Heirless kings

[telesien]

My point is though that there needs to be some way for the kingdom to dissolve. Kingdom titles have been lost permeability throughout history and this is a sandbox game so having a chance of that happening here, like it did in other eras, is appropriate.

There can be some limit. Like if you won't solve the civil war in 5 years, the kingdom will be done. Or something more dynamic like a year for every duke or so.

Also the possibility of inviting foreign dynasty was historical option. Like when in 1306 died the last male member of Premyslid dynasty Wenceslaus III Bohemian nobility elected Henry IV (husband of Wenceslau's daughter). However two emperors were against him (first Albert I and later Henry VII) so he never ruled for long. However this brings two new possibilities.

-When the title is not passed along female line, nobility will still probably vote for someone who married woman from the ruling house to keep the original bloodline on throne and will prefer this solution to most powerful domestic duke without strong connection to the king

-As the example of Henry VII's son John shows, it is possible to gain support to the throne by marrying woman after the death of king and thus gain the right to rule

Although the second one is more complicated and involves pressure from the emperor, it may still be an option for countries within HRE

 

[unmerged(84239)]

I think the civil war between the largest dukes would work well.


However I would like to see a different one, already suggested.
When a king dies heirless, the:
- kingdom changes to elective law
- the strongest duke becomes king
- the dukes which are in inheritance places 2-4 get a claim, and a chance for a rivalry/friendship with the king.

 

[Wezqu]

I would also want the possibility that kingdom would be able to dissolve. Of course this might be possible if they never really give the kingdom tittle to any of the dukes but if one of them doesn't win the war of succession but makes a white peace the kingdom will dissolve and can be again reformed if you own enough provinces.

 

[Vricklund]

I'd much rather discuss a hairless king. It could be a new trait. Maybe it could decrease your popularity with the ladies.

 

[telesien]

I'd much rather discuss a hairless king. It could be a new trait. Maybe it could decrease your popularity with the ladies.

[TEENAGE DISCUSSION]

Chicks love bald guys.

[/TEENAGE DISCUSSION]

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Please stop the spam

 

[Barón Rojo]

What about if the nobles choose other king from the same cultural group?
Say, if the king of Sweden die they invite the king of Norway to the throne.

Or better, the kings of Norway and Denmark fight for the throne.

 

[Chaingun]

Civil wars are fun... I vote for any solution involving them.

 

[Laur]

Civil wars are fun... I vote for any solution involving them.

They might be fun for the player, but historically the nobles tried their best to avoid them. Personally, I would like for the game to allow for instances in which the players would preffer to be kingmakers rather than kings. Kingdoms were pretty solid entities even back in the CK timeframe, and I was quite displeased to see Germany, France, England and Hungary collapse in a myriad of counties and one province duchies.
If anarchy has to prevail (hopefully the result of a seldom chain of events in CK2), I would preffer the main kingdom to be split into separate kingdoms (Merovingian method) rather than have every province be an independent county.

 

[telesien]

What about if the nobles choose other king from the same cultural group?
Say, if the king of Sweden die they invite the king of Norway to the throne.

Or better, the kings of Norway and Denmark fight for the throne.

I don't know... there are lot of examples when culture was ignored (and it wasn't that important anyway). Luxemburg on the bohemian thorne, germans on the bohemian or throne, french guys on hungarian, sicilian or IIRC even polish thrones... And at least half of them was invited by local nobility

 

[ZhugeKongming]

Well the kingtitle of Poland disappaered for a while

I don't know much about medieval Poland, but to me this sounds something like the situation with the "Emperor of Spain" title. It was a novel title that just didn't "stick," and there are many examples of this in the Middle Ages (and beyond), especially at the sub-kingdom level. This isn't quite the same thing, IMO, as an established kingdom simply vanishing into the ether because the royal family dies out.

 

[unmerged(2456)]

I don't know much about medieval Poland, but to me this sounds something like the situation with the "Emperor of Spain" title. It was a novel title that just didn't "stick," and there are many examples of this in the Middle Ages (and beyond), especially at the sub-kingdom level. This isn't quite the same thing, IMO, as an established kingdom simply vanishing into the ether because the royal family dies out.

The kingdom title did vanish though. The Pope did not acknowledge the new king and thus could not be a kingdom.

Of course they could have converted to Orthodoxy and set themselves up as a Kingdom. Orthodoxy power in the material world doesn't come from the Patriarch. ^_-

 

[Lord Blekinge]

How about the ability to adopt one of your grandchildren?, say that your daughter had married the King of Scotland, the King of Scotland then has three sons. The first son will inherit Scotland and then you have the option to adopt the second or third son, this will change his dynasty and depending on which son you will have some kind of gold or stability hit.

 

[telesien]

How about the ability to adopt one of your grandchildren?, say that your daughter had married the King of Scotland, the King of Scotland then has three sons. The first son will inherit Scotland and then you have the option to adopt the second or third son, this will change his dynasty and depending on which son you will have some kind of gold or stability hit.

I don't know. That sounds too much roman to me...

 

[wobbit]

Well the kingtitle of Poland disappaered for a while

Ah, but was that more to do with the death of the king, his unorthodox method of selecting his heir (went to his second son while first was alive) or the intervention of a vengeful German Emperor? Discuss. (also, the kingdom more or less survived intact as a duchy, albeit after some upheaval. Also also, the Poles had pretty much missed the boat on converting to orthodoxy by the 11th century.)

I've already stated my preference for a system of allocating claims to an heirless kingdom based on a number of factors (connection to the royal line through marriage, election by the nobility, selection by the pope, selection by the dying king, being the most powerful noble in the realm, already having a claim to the title). The guy who actually gets the crown could be based on the figure physically (geographically) closest to the dying king or the capital. Basically, the closest figure would get the decision: The old king of x has died without heir, do you wish to assert your claim: a) yes (become king of x), b) no (nothing changes, decission fires for next geographically close figure with a claim). Obviously, selecting "a" could have extreme consequences, especially if other powerful figures have claims to the kingdom. Expect disputes generally ending in violence.