• 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
 
Given the Macedon dynasty was effectively primo, it shouldn't be a problem to push it through.

Though I'm not really someone who often plays as the Byzzies anyway. Preferring Italian starts.

Which is why I want to be able to apply Imperial Government to Empires if they have the right laws passed. And Aurelian Walls for Rome.

Even they had situations where the father-in-law of the previous emperor took the throne, succession was incredibly messy even under rulers with great deals of prestige and influence.

Also, would the Kingdom of Bohemia take precedence over the Duchy of Bohemia if they were both held separately in terms of voting mechanics?
 
Last edited:
>Make it into a Merchant Republic
That's even worse.
Eh, I like a stable succession and if I've got to pay thousands of ducats to get it, I'm okay with it. The new imperial elective just seems too RNG for my tastes, like a lottery where a random commander can just steal my empire and my accomplishments without me being able to do anything about it. It might be more historically accurate, but screw historical accuracy, being frustrated isn't fun. The only thing that I consider a minor downside is that if I do a merchant Roman republic, I'm going to miss out on the cool laurel crown and the fancy togas, as I presume that if merchant republican government type overrides imperial elective, so will their renaissance bourgeois fashion override the new Roman LARPing clothes sadly.
 
Eh, I like a stable succession and if I've got to pay thousands of ducats to get it, I'm okay with it. The new imperial elective just seems too RNG for my tastes, like a lottery where a random commander can just steal my empire and my accomplishments without me being able to do anything about it. It might be more historically accurate, but screw historical accuracy, being frustrated isn't fun. The only thing that I consider a minor downside is that if I do a merchant Roman republic, I'm going to miss out on the cool laurel crown and the fancy togas, as I presume that if merchant republican government type overrides imperial elective, so will their renaissance bourgeois fashion override the new Roman LARPing clothes sadly.

I agree that Merchant Republics allow for more predictable and stable succession than this new Byzantine system which can't even be changed.

I just don't like playing Merchant Republics that often outside of gimmick campaigns. Like the Merchant Republic of Iceland.
 
I am super intrigued by the ERE succesion. True that you can't change it, but it is not impossible to keep the throne dynastic. If anything this means that when playing Byzantines you will always have a challenge no matter the size or the year. Before it was enough to group vassals under viceroys and just keep them happy or have huge retinues, making factions never blackmailing you.

Now i love the idea of holding onto the imperial title for a couple generations before retiring to my "country villa" (2 duchies) focus on scholarship, theology and general prosperity of course. All this while remaining a prestigious and influencial elector and candidate. This is the Roman dream.

Also i love the little detail of ERE electors preferring intrigue characters (very historically accurate) while RE favours diplomacy. A tiny detail that could totally change how the game is played.

Just my opinion but i have not found a single HF addition that i don't like. I have nothing but praise to give to the devs. Keep up the good work!
 
Read every page but I may have still missed it: this sounds like it's all in the free-patch, yes? Or will the special new inheritance (Princely and Byz) be patch only?
HRE and Byz succession are patch, Eldership is DLC.
 
I agree that Merchant Republics allow for more predictable and stable succession than this new Byzantine system which can't even be changed.

I just don't like playing Merchant Republics that often outside of gimmick campaigns. Like the Merchant Republic of Iceland.
I'm just going to leave this picture here, this was an Ironman Iceland start.
Yes, I will admit, not my proudest moment... Also, I was the Sunni Caliph before becoming Slavic Pagan. So I guess I understand where you're coming from. :D
20180317120419_1.jpg
 
I would love something like to create provinces for byz and restored rome like in ck2+ in vanilla, cause if i can not take over kingdom titels i fear maybe if i will expand Byzantium i might have some problems with the vasall limit?
 
- Make it so that characters from outside the dynasty may be elected if they have a claim. But should non-dynastic members succeed only the upper title passes on and vassals get an event to become independent.

NO!

The one advantage Tanistry has over other Elective forms of government is that only dynasty members qualify for election. Take that away and you ruin the main reason for playing Tanistry.
 
Honestly, something like the Imperial Elective was not too dissimilar to how lots of kingdoms worked, not just the Byzantines. The idea of a clean succession from parent to oldest son is really something that only happens in more modern times.

My favorite example is the Kingdom of England:
We'll start with William the Conqueror, as prior to him you have issues with the Witan and sort of elective succession (and of course, his own claim to throne was a ridiculous mess by any succession system).
  • He dies, his heir by primogeniture would be his elder son Robert Curthose, but second son William Rufus gets the title (and, after a brief civil war, basically takes Robert's other lands as well)
  • William dies, his heir by primogeniture would be his elder brother Robert again, but instead, their younger brother Henry grabbed the throne basically through political intrigue and beat Robert again
  • Henry dies, with his daughter Matilda as his declared heir (whom everyone has sworn to obey; there are no legitimate male line descendants of William the Conqueror left). Instead, his sister's third surviving son Stephen gets the throne (touching off another civil war), basically again due to being on the spot and having sufficient domestic support
  • Stephen dies, with his heir by primogeniture being his eldest surviving son William, but instead the throne goes to Matilda's son (and thus Stephen's cousin) Henry II
  • Henry II dies in 1189, his heir by primogeniture is his eldest surviving son Richard the Lionheart, who actually makes history by becoming the first heir under primogeniture to actually inherit the throne, a mere 123 years and five generations after the Norman Conquest. And after he dies, the cycle is broken yet again, as his nephew and heir Arthur is imprisoned and murdered by Richard's younger brother John.
Plenty of these were strong kings, and yet you'll note that they couldn't control the succession after they died, despite various major efforts (e.g. Henry I had all his nobles repeatedly swear to support his daughter as heir, but they all immediately rushed to crown Stephen instead as soon as he was safely dead).

And the Byzantines (like their Roman predecessors), of course, were significantly worse about successions even pretending to obey consistent rules.
 
Honestly, something like the Imperial Elective was not too dissimilar to how lots of kingdoms worked, not just the Byzantines. The idea of a clean succession from parent to oldest son is really something that only happens in more modern times.

My favorite example is the Kingdom of England:
We'll start with William the Conqueror, as prior to him you have issues with the Witan and sort of elective succession (and of course, his own claim to throne was a ridiculous mess by any succession system).
  • He dies, his heir by primogeniture would be his elder son Robert Curthose, but second son William Rufus gets the title (and, after a brief civil war, basically takes Robert's other lands as well)
  • William dies, his heir by primogeniture would be his elder brother Robert again, but instead, their younger brother Henry grabbed the throne basically through political intrigue and beat Robert again
  • Henry dies, with his daughter Matilda as his declared heir (whom everyone has sworn to obey; there are no legitimate male line descendants of William the Conqueror left). Instead, his sister's third surviving son Stephen gets the throne (touching off another civil war), basically again due to being on the spot and having sufficient domestic support
  • Stephen dies, with his heir by primogeniture being his eldest surviving son William, but instead the throne goes to Matilda's son (and thus Stephen's cousin) Henry II
  • Henry II dies in 1189, his heir by primogeniture is his eldest surviving son Richard the Lionheart, who actually makes history by becoming the first heir under primogeniture to actually inherit the throne, a mere 123 years and five generations after the Norman Conquest. And after he dies, the cycle is broken yet again, as his nephew and heir Arthur is imprisoned and murdered by Richard's younger brother John.
Plenty of these were strong kings, and yet you'll note that they couldn't control the succession after they died, despite various major efforts (e.g. Henry I had all his nobles repeatedly swear to support his daughter as heir, but they all immediately rushed to crown Stephen instead as soon as he was safely dead).

And the Byzantines (like their Roman predecessors), of course, were significantly worse about successions even pretending to obey consistent rules.

Perhaps depending on the amount of prestige he can raise a certain number of troops by events, (needing to have no land) besides the vassals supporting his claim
 
This should be more of a concern for the AI. For the player anyone with a title should be immune to pruning

Even titleless characters are potential councilors or co-conspirators in plots. They may play a role in random court events. Removing them arbitrarily would interfere with the dynamics of a Byzantine court in a way that conflicts with the intended gameplay design.

If the court is to be the center of Byzantine/Roman power, it only makes sense that the court should be huge and complex.
 
That was my understanding of reading the dev diary. Basically, the only system that uses variable vote power in vanilla is imperial elective.

While I personally think the new byzantine Byzantine succession is awesome, an option to allow it to be broken might be to add a Greek Empire and a decision to swap the Byzantine empire to the Greek Empire under certain circumstances (e.g. max central, max crown authority/destroyed council, have both your father and grand-father be emperors).
 
Yes, I will admit, not my proudest moment... Also, I was the Sunni Caliph before becoming Slavic Pagan. So I guess I understand where you're coming from. :D View attachment 413549
I don't see how that glorious moment could be anything less than your proudest moment! That picture is goddamn amazing. And you were Caliph before converting to paganism? You sir are a legend!
 
That was my understanding of reading the dev diary. Basically, the only system that uses variable vote power in vanilla is imperial elective.

While I personally think the new byzantine Byzantine succession is awesome, an option to allow it to be broken might be to add a Greek Empire and a decision to swap the Byzantine empire to the Greek Empire under certain circumstances (e.g. max central, max crown authority/destroyed council, have both your father and grand-father be emperors).
Technically Princely Elective can potentially have a slight modification in voting power:

Theocratic Catholic Electors have twice as much voter strength than secular Electors whenever the Empire is under Papal Investiture.

But essentially, yes, it's only for imperial succession without mods (which I imagine will do all sorts of crazy things).
 
I don't see how that glorious moment could be anything less than your proudest moment! That picture is goddamn amazing. And you were Caliph before converting to paganism? You sir are a legend!
It was a pretty fun campaign, don't get me wrong, just not the most... realistic one.
Some more pics for the lulz for anyone interested:
20180310124733_1.jpg
20180209141702_1.jpg
20180204103931_1.jpg
20180217164148_1.jpg
20180309204729_1.jpg
20180128145339_1.jpg
20180310211438_1.jpg

I've got a lot more, but I don't want to spam the thread too much.
 
NO!

The one advantage Tanistry has over other Elective forms of government is that only dynasty members qualify for election. Take that away and you ruin the main reason for playing Tanistry.

The MAIN reason for playing tanistry is flavour which I'm trying to improve.
 
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.