• 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
 
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?
In the British Archipelago there are tribal catholics of Irish, Pictish, and Welsh culture. The British Archipelago includes the islands of Great Britain and Ireland, the Isle of Man, and things like the Hebrides and the Faroe islands. While the Irish might get upset at my inclusion of them in "British", I am technically correct.

As to your other question, the Isle of Man is an independent Welsh tribal start in 769. I think there are Welsh tribals who are vassals of Pictland then too. I am unsure about The Old Gods and Welsh tribals.
 
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?

id assume you just keep playing with your ducal titles and constantinople with the new emperor having the button to get constantinople

EDIT: it occurs to me that this is why the generals have to be landed to stop a landless emperor from taking over before they can seize constantinople
 
id assume you just keep playing with your ducal titles and constantinople with the new emperor having the button to get constantinople
What if you vote for the other guy too? Does that count as "winning" the election? And didn't the past forms of elective kept you playing as the newly elected ruler no matter what (assuming he/she was of your dynasty)?
 
What if you vote for the other guy too? Does that count as "winning" the election? And didn't the past forms of elective kept you playing as the newly elected ruler no matter what (assuming he/she was of your dynasty)?

its kinda like heir designation you play as whatever dynasty member wins the election and if a non dynasty member wins you keep going with your other titles based on whatever succession law they have, since they cant be imperial like the empire title
 
Who elects a ruler in tanistry?
The paternal family group.

No. The vassals.

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?

Read what it's trying to do and get back to me.
 
By opening Tanistry Election to non-dynasts, you'd take away what makes it unique and desirable. You'd be yanking away the thing that makes people say "Hey, I think I'll try that".
Only non-dynasts with strong claims. It makes it more challenging I agree but it should make Irish starts more interesting gameplay wise. Constant pressure to improve your heir and to remove/mutilate claimants who may undo all your work.
 
Can you also please extend this to Republics?

The current republic succession is not very realistic. But I can see how something like this can be used to fix this. Let’s say allow all adult males from Patrician families vote to elect the Leader of the republic for example. Or put in place a separate title of “Freeman” which citizens of republic who have certain amount of wealth can buy and then have them vote the successor to the current doge.
 
Well, there we have it. Just over six years after the release of Legacy of Rome, and Byzantium is finally in a decent shape. What took you so long?

The moddable succession laws, if implemented as well as they seem to be from the many answers in this thread, would solve what I would say is the final major modding obstacle. Well done.

All in all, this patch/DLC combination is now looking to finally be an actual great one, after a number of DLC's that - how do I put this diplomatically - were not as good as they could have been. Consider it bought.
 
I am happy as they revamp elective succession, I like as they want represent Byzantine Empire better than in current versions of CK2
 
In the British Archipelago there are tribal catholics of Irish, Pictish, and Welsh culture. The British Archipelago includes the islands of Great Britain and Ireland, the Isle of Man, and things like the Hebrides and the Faroe islands. While the Irish might get upset at my inclusion of them in "British", I am technically correct.

As to your other question, the Isle of Man is an independent Welsh tribal start in 769. I think there are Welsh tribals who are vassals of Pictland then too. I am unsure about The Old Gods and Welsh tribals.

Agree to disagree I guess. I certainly don't think there's any element of technical correctness of any sort. But I also don't think that there's much likelihood of you changing your mind, or anything constructive coming out of continuing this conversation, so I'll leave it at that.

Although on another point, I've never seen the Faroes been included in the same archipelago, in any sense.
 
Ah, I thought the Faroe islands were where the Orkney islands are because the same duchy includes them. I really hate the Faroes since I have to take them to actually have the entire British archipelago in my empire of Britain. It probably wouldn't be so bad if I couldn't walk troops right in to Orkney.
 
Ah, I thought the Faroe islands were where the Orkney islands are because the same duchy includes them. I really hate the Faroes since I have to take them to actually have the entire British archipelago in my empire of Britain. It probably wouldn't be so bad if I couldn't walk troops right in to Orkney.

According to those that recognise and use the term, the British Isles also includes the Channel Islands, which in-game are part of the Duchy of Normandy. So even if you take the Faroes too, you still won't have the "entire" thing.
 
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.
Nope.

The point is that popular sovereignty was/is the source, the legitimacy, of power in the Byzantine political system and society. Hereditary succession is the opposite of that.
 
The biggest problem with changing the succession laws by a powerful and popular ruler is that succession, by definition, generally takes place after the popular and powerful ruler is dead. Which is why you have so many cases of monarchs designating their heirs, only for that designation to be ignored as soon as the king/emperor died.
 
Agreed, and that's a problem with lots of the succession law changes in game - it might be better if there were a lot of hard to enact steps each generation which added modifiers to make your heir more likely, but a single failed inheritance resets it. Or something like that.
 
Agree to disagree I guess. I certainly don't think there's any element of technical correctness of any sort. But I also don't think that there's much likelihood of you changing your mind, or anything constructive coming out of continuing this conversation, so I'll leave it at that.

Although on another point, I've never seen the Faroes been included in the same archipelago, in any sense.

The faroe islands are geologically on a different continental shelf to the British isles and are culturally Nordic not Anglo-Celtic.
 
The biggest problem with changing the succession laws by a powerful and popular ruler is that succession, by definition, generally takes place after the popular and powerful ruler is dead. Which is why you have so many cases of monarchs designating their heirs, only for that designation to be ignored as soon as the king/emperor died.
Which is why they more and more went with strict primogeniture, thinking it would solve those issues. But it didn't. Sometimes people died without an heir and all the intermarrying between royal families from different countries caused very nasty succession disputes and huge wars (talking about the early modern era here).
 
So what? Even if they decided to unanimously change the way the Emperor is sorted by absolute legal means then it would be ilegilimate?
In historical theory there is something we call space of experience and horizon of expectation. The former is composed of a society’s cultural heritage and determines their horizon of expectation, i.e. the possible choices a person could make given their background. There was no legitimate monarchic experience in the Byzantine space of experience. Indeed, Byzantine political culture was entirely built on the Roman res publica, which was a total negation of the Roman monarchy that predated it. Therefore, there is nothing in the Byzantine space of experience that would allow a feudal hereditary succession to emerge within their horizon of expectation. I agree that they could decide unanimously to adopt a feudal monarchy, just like Trump could possibly bribe Congress and the Supreme Court to install a Trumpian monarchy. Neither would ever happen, however, because that’s not in their horizon of expectation as their space of experience is built on the opposite political and social organization. This option would never be considered by them, in short. It seems sensible to you because you have examples of successful feudal hereditary monarchies within your space of experience. The Byzantine space of experience, however, associated dynastic rule to tyranny and the foreign barbarian polities. To be Roman meant to be a member of the Roman res publica (politeia, in Greek). And the Roman res publica does not admit hereditary succession.