• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

CK2 Dev Diary #106 - New Succession Laws Extravaganza

Greetings, everyone.

Well then, this is going to be a long one...

The old elective succession system has been succeeded


So your cousin the Duke of Burgundy always seem to nominate the Steve ‘the drunkard’ as the next Emperor of the realm rather than your favorite quick and attractive son. This has been a common theme for a bunch of our playthroughs while having the elective succession laws active for our main titles. One of the biggest problems about this is that the other electors reasonings for their nomination decisions has been hidden away in an opaque box so you never know which electors can be influenced to see things more in your way.


This was one of the first problems we wanted to address when we decided to rework the elective succession system. So instead of just giving you a list of names in the tooltips for whom casted votes on a given candidate we made a specific interface to enable us to give you a more detailed view into the minds of the powerful electors of the realm.

Succession Laws0.PNG


After it was possible to get a better look at why the electors made their decisions we wanted to make it easier to further edit the underlying factors which governs the AI. Therefor we decided to replicate the old logic from hardcoded conditions to instead be based on a scripted system which decides various rules of how the elective succession works.

This not only enables modding of the elective succession law, we now also allow you to create any number of your own elective rules to fill the world with different electorates that play by their own criterias. Maybe you always wanted to create your own technocratic republic that is governed only by the most learned people of the realm. The party realm might only allow drunkards and hedonists to have a say in whom should be this years party host.

For the people that are more interested in exactly how this is modifiable there’s a brief rundown of the syntax used to define the elective rules here:

Code:
### Condensed syntax layout:

#<elective_law_type> = {

#    candidate_vote_score = {

#        <Weight Modifiers>

#    }

#    elector_selection = {

#        max_amount = <int>

#        <Weight Modifiers> - if max_amount is set it will pick the X amount of top scorers.

#                Negative scores are considered invalid electors - Ruler is always an elector

#    }

#    elector_vote_strength = {

#        <Weight Modifiers>

#    }

#    elector_stances = { - Intended for the elder council positions

#        <stance_name> = {

#            icon = <int>

#            <Weight Modifiers>

#        }

#    }

#    candidate_trigger = {

#        <trigger>

#    }

#}


# <Weight Modifiers> - denotes a field of an arbitrary amount of triggered value modifiers eg.

#    additive_modifier = {

#        value = -4

#        is_tribal = yes

#    }

#

# <trigger> - denotes a field of conditions that needs to be evaluate true for the trigger to be fulfilled

#

# The elector will vote for the candidate with the highest score given by candidate_vote_score

# The electors are selected from the pool of characters which get a non-negative elector_selection score until we reach the max_amount

# elector_vote_strength will determine how much weight the vote of a single elector carries

# The elector will use the elector_stance with the highest score if any are scripted

# The stances are thought to be some kind of common thought process or allegiance for a subgroup of the electors - This system is used to create the different states for how the Elders will behave in the Eldership succession law explained in detail below

In addition to these underlying code changes of the elective succession forms we also added another usage of the Conclave favors so that you now can force electors to vote in compliance with your vote for the succession of a title.

Revamped Elective Laws


The unhardcoding of Elective successions allowed us to completely rewrite the AI behavior for the existing Elective laws accessible through the base game (Feudal Elective, Elective Gavelkind, Tanistry). The various conditions to be eligible as a successor or elector under these laws have remained unchanged (although now they have been translated into moddable script), while the AI electoral behavior has been rewritten into a long list of nuanced modifiers. You can now expect Electors to take into account how much they like a candidate, how legitimate they think his claim his to the title, and how much they trust the ruler that is voting for said candidate. Age, titles, character traits, culture, religion, dynastic ties and much more are now all taken into consideration by the AI and visible to the player when using the new Electors’ Tab. The sum of all these modifiers will result in a voting score, and the potential candidate who has the highest voting score will be the one selected by the Elector in question (and since each Elector has a different personality/status/etc. different kinds of Electors will prefer different kinds of candidates).

Succession Laws1.jpg



The Electors Tab shows to the player the complete list of Electors casting their vote, who they are voting for, the reasons why they are voting for said characters as well as a comparison with the candidate score of the ruler’s preferred candidate and the reasons why they are not voting for him.

Succession Laws2.jpg


Eldership

Somewhat similar to Tanistry, Eldership prevents your title from ever falling outside a ruler’s family, restricting the choice of potential candidates to members of the ruler’s dynasty. Under Eldership, only the six oldest and most learned characters in the realm will be allowed to pick the ruler’s successor. Each Elder can hold one of three possible stances at any given time, depending on how he feels about the ruler: Displeased, Pleased, or Ecstatic.

Making sure that your Elders have a high opinion of you, giving them their preferred Council positions (Chancellor, Steward, Chaplain), or fulfilling the occasional request from them, will push them further to become Ecstatic.

20180824080508_1.jpg


An Ecstatic Elder will almost always vote for the ruler’s chosen candidate, almost never make demands, and even give the occasional piece of advice to make you a better person.

20180824080639_1.jpg


Pleased Elders will try to vote for what they consider to be good and capable candidates amongst the members of your dynasty, favoring older characters with high stewardship. They might occasionally make some demands, such as asking a ruler to give some land to a family member that they really like, but they will, for the most part, be reasonable people to deal with.

Displeased Elders on the other hand, will be much harder to deal with. Not only will they purposefully select bad candidates, they will occasionally grant claims on your title to people that they like, openly questioning their liege’s right to rule.

20180824080819_1.jpg


Holy Fury will allow the Baltic and African realms to start with Eldership as default succession law, rather than Elective Gavelkind. Additionally, other pagans can unlock this succession by picking the right Doctrine when they Reform their faith.

Princely Elective
This new variation on elective has been scripted to replace Feudal Elective for the Holy Roman Empire. This succession limits the electors to a maximum of seven (plus the ruling Emperor) and makes it so the historical titles held by the Prince-Electors are prioritized when determining the valid electors in the Empire, these titles being the Bishoprics of Mainz, Koln and Trier, and the Duchies of Bohemia, Franconia, Saxony, and Brandenburg. If an elector title does not exist or his held by the Emperor, another valid Duke will replace it (prioritizing dejure vassals of the same religion as the ruling Emperor).

20180824081547_1.jpg


Electors under Princely Elective are overall much less likely to pick candidates that are either impious or of a different religion, and Theocratic Catholic Electors have twice as much voter strength than secular Electors whenever the Empire is under Papal Investiture.

While rulers of the Holy Roman Empire can still change the realm’s succession law as usual, the faction for Elective has been made much more easily accessible and palatable for vassals of the HRE and requirements to switch away from this succession have been made more restrictive (the ruler must have Max Centralization and either Absolute Crown Authority or Abolished Council Power).

Imperial Elective
And finally, a completely new succession law has been scripted for the Byzantine (and Roman) Empire, to better represent the peculiar politics of this realm. This succession has been tied to the two titles and is now also the *only* succession law that they have available. There are several features that are unique to this succession law, so I will explain it in sections:

20180824081910_1.jpg


Successors: Potential candidates under Imperial Elective include the Emperor’s children and close family members (spouse included), any claimants to the title, the current Marshal, and any Commander under the Emperor, with mutilated characters being excluded. This is to represent the influence of the military over Byzantium and allow more historical instances of influential commanders becoming Emperors.

Imperial Court: The Emperor, all of his Councilors, and all of his Commanders are valid electors. As Byzantium was a centralized power, the Emperor will need to curry the favor of the most powerful members of his court to ensure that his dynasty continues to maintain the throne, rather than his vassals, like a Feudal ruler would.

Scaled Voting Power: And this is where things get really interesting. Imperial Elective uses to its full extent the new voter_power function of scripted elective, making sure that every elector has a different amount of influence, entirely dependent on his status in the court and his attributes. The Emperor’s vote starts out with a strength of 200 voting power, which can be further boosted by good diplomacy and martial scores, making it so that a powerful and influential Emperor will be able to push the candidate that he wants on the throne even if most of the Court is against it. Conversely, if the Emperor is not Born in the Purple, deformed or crippled, or if he has made a reputation of appointing sycophants in his court (more on that below), he will see his voting power plummet. The other Electors have their own variable voting power, tied to prestige, rank and attributes (a Steward with high stewardship is more influential than an incompetent one). As such, appointing competent people to be your councilors and commanders will not only mean that your favorite son will have to compete with more competent and palatable candidates, but also that the electors will have a greater influence over the succession. Finally, minor titles can also affect a character’s voting power, so you might want to think a bit more before giving out your Caesar and Sebastokrator spots.

20180824082114_1.jpg


Heroes and Sycophants: Is Belisarius too popular a Commander for your sons to compete with him? Well, you can always discharge him: take away his status as Commander and he will no longer be a potential candidate or an elector, problem solved. Except... when under Imperial Elective, removing a competent Commander or Councilor from his position reduces the Emperor’s voting power of an amount proportional to the competence of the character you are removing. The more competent people the Emperor pushes out of his court, the less his vote will be worth overall. Same applies whenever an Emperor appoints a commander with poor martial score while there are clearly superior choices available: the court will notice that you are appointing mediocre sycophants because you fear competition and you will see your voting power go down. Additionally, Imperial Elective prevents Emperors from appointing landless commanders for as long as potential vassals are available to take the spot. If you wish that high-martial courtier to lead your armies, you will need to give him a proper title first.

Prestige and Ageism: This is not Feudal Elective, the Empire does not care as much about family ties and character traits, it cares about placing a competent and prestigious leader upon the throne. For the Byzantine Empire, this translates to the electors tending to favor skilled high-Intrigue characters, whereas the Roman Empire electors are keener on good orators (high Diplomacy). In both Empires, the electors will always favor people that are competent at their job, that have high prestige and titles (both minor and landed). One of the most visible consequences of this is that hardly anyone under Imperial Elective will ever consider a child to be a valid successor to the throne. If you wish your son to take your place, you will have to groom him first, wait for him to become adult, then push his bid to your Empire, possibly giving him a few honorary and landed titles along the way. While he’s still a toddler, it might be more sensible for you to appoint your younger brother, or your old uncle as preferred heir, just in case something happens before the little Prince comes of age...

20180824082155_1.jpg


Strong Claim Duel
Somewhat related to all these new succession forms, we have also added a new type of duel designed to let players keep their realms together after an Elective Gavelkind succession. This Strong Claim Duel is available regardless of whether you have the War Focus active, or if you are a member of a Warrior Lodge (which is otherwise required for regular dueling). As a tribal character, with a Strong Claim on a title currently held by a tribal ruler, it will be possible to issue a challenge to the current title holder, with the requirement of your target ruler either being independent, or both of you being vassals under the same liege. Bear in mind that the stakes in these duels are high, and losing does not only mean you give up your claims - unless you have a particularly kind opponent, who loves you dearly, death is the common way out of this dispute. Winning, on the other hand, means that you take the title in question and any vassals that come with it, along with any other of their titles on which you have a Strong Claim.

If the target of your Claim Duel happens to be an AI character of your own Dynasty, losing will present players with a choice: accept your fate, or click the option to take over as the character who won the duel, and continue to play the game as the kinsman (or woman) who bested you.

Succession Laws3.jpg
 
The MAIN reason for playing tanistry is flavour which I'm trying to improve.
Who elects a ruler in tanistry?
The paternal family group.

Who is eligible to be elected?
A member of the paternal family group.

How, for most realms that will be using it (the provincial/petty kings) is flavour improved by setting up for ahistorical succession patterns by allowing those outside the bloodline to be elected to office?
 
You claim the Palaiologos operated by Primogeniture, but a quick look at wikipedia dispels that notion. The first succession was by primogeniture sure, but after that it changed hands by a civil war (Andronikos III overthrew his grandfather Andronikos II). Then it was contested by John VI Kantakouzenos, the grand domestic (i.e. chief general or marshal). John VI won and was emperor for about 10 years before being deposed by the man he had deposed. John V proceeded to go in and out of power for the next 30 or 40 years, bankrupting the empire in the process.

That sounds like the sort of thing the new imperial elective will cause to happen.
 
You claim the Palaiologos operated by Primogeniture, but a quick look at wikipedia dispels that notion. The first succession was by primogeniture sure, but after that it changed hands by a civil war (Andronikos III overthrew his grandfather Andronikos II). Then it was contested by John VI Kantakouzenos, the grand domestic (i.e. chief general or marshal). John VI won and was emperor for about 10 years before being deposed by the man he had deposed. John V proceeded to go in and out of power for the next 30 or 40 years, bankrupting the empire in the process.

That sounds like the sort of thing the new imperial elective will cause to happen.

primogeniture and civil war are two different things, aren't they? civil war is not a succession type
 
Last edited:
You better be shitting me with locking Byzantines into Imperial elective. "...to better represent the peculiar politics of this realm..." have you ever read a fucking book about Eastern Roman Empire ? The empire under Komnenos dynasty was pretty much typical western feudal succession. After Michael VIII snatched Constantinople in 1261 the Palaiologos dynasty was the only ruling dynasty all the way until 1453.

First of all you lock players out of other succession options for Byzantines making the game less sandbox and freedom-like, which is what we love about the game and then you try to justify this with an absolutely ignorant statement. As someone interested in Byzantine and Constantinople history there's better be a starting game rule for this crap.
I’m not sure what books you have been reading on Byzantium. I can assure you that the Byzantines never ever perceived themselves as a hereditary society and that imperial succession was never legally or politically/culturally hereditary, although that happened in practice. The only clear example we have of hereditary succession dictating, well, succession, were the empresses Zoe and Theodora of the Macedonian dynasty - and even then there was a consensus that they should not rule themselves, but withdraw from ruling as soon as they got married and let their husbands do the ruling.

You are wrong about the Komnenids. Sure, they adopted some Western customs, especially with Manuel I, but the Roman core remained mostly untouched. Let’s have a look at it:
  • John II Komnenos (1118-1143): he succeeded his father Alexios I because he had been crowned Co-Emperor in 1092. Despite being the eldest son, his succession was disputed by his sister Anna and her husband Nikephoros Bryennios, which shows that succession was not determined by primogeniture, but association to the purple.
  • Manuel I Komnenos (1143-1180): the obvious one. He succeeded to the throne despite having a living older brother, Isaac, because he had been designated by John II as his successor.
  • Alexios II Komnenos (1180-1183): his succession is a good argument to primogeniture, but it’s a flawed one. Pior to his birth Manuel I had designated Prince Béla of Hungary as his successor and had him betrothed to his daughter. Manuel I had effectively designated his successor and associated him to the purple by forging a family tie to the Basileus. The fact that Alexios II succeeded him instead is owed to the strength and influence of Manuel I rather than some notion that he was the rightful heir, which is made clear by...
  • Andronikos I Komnenos (1183-1185): need I say more? My criticism of the new imperial succession is that the CK2 mechanic would have immediately selected Andronikos as Manuel’s successor, which is wrong. The designated heir should succeed, and only then should he be challenged if the electors wanted somebody else on the throne.
Byzantine succession worked by either appointment to Co-Emperor or acclamation by either the people of Constantinople or, most often, the army. You mistake the importance of a spiritual connection to the previous emperor in order to succeed as some custom for hereditary succession, which is incorrect. Spiritual ties were achieved either through baptism, which is why only eunuchs or powerless courtiers baptized the imperial children, or through marriage, which is why several emperors either married a Basileus’ daughter or his widow. It’s not a matter of blood or birth right, but of family and popular sovereignty. In Western Europe you succeeded because your birth afforded you that right. In Byzantium you succeeded because you had been designated to succeed.
 
Yeah, I grab Tanistry as a British tribal because it lets me keep my realm together if I am slowly expanding across the islands rather than having a kingdom where every county is ruled by a different one of my relatives if I am gavelkind.
 
The (Eastern) Romans should be able to change to primogeniture with a difficult discision and civil war. Like at max centralization. Interested to see if governorships work differently
 
The (Eastern) Romans should be able to change to primogeniture with a difficult discision and civil war. Like at max centralization. Interested to see if governorships work differently
Honestly? I don’t think so. To make a modern and admittedly crude, but enlightening, analogy, it doesn’t matter how much a President centralizes the United States; he’s never going to install legal hereditary succession to the presidency. Sure, he might establish a presidential dynasty, but his successors would still need to get elected, even in rigged elections. That’s just the nature and very essence of the United States. A good current example of this setup is North Korea, a hereditary dictatorship in practice, but which still clings to their “democratic tradition” in theory through rigged elections. The Byzantines were the same. They were a republican monarchy, and that’s just who they were. Changing that changes their whole self-identity beyond repair. Honestly, if people want to play a feudal and hereditary Byzantine Empire, I recommend establishing the Latin Empire and playing around with it.
 
Honestly? I don’t think so. To make a modern and admittedly crude, but enlightening, analogy, it doesn’t matter how much a President centralizes the United States; he’s never going to install legal hereditary succession to the presidency. Sure, he might establish a presidential dynasty, but his successors would still need to get elected, even in rigged elections. That’s just the nature and very essence of the United States. A good current example of this setup is North Korea, a hereditary dictatorship in practice, but which still clings to their “democratic tradition” in theory through rigged elections. The Byzantines were the same. They were a republican monarchy, and that’s just who they were. Changing that changes their whole self-identity beyond repair. Honestly, if people want to play a feudal and hereditary Byzantine Empire, I recommend establishing the Latin Empire and playing around with it.

I get your point, but there's a difference between hereditary succession in the United States and the Emperor of the Romans writing on a piece of paper saying "Yo I have max authority so I figure I out to say that my firstborn should be the next ruler." I'm probably going to use Imperial Elective since I always like the idea of some threats existing. I just think it's weird that the HRE can get rid of its elective system but the Romans/Byzantines can't. If you argue historical realism, then I bring up the fact that you can bring a mostly dead religion back, but you can't change the succession system of an empire, at the very least make it a game rule.

Lastly, I worry about the AI Byzantines being incapable because the AI is terrible at educating characters.
 
You claim the Palaiologos operated by Primogeniture, but a quick look at wikipedia dispels that notion. The first succession was by primogeniture sure, but after that it changed hands by a civil war (Andronikos III overthrew his grandfather Andronikos II). Then it was contested by John VI Kantakouzenos, the grand domestic (i.e. chief general or marshal). John VI won and was emperor for about 10 years before being deposed by the man he had deposed. John V proceeded to go in and out of power for the next 30 or 40 years, bankrupting the empire in the process.

That sounds like the sort of thing the new imperial elective will cause to happen.
No, not really. The cases you mention are better represented by factions, not funky inheritances. In fact none of the cases you mentioned involved death, just one person dethroning another, if I'm not wrong. I don't see how it proves your point.
Honestly? I don’t think so. To make a modern and admittedly crude, but enlightening, analogy, it doesn’t matter how much a President centralizes the United States; he’s never going to install legal hereditary succession to the presidency. Sure, he might establish a presidential dynasty, but his successors would still need to get elected, even in rigged elections. That’s just the nature and very essence of the United States. A good current example of this setup is North Korea, a hereditary dictatorship in practice, but which still clings to their “democratic tradition” in theory through rigged elections. The Byzantines were the same. They were a republican monarchy, and that’s just who they were. Changing that changes their whole self-identity beyond repair. Honestly, if people want to play a feudal and hereditary Byzantine Empire, I recommend establishing the Latin Empire and playing around with it.
That's similar to saying the transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire could not possibly happen because reasons. Transitions happen under certain conditions.
 
That's similar to saying the transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire could not possibly happen because reasons. Transitions happen under certain conditions.
My point exactly. The essence of the Roman political system - popular sovereignty - remained virtually untouched even after the establishment of the imperial office. The Emperor reigned because the people allowed him to reign, and he was held accountable before the Roman res publica, or the Byzantine politeia. Popular sovereignty is what defines Rome/Byzantium and it is completely incompatible with a hereditary monarchy. Byzantium was a Republican Monarchy. Adopting primogeniture succession would make just about as much sense as France converting into a merchant republic.
 
My point exactly. The essence of the Roman political system - popular sovereignty - remained virtually untouched even after the establishment of the imperial office. The Emperor reigned because the people allowed him to reign, and he was held accountable before the Roman res publica, or the Byzantine politeia. Popular sovereignty is what defines Rome/Byzantium and it is completely incompatible with a hereditary monarchy. Byzantium was a Republican Monarchy. Adopting primogeniture succession would make just about as much sense as France converting into a merchant republic.
And when bribed council members allow you to abolish the Council is also popular sovereignty, right? And having all vassals in your realm aprove a succesion law change (as it happens right now ingame) is also popular sovereignty, right? Is it not the will of the people anymore if the country itself allows such a change?

Changing succesion laws ingame right now is not just one person forcing a change on people, it requires a pretty big consensus of the whole country.
 
Yeah, I grab Tanistry as a British tribal because it lets me keep my realm together if I am slowly expanding across the islands rather than having a kingdom where every county is ruled by a different one of my relatives if I am gavelkind.

I think the only tribals in Britain are the Picts and one or two Anglo Saxons in early starts. Or do some Welsh rulers start as tribal too?
 
I really like how HRE now has this unique succession form - I guess it would be cool though if the players got something more for playing as HRE, rather than just now having a more challenging succession.

With the Roman Empire there's the new more challenging Imperial succession, but there's also the bonuses of being able to hold cities, and the Augustus and Born in the Purple traits. HRE only has a unique crown, but other than that it's inferior to created empires of Scandinavia or Hispania or Russia etc, since it is so restricted.

Max Centralisation is a really tough requirement for changing the succession law too - the tech level needed is so high, so it'll only end up happening in the late game.
 
I couldn't locate an answer for this so I'm asking myself (if an answer exists, please point me to it) :

If as the Basileus or the Kaiser you are voting for your son but the other electors vote for another person of your dynasty and that person wins, who do you play as? The son or the new dynastic emperor?