the development team as they wrap up their CK2 project.