Giving a power to the descendants is one of the most game's element. The most comfortable situation is of course, when the crown come straight from the king to the oldest son, without any voting and additional problems (like fratricidal fights). Unfortunately, the reality of Crusader Kings II is rarely comfortable and steady. Characters constantly throwing the logs under the player's legs, forcing him to think and balancing between influence zones. It's even more problematic since the succession laws can be changed only after completing six assumptions:
* actual ruler didn't change any succession law earlier
* he has reigned at least from 10 years
* there is a peace
* there is no regency
* vassals aren't fighting between themselves
* all vassals have positive opinion about the sovereign
Completing all of this assumption is a hard task, so in the Problem? section you may find few useful tips.
We've found the best Skyrim mods you should download for Skyrim Special Edition which will fix NPCs, add new combat, and make travelling a lot easier. Skyrim remastered all mods 1. Jun 15, 2016 THE BEST MODS OF ALL TIME - Skyrim Mods Remastered - #1 MxR Mods. Unsubscribe from MxR Mods? Cancel Unsubscribe. Subscribe Subscribed Unsubscribe 1.9M. How can the answer be improved? The first Nexus Mods Screenshot Community Event is here! Submit your screenshots of Skyrim, Skyrim Special Edition, Enderal, Fallout 4, or Fallout 76 illustrating the event theme and seize your chance to win one of three £25 Steam Gift Cards ($33 depending on. Sep 15, 2016 Skyrim Mods Weekly Playlist 'MXR' 3% cashback: Instagram: https.
Every kingdom you possess can have individual succession laws. It means that the king of Poland and Lithuania can subordinate to the primogeniture in one and to the feudal elective in the other. Each of those countries is treated separately, there is even no common laws about the heir's sex. Its consequences is a fact, that after taking the power in particular domain, you have to usually try to make a proper position for your descendants.
There are no doubts, that some political systems are more profitable for the monarch than the others. On next pages you'll read about all available succession laws. This issue is often problematic for the players, so I'll pay an attention to it.
Primogeniture
Primogeniture is a rule according to which, the oldest son of the monarch takes all of father's titles. It's the most comfortable option from the available (of course from the player's perspective), but it causes much of rumors between monarch's sons. This fact gives a reason to have a minimal number of masculine descendants and few daughters (jump to the chapter House: Basics). Primogenitural model meets also a big aversion of nobles, so it's possible to realization only in countries with strong central power.
Son of Ingegerd and her husband (player) will inherit the throne after murdering Magnus, Olaf and Haralda.
Primogeniture is the simplest and the most intuitive system of succession, useful not only for kings but also for players who want to climb on the career levels. If this system is the actual one in the country, it's enough to marry one of ruler's daughter and then kill all her brothers and older sisters. In that way the second or the third generation you will gain the crown. More about it, you'll find in House: Marriages.
Thanks to the marriage with the queen of Norway, poor count may provide a crown of Scandinavian country to his son.
Primogeniture requires high or absolute crown authority.
Seniority
Seniority is a law according to which the oldest member of the family inherit all titles of the dead sovereign. It's very uncomfortable rule, because makes the oldest one is a successor and white-haired characters tend to die quickly what causes a chaos in the country. All the more that during the few first years of new ruler's reign there is a bigger probability of vassal's rebellion. In such case, the greatest danger for the player is his oldest son, who will try hard to take over the power and without hesitation starts civil war or coup d'etat. What is curious, often it's profitable to let him win, because the young has a chance to change the political system if that's why he began the war.
If you aren't patience enough to slaughter dozen members of the family, you may begin the war for the rights for your favorite one.
Taking over the power in such country is rather problematic (if you want to make it in the peaceful way). Usually you have to follow the family tree of the House you are interested in and then find the common ground (moment, when the man from your House and the woman from the chosen one have a marriage). Next you have to count all persons above this point. All those persons should have been killed or distributed a bishopric. Then you should get rid of all men in this House. Only at this point taking over will be possible, what, as you can see, isn't that simple. What is more, the situation is even more complicated if the country has a agnatic succession law. In such cases the only way is the matrylinear wedding, which is rarely acceptable for the men. That's why an open war is often the better solution.
Requires medium, high or absolute crown authority.
Feudal elective
Feudal elective is a rather common and simultaneously very problematic political system. Electors voting decides who will seize the power after the sovereign from all the vassals (ruling family members and king's council are also taken into consideration). Such fact makes the crown going from one House to another, what plunges the country in the chaos.
Electors are not only landowners but also members of the ruling family.
Crusader Kings 2 Limited Crown Authority Chicago
Electors are always the persons standing a level lower than the ruler. So when it's about king's succession the electors are all dukes, archbishops and doges. Similarly: about dukes decide counts, village headmen and duke-bishops and about counts: majors, barons and bishops. The only exception are emperors who have to take into account not only votes of kings but also dukes with the biggest amount of lands. Besides all those people, right of vote and election have also members of the ruling House.
Description of all feudal ladder you may find in Glossary: Titles.
In big countries election is the worst possible political system - you have to change it quickly.
If the ruler has a big authority within his vassals, elective system isn't his biggest problem, because everyone will vote just like he wants to. It's much worse if there are different groups of agents of other monarchs in the country. There is no chance for agreement and losing of the crown is almost sure. In such way you should change the system or bribe electors with moneys and land distribution. Despite pretences the first way is much more profitable.
Imprisoned electors still have a right to vote (an icon of the crown at the right).
Taking over the country with such system is quite a challenge. Family links has almost no meaning in this case, it only means that the player can be a one of the electors or ruler's relative. It results from this that if you're playing as a duke inside a kingdom with such political system, gaining a crown should be relatively easy. In worse situation are the Houses outside the kingdom, because they cannot be electors and seizure the power is almost impossible (at least to the moment, when they become a ruler's vassal).
If you're an elector, you should convince counter candidates of you and then kill the king - the crown will be yours.
Requirements: none
Gavelkind
Gavelkind is the most common way of inheritance. It divides father's land on parts for every son, but the oldest one is a sovereign (e.g. first-born became a king and his younger brothers dukes). It's much more comfortable than the seniority and election but less profitable than primogeniture. The basic problem here is a size of the family. The more men descendants, the more dismembered the kingdom is. To prevent it, you should develop your House properly ( House: Basics). Some plus of gavelkind is a fact that the ruler can possess 30% more estates without penalties to the prestige for sons without land.
1. Invite third rate duke of Croatia on the court. 2. Arrange the matrylinear marriage between him and your daughter. 3. Kill all the older brothers of the prince. 4. Play as a prince's son, who is a Croatia king.
Gavelkind isn't a problem for players who try to takeover the power thanks to the marriages, just do like in the case of the primogeniture (screen above). After gaining the crown, it's worth to strengthen the position of your House.
Requirements: none
Agnatic Succession
A law, according to which only men can inherit. It's the most comfortable option from all, because it protects the kingdom from the enemy's intrigues. It's not hard to see that the kingdom with such political system can't pass to the other House thanks to the marriages. Unless you agree on matrylinear marriage, what is a very stupid idea.
Men succession makes good in all political systems.
The biggest flaw of such succession is a great risk, because when all of your masculine members of family dies you'll lose the rights to the kingdom in which agnatic succession is obligatory. So be careful and have at least two masculine descendants (House: Basics).
Agnatic-Cognatic Succession
According to this law, women can inherit only in the situation when there is no masculine descendants. It's the most common preference of the sex, which guarantees safety to the family but makes enemy's intrigues easier. Thanks to that rule acquiring the crown is relatively easy, it's enough to marry king's daughter and kill all her brothers and older sisters.
On the Iberian Peninsula accumulating power thanks to the marriages is a simple thing.
Absolute Cognatic Succession
According to that law, women inherit the crown at the same rules what men. Only characters with Basque culture can take this option, but it isn't any quality. The main problem with the absolute cognatic consist in that just few men agrees to the matrylinear weddings, which are the only ones profitable for a player in this situation.
Especially problematic is a situation in which there is a queen. If she had a normal wedding, all her children will inherit house after the father. As you can easily imagine, such situation may lead to the instant failure. On the other hand, if you play the character from the outside, in such way you may easily expand your territory.
Fact. Crusader Kings II is the best game of 2012.
FACT.
Alright, it's an opinion, and one that I cannot 100% support until I have played more of the acclaimed games released this year. Many would say that one could not crown a game as the best of the year until they have played The Walking Dead, and while I have not yet played Telltale's zombie magnum opus, I own it and it's probably the game I'll play next.
But you know what I say? I say that no one can crown a game as the best of the year until they've put at least..let's say 30 hours into Crusader Kings II.
Also on the list of games I own but have yet to play are The Darkness II, Darksiders 2, and Mark of the Ninja. I have played enough Borderlands 2 and Torchlight 2 to know that those are both good games - TL2 is actually very good. I have beaten XCOM: Enemy Unknown, and I am very close to beating Dishonored; XCOM is pretty amazing, and Dishonored is good but hasn't quite hooked me as much as a GOTY candidate should. Journey is probably the most magical experience I have ever had with a game, but it being 90 minutes long holds back its GOTY potential. Civilization 5: Gods & Kings is an excellent expansion to a phenomenal game, and has consumed almost as much of my gaming this year as CKII has, but one cannot in good conscience endorse an expansion pack as one's GOTY.
But fuck all those games because Crusader Kings II.
There are plenty of games from 2012 that I will almost certainly play at one point, but have not gotten around to: this list includes Sleeping Dogs, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, Mass Effect 3, Forza Horizon, Far Cry 3, and maybe Assassin's Creed III, if I ever get around to playing Brotherhood and maybe Revelations. I'm pretty comfortable with the fact that I'll probably never played Diablo III, and Halo is not a series I am into at all, and I never played either of the games that preceded Max Payne 3.
So in hindsight I didn't actually play that many games in 2012, or at least games that were released in 2012. Why? Because I was playing Crusader Kings II.
Because Crusader Kings 2, as a video game, is nearly perfect.
CKII is a remarkable refinement of the grand strategy game that Paradox has been making for years, and it's one of the best designed games of this entire generation. It was my first experience with the Paradox grand strategy games, and the excellent quick look earlier this year led by Dave Snider, combined with my love of strategy games and my interest in history, was what led me to pick it up - it's just one of many reasons for me to be thankful for the existence of the Snide One.
CKII is a game that is purely mechanical, but creates drama and narrative purely through said mechanics, which it achieves by focusing the game on characters, not countries. EUIII felt pretty sterile and tame, the same problem with the Civilization games. The Total War games do an admirable job of making the experience more personal and character driven, but CKII absolutely nailed it. CKII is a great generator of anecdotes, and many people that I know, regardless of their level of interest in games or history, were regaled with the adventures of my digital Medieval dynastic avatar.
Probably my best story is when I started a game as the Duke of Austria, and I controlled one little holding in the Holy Roman Empire. Through political marriages and effective manoeuvring I earned enough prestige for one of my rulers to be named Holy Roman Emperor. My dynasty's claim on the HRE lasted for only 15 years, but during that reign I was able to create for my dynasty the hereditary titles of King of Germany and King of Italy, and I was able to use the claim I had earned to conquer the Kingdom of Hungary and include it within the vassal lands of the HRE. Thus, when my dynasty imploded and I lost the Imperial crown, my heirs still inherited the titles of three major kingdoms. Successful crusades then led the Pope to grant to my dynasty the kingdoms of Sicily, Frisia, and France, thereby making my dynasty the holders of six major European kingdoms. With Spain in the hands of the Muslims, the only Catholic ruled kingdoms in Europe that did not bow to me were the Scandinavian countries, England, and Poland. At that point, I still wasn't Holy Roman Emperor, but I was so powerful that if I wanted to revolt, gaining independence would be a trivial matter; I did successfully revolt against the Emperor to lower the crown authority in the realm. Invading Mongols and threats from the Levant led me to the decision that it was probably better if our lands remained united, but we ruled from our original holding in Austria, controlling six kingdoms, safe in the knowledge that the HRE existed because we allowed it.
Crusader Kings II is a very deep and intensively crafted game, and the detail in presenting a historically accurate world for you to start in is pretty damn cool, especially since the game does a great job of drawing you into the atmosphere of the Middle Ages. I'm an atheist but I'm tolerant of other people's religions; CKII turns me into the most zealous champion of my faith - be it Christianity or, thanks to DLC, Islam - hell-bent on crushing all those who pray to false gods.
Another great aspect of the game is that it starts in a very historically accurate base, and just devolves into complete anachronistic chaos where the Pope is a Muslim, Ireland is ruled by the French, and Jerusalem is controlled by a Russian. It kinda undoes all of the game's historical accuracy, but it's also beautiful to behold, especially since it can go in so many different ways - in one game, Spain and France can be ruled mostly by Muslims and the Byzantine Empire is having a rough time of things, and in another the French can rule Spain and into North Africa while the Byzantines rule the entire Middle East. But they bring some great historical accuracy into the game by forcefully including events like the Mongol Horde arriving in the mid-1200s, which will happen regardless of how the rest of the world looks; if the Russian duchies are united and the Persian and Byzantine Empires are strong, then the Horde will have a tougher go of it, but if Russia is disunited and the Muslims are wrought by civil war, then wave goodbye to pretty much all of Eastern Europe, as well as the Persian Empire.
It's such a knife-edge experience: despite how annoying it can be, one of the most engaging parts of the whole game is building up a huge kingdom with your super badass ruler with high stats and great traits..only to see it all crumble into rebellion and invasion when his incompetent, arbitrary, gluttonous, harelipped son takes the throne. This is a historical reality that CKII captures perfectly; in the 17th century, Oliver Cromwell destroyed an entire monarchy and made sweeping changes to the culture and politics of Great Britain, one of the world's major powers, and in just one generation, all his work was undone. His son, Richard, could not match the energy or ruthlessness of his father, and there was no effective base for him to retain the power that his father had earned, so the monarchy was restored. Oliver Cromwell died in 1658, and Charles II was crowned in 1660. Two years, that's all it took for Cromwell's power to crumble. And that's exactly what can happen to you in CKII if you are careless - although the reality is that almost all players, including myself, simply say 'fuck this shit' and reload. Same when your character just randomly dies in battle. I'm not sure if the game would be better if it actually forced you to live with the consequence of all these random events, because that would be pretty ballsy but quite infuriating - it would make Dark Souls look like a cakewalk.
Yes, the game requires a certain investment of time in order to figure out and become comfortable with its mechanics, but I think this part of it is probably overstated. Yes, my passion for this game is probably strongly effected by my interest in history - playing CKII has led me to many, many Wikipedia articles, and through personal reading inspired by the game I have learnt more history than I did from pretty much any history teacher I ever had. Yes, it's a niche genre, but the Total War games experience a certain amount of wider acclaim; it helps that those games actually contain real-time battles, whereas combat in CKII is click to send army to fight other army and then watch as meters drain.
I understand that all of these caveats are why almost nobody is championing Crusader Kings II as the game of the year, not against the frontrunners like The Walking Dead, XCOM: Enemy Unknown, Dishonored, and, according to the recent reviews, Far Cry 3. But it's very important for us all to realise that the game of the year as a concept is entirely subjective and extremely limited. We often defer to the enthusiast gaming press as they play more games than pretty much any of us can manage, with the time restraints of work, social life, and other interests - I could have played more games in 2012, but that would have meant I'd have read far fewer books, and my having read more than 10 books in 2012 is a great personal achievement, since I probably read 10 books between the years 2006 and 2009 combined. Still, even games journalists can't possibly play every significant game that comes out in a calendar year; such an expectation is ridiculous.
Our minds should be open to the possibility that the 'real' game of the year is a game that you missed, one that flew under the radar, one that didn't quite catch your attention, one that was even more indie than the games that are being championed as indie darlings in this year's GOTY consideration. Mass Effect 1 is a game I didn't play until early 2009, and only when I beat it did I realise that it could stand up with The Orange Box and Forza 2 and Eternal Sonata as one of the GOTY runners-up for 2007 - nothing beats BioShock that year. Mount&Blade: Warband would be very high on my 2010 GOTY list if I hadn't played it in 2011; same goes for Total War: Shogun 2 being one of the best games of 2011, but me not having played it until earlier this year.
So let's all remember when we champion our games of the year, it comes with a large asterisk. It's the best game that we played that year, and there is no rule that states that once a game is crowned, it holds that title forever; since 2007, all of my games of the year have been games I played in their year of release, but my mind is very open to the possibility of this happening in the future. There are so many games that we game enthusiasts get exposed to but never play, for various reasons, and somewhere in the world somebody is championing that game as the game of the year. There are people in this world who if I asked their game of the year, they'll respond with the name of a game I've never even heard of. Of this I am sure.
You might have not played Crusader Kings II in 2012, and if you did, there's a good chance that you could be turned away by the awful tutorials and the learning curve, and even if you overcame those you still might not like the game's mechanics. Crusader Kings II is almost certainly not your game of the year: as far as I'm concerned, that is your fault, not the game's fault. If you haven't played Crusader Kings II, you cannot call yourself a gamer, and if you played it but didn't care for it, then you need to have a good long look at who you are as a human being.
So what I'm saying is that you guys are assholes. You hereby have my permission to go fuck yourselves.
*drops the mic and walks away*
I am trying to raise crown authority, but currently too few lords support the vote. Are there any methods to persuade the lords of the realm to support the new law?
Doozer Blake
13.9k3232 gold badges100100 silver badges169169 bronze badges
XenoxXenox
9,34288 gold badges5959 silver badges103103 bronze badges
3 Answers
When you hover the mouse over the vote count, it'll tell you who's opposing (more like, not voting for) the vote. Not all voters have the same weight, some count more than others and you can see that here. Concentrate on the bigger voters and those who have a least negative attitute towards you. If the opinion is not too negative, a simple honorary title could make them vote for you (+10/+15). After that, try having them educate your child (+20). If money is not an issue, a gift I think adds +20. Or if the vote is important for you and there's a voter that has a heavy vote, you might even try giving them a land. Also maybe they have a claim on a title, well, if you press that claim it's an automatic +100. Another thing you can do is select him/her to your council. Check their current ambition, if it's getting married, arranging that marriage I think adds relation to you too.
RodolfoRodolfo
1,98744 gold badges1313 silver badges2727 bronze badges
Raise their opinion of you. Give them titles, send gifts, be a ruler with many virtues. If they like you they would vote almost immediately.
Alien-47Alien-47
As well as the obvious Honorary Titles (DON'T GIVE COURT JESTER), Education, Gifting, granting a landed title, and pressing claims, try making it faster by having a Feast every 2 years.
Emperor of the HGEEmperor of the HGE
Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged crusader-kings-2 or ask your own question.Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |