CKII’s Monks & Mystics (& Satanists) arrive in March

It’s that time again – Crusader Kings II [official site] is already obese with DLC and expansions but that is not stopping Paradox from bringing yet more obscure possibilities to the historical son-murdering simulation. The next addition, Monks & Mystics, is going to let you join religious sects and shadowy groups of clandestine devil worshippers among others. It’s release date has today been confirmed as March 7. And there’s a dev video below explaining some of the features.

Firstly, here’s developer man Henrik Fåhraeus talking us through some of the bigger elements of the DLC, such as collecting religious relics for prestige, holding a hidden faith in your heart, and recruiting craven killers to your bloody cult of Satan-lovers.

There’s also some “quality of life” stuff in there. For instance, you can now suggest to your allies that they concentrate on besieging your foes or follow your army and so on, which is nice. But more importantly, we also now get to pick our favourite line from the changelog. Previous patches have offered such goodies as: “Mystics bringing promises of eternal life are more likely to be frauds” and “Regrowing lost limbs now removes phantom pain”. This time there’s only one in the running so far: “When eating your prisoners,” it says, “you can now attract a non-serious disease”. Excellent.

Like I said, Monks & Mystics is due out March 7 and will cost $14.99/€14.99 (that means it’ll probably be around the £10.99 mark in Britpounds, to fit with past expansions).


  1. Viral Frog says:

    I’m confused. The title reads (& Satanists), but the article states devil worshippers. Which one is being brought to the game? Satanists do not believe in, nor do they worship, Satan. Satan is nothing but a metaphor. Below, an excerpt from The Satanic Temple’s FAQ.


    It is the position of The Satanic Temple that religion can, and should, be divorced from superstition. As such, we do not promote a belief in a personal Satan. To embrace the name Satan is to embrace rational inquiry removed from supernaturalism and archaic tradition-based superstitions. The Satanist should actively work to hone critical thinking and exercise reasonable agnosticism in all things. Our beliefs must be malleable to the best current scientific understandings of the material world — never the reverse.”

    link to

    Confusing the term Satanist with the term devil worshippers is, unfortunately, a rather common thing. It is not correct to refer to devil worshippers as Satanists. Anywho, just thought I’d share some knowledge. I’m really just being pedantic. But as a Satanist, it bothers when people incorrectly assign me to the category of a devil worshipper.

    • Premium User Badge

      Drib says:

      So you’re saying that a modern group named The Satanic Temple doesn’t follow the tenets described in a videogame, relating to satan worshippers centuries ago? You know, before this The Satanic Temple even existed?

      You’re surprised?

      Also why does the Satanic Temple call themselves that if they’re just an agnostic/atheistic group? Just so their name has more recognition?

      • X_kot says:

        Gotta admit, it’s a hell of a brand name.

        • Premium User Badge

          Drib says:

          Not sure if that’s wordplay or just happy coincidence. Either way I liked it.

      • Landiss says:

        There actually were satanists during medieval times? I thought it was in general quite modern thing.

      • Viral Frog says:

        Prior to contemporary Satanism, people didn’t self-identify as Satanists. The term was used by some Christian groups as an accusation of anyone they thought to be against their ideology. So as long as a non-Christian faith has been implemented in the game, Satanists have already been a part of the game. In this sense, it is still not correct to say that Satanists are coming to the game because, based on this, they’ve already been a part of the game. But yeah, I shouldn’t have framed this from the view of contemporary Satanism for obvious reasons.

        As for why LaVey chose the term Satanist/Satanism? Shock factor.

      • gabrielonuris says:

        Because “satanists” sounds more edgy than simply agnostic or atheistic.

        • SaintAn says:

          Nope, it’s to annoy the Christians who are a cancer to the world.

          • thetruegentleman says:

            Because nothing promotes rationalism better than antagonizing strangers in a way that helps to make everyone’s life just a little bit worse.

          • Eightball says:

            L O L



      • April March says:

        You know how when you read a word over and over again it loses all meaning? I never thought I’d see it happen to “satanist”, and yet here we are.

      • Premium User Badge

        The Borderer says:

        It’s because of America is supposed to seperate church and state, yet government run schools and universities have lots of Christian clubs. The Satanic Temple are trying to fight for the seperation by starting “Satan” clubs (which are more like atheist rather than satanist) in school, which means that either “Satan” club has to be allowed or the Christian clubs need to find a new, non-government funded, venue.

        The LaVeyan Satanists are objectivists who are trying too hard to shock people.

        • Premium User Badge

          The Borderer says:

          Where did the edit button go?

          The Satanic Temple have little, if anything, to do with the LaVeyan satanists.

    • Unpoetic says:

      Yeah, this isn’t about contemporary satanism… obviously.

    • Kolbex says:

      Any time you’re tempted to “well, actually,” or, “let me explain,” or engage in basically any form of pedantry…don’t.

      • lasikbear says:

        IDK wellactually’ing is basically the only core tenent of the modern Satanic Temple

      • Viral Frog says:

        But pedantry is my favorite way to kill time. :(

    • demicanadian says:

      I’m pretty sure there was no LaVeyan Satanism 500 years before LaVey was born.

      • Viral Frog says:

        TST isn’t a sect of LaVeyan Satanism. LaVeyan ideology promotes a belief in magic, which is just as silly as the religions he mocked. But I get your point.

    • cardboardcity says:

      I knew we would hear from the Satan Anti-Defamation League (SADL). Glad not to be disappointed. Was the satire ending of the video about taking Satan into your hearts too subtle?

      • Viral Frog says:

        I don’t watch the videos in the articles, so I’ve got no idea what you’re talking about. :D

      • Pogs says:

        Satan Anti-Defamation League (SADL)? Such a thing exists? The mind boggles.

    • ukpanik says:

      “as a Satanist, it bothers when people incorrectly assign me to the category of a devil worshipper.”

      Couldn’t agree more. The wanker category is more apt.

      • Viral Frog says:

        I agree. People that stand for equality, justice, and improving society as a whole are wankers. Other than a wanker, who else would stand for such silly things?

        • Snowskeeper says:

          Standing for equality, justice, and improving society as a whole doesn’t make you a wanker. Calling yourself a Satanist, and being upset when people classify you as a worshiper of Satan, makes you a wanker.

          Want people to stop making fun of you for that? Come up with a name that isn’t specifically designed to annoy or confuse people. Like ‘egalitarian,’ for example. Until then, expect to be mocked.

          • Premium User Badge

            Frog says:

            Agreed. And, professing to follow the entity historically called the “father of lies” does not help either.

          • TobleroneRoloCombo says:

            “Egalitarian” as a term is pretty much meaningless, outside of a historical context.

          • Snowskeeper says:

            I don’t see the point you’re trying to make; could you expand on it a little?

    • Tigris says:

      So when i call my cat “dog” will you in the future also ask in each article you see online: “Do you mean the carnivore which is similar to a wolf, or do you mean what dog really means: The cat of some random dude on the internet” ?

      Just because some random people, no one is interested in, call themselves satanists, does not mean that this is now what the world “really means”.

      link to

      I cant see the definition “Random agnostic dudes, who found their name too boring” there!

    • TobleroneRoloCombo says:

      Both are kinda anachronistic.

  2. Landiss says:

    They lost me a few DLCs ago. I would gladly go back and try it again, if they put all DLCs into one big pack for not a ridiculous price. And by “all DLCs” I mean all, not just the main ones, but all the extra graphics and music and so on. Without that I’m just feeling I’m loosing too much. I’m also worried that the design is done assuming the player owns the previous DLCs.

    Or well, just leave it and make a new game? If I’m perfectly honest, I just got bored with CK and I don’t think even all DLCs would keep me longer in the game now. Pff, perhaps it is time to finally get Hearts of Iron.

    • Neutrino says:

      I agree with this. The fact that they haven’t combined some of the older DLC into a cheaper package and that (sales aside) it now cost some $120 to get the ‘full’ game seems like they are overly milking this horse.

      In addition to that a lot of the new DLC seems very much like tinkering around the edges. What this game desperately needs is some refinement of combat (to give the player some meaningful agency in this area), logistics (since we all know this is the core of any meaningful strategic combat simulation) and economy (so the player has something to do outside of wartime while waiting for their Chancellor to fabricate claims).

      Instead we get these odd patches about diseases and Satan worshippers. Given the potential of the underlying implementation it’s a bit disappointing.

      • Landiss says:

        $120? I wish. All DLCs cost €260 right now. There is also a collection for €145, but it looks to be incomplete. And there is just no way I would buy it for more then €20. Even during promos it doesn’t even get close to that number.

        And you are right about the content that’s needed. But I don’t think they will make any such drastic changes. They don’t want to antagonise their current player-base – and since those players do play the game, they must like it the way it is now. It also seems that a lot of people (including RPS) look for RPG elements in the game, not as much for the strategy.

        • Premium User Badge

          The Borderer says:

          Most of the dlc is cosmetic, only 14 of them add anything to gameplay. All the non-cosmetic DLC with the EU4 converter costs about £110 in total, which is close enough to $120.

          The CK2 reddit recommends getting The Old Gods, Legacy of Rome and Charlemagne first, which is £25 altogether. Wait for a sale and you should be able to get it for a lot less. After that just buy what interests you. There’s no need to buy all the DLC at once.

          • Landiss says:

            But my point was that I would get back if I could get all the DLCs at once. Not just the main ones (I have some of them already anyway), not just those that change mechanics, but all, including cosmetic stuff.

  3. Captain Narol says:

    DLC for the DLC God !!

    More CKII is always a bless from Heaven ! Well, that doesn’t prevent you to wait for a sale to grab those new DLCs with a discount….

    Anyway, The end is coming, according to their planning there is only 1-2 DLCs left after this one…

    I hope they will do a remake of “EA : Rome” next, using some of the mechanism of CKII to keep the focus on individual characters that makes this game so fascinating.

    • King in Winter says:

      Well, Vicky III is on top of my wishlist, so I’d rather see them go that way…

  4. morganjah says:

    Charlemagne is $5.09 at bundle stars. I’m thinking of picking it up and giving it a go. But there are way too many DLC’s, half of which have terrible reviews, especially because they seem to sabotage you if you lack them.

    • jerubius says:

      I think you are confusing CK2 with EU4. Nearly every dlc on CK2 has positive reviews, and none of them hurt your experience if you lack them. Also most of the dlc for CK2 seems reasonably priced for what you get, which is not something I can say for EU4 dlc.

      Charlemagne is one of the ones I’m more on the fence about whether it is worth the price or not. The earlier start date is great, I use viceroyalties all the time when I get empire sized, but that’s all I’ve used from it. The custom kingdoms and empires sound useful in a few rare edge cases, but I’m not sure I will ever touch the Charlemagne event chain. All in all, that doesn’t sound like a lot for $15, I’m glad I got it for less.

  5. TobleroneRoloCombo says:

    So, this is a feature that I’ve kind of been suggesting for a while which seems to have been taken on, which is cool, bundled with a system of demon worshipping cults which don’t really have any real basis in history, outside of describing other’s religions. Wondering about what other features come with the expansion and which are patch features.