Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Legitimacy

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Crusader Kings II 69939 Bug Reports 19716 User Modifications 10604 Suggestions 5969 Tech Support 6373 After Action Reports
Veldmaarschalk

Veldmaarschalk

Cool Cat
152 Badges
Apr 20, 2003
30.245
2.480
  • 200k Club
  • Hearts of Iron 4: Arms Against Tyranny
  • 500k Club
In Heir to the Throne, every ruler has a legitimacy-rating. If it is low then 'pretender' rebels my rise and if these pretenders conquer your capital and keep it for 2 years, the leader of the pretenders will be your new ruler.

This would be an interesting feature to have in CK2 I think. Every ruler and his heir have a legitimacy-rating. It may depend on your prestige or your inheritance-law.

f.e. a realm has salic primogeneture as law, but the ruler thinks that is eldest son is an idiot and he appoints his 2nd son as his heir (speculating that this is possible). The ruler dies and the 2nd son takes over, now his legitimacy is lower then that of his elder brother, due to the law of the land. The elder brother might then rebel and some vassals in his country may support him (depending on his prestige, loyalty-rating and so on) or support the 2nd son.

This would make civil wars very interesting IMO.

Good idea ? Bad idea ? Any other idea's about this ?
 
I say good idea, should make taking a crown and keeping it a lot more interesting.
 
I love this idea. I think there are lots of features that could be pulled from EU3 and Rome and tweaked for use in CK2. Not sure if much from V2 would be applicable but I'm sure there are a few things.

Edit: In other news I just noticed I'm getting dangerously close to "Captain" rank. My lurker status may be in jeopardy thanks to CK2. :D
 
A good point, Veldmaarschalck, although assessments of legitimacy would have to be made in the context of which regime of succession the player was using (i.e., Salic Law, semi-Salic, etc.), a point which I am sure has already occurred to you.

Although the concept would be useful here, I would like some pretty extensive modifications made to the way that Heir to the Throne used legitimacy, which was too tied to royal Marriages and other EU game mechanisms. here, you could make particular professions to your liege, the HR Emperor or the Pope, for example, which would cost you prestige and money (many more things should have to cost you money in CK2 :D), you could institute a special tour of your principality or kingdom, which would of course have the effect of puttng a temporary -15% or something on each province as you pass through it, and so forth.

Also, I would like to see a partial decoupling of legitimacy from revolt risk. Low legitimacy can produce certain kinds of revolts, obviously, but the effect of low legitimacy should not merely come in the form of higher RR.
 
Veld nice idea! I can see this type of idea making it into the game.
 
Sounds good to me! I'm just wondering if we should see an actual legitimacy rating in the game (ie, the actual number) or that it should just show the top 2 most likely people's portraits and names, and make us always wonder how much backing those people have? Or, should we be able to hover over those portraits and see a hover pop-up listing of supporters (ie, Supported by Duke of York, Count of Kent, Count of Surrey) etc?
 
It should be very rare and quite problematic, though - particularly if you have people alive who feel they have some sort of genuine (or at least plausible) claim to your throne.

Austen
 
tretii_sleva said:
Does it mean that every courtier has a hidden stat called "legitimacy"? Or you want it to be shown - in order to get rid of popular but unwanted pretenders to the throne?
Click to expand...

Well currently every character in the game has a loyalty rating and you don't kill everyone that is disloyal.

Also assasinating people won't increase your legitimacy.


Austen said:
It should be very rare and quite problematic, though - particularly if you have people alive who feel they have some sort of genuine (or at least plausible) claim to your throne.

Austen
Click to expand...

The further you are from a throne, the lower your legitimacy and the lower the changes are that you will rebel.
 
Wait. Further from the throne makes you less likely to rebel? I can understand the lessened legitimacy, but shouldn't it be a heightened chance of rebellion? Or secession, at least? After all, if your ruler is off in Paris and you're in... say, Anatolia, I'm pretty sure you're going to realize your liege isn't of much help and it might be better to go on your own and maybe find a closer liege.
 
Andrzej I said:
Wait. Further from the throne makes you less likely to rebel? I can understand the lessened legitimacy, but shouldn't it be a heightened chance of rebellion? Or secession, at least? After all, if your ruler is off in Paris and you're in... say, Anatolia, I'm pretty sure you're going to realize your liege isn't of much help and it might be better to go on your own and maybe find a closer liege.
Click to expand...

I think what he means is the chance to become a pretender rebel
 
great idea ... it would be obvious to use the Claim legitimacy from HttT here.

Also when changing laws the legitimacy of the new primary heir (if that changes) should be pretty low.

So if I go from Elective Law (where my rival bastard brother is first heir) to Salic where my 12-year old son is heir, then if my ruler dies 2 months later, the bastard brother would have most support as he has been next in line for a long time, while the young son might have a bad claim as he is new in succession line (jumping ahead of all your vassals) and is underaged.

That should be a situation that is ripe for a complete vassal uprising.
 
I think this would generate a lot of problems in the interplay between the different tiers of vassalship. For example, let's say the second son of the King of France also happens to be the Duke of Burgundy. He has a weak claim on the throne of France, but strong claims on the Duchy of Burgundy. How could the game express this situation with a single legitimacy rating?

I'd rather if each claim to a title be designated its own "legitimacy" rating - so the King of France's son gain a claim to their father's throne of various strength (depending on their order in the succession), but also retain their own claims to other fiefs.

Legitimacy of a claim could even decay over time/depending on other factors if not followed through.

In short, legitimacy as a country stat is fine when talking about a game at EU3's level of abstraction, but I'd prefer a more in-depth system for a game like CK.
 
Andrzej I said:
Wait. Further from the throne makes you less likely to rebel? I can understand the lessened legitimacy, but shouldn't it be a heightened chance of rebellion? Or secession, at least? After all, if your ruler is off in Paris and you're in... say, Anatolia, I'm pretty sure you're going to realize your liege isn't of much help and it might be better to go on your own and maybe find a closer liege.
Click to expand...

What I mean is that someone who is 3rd in line fro the throne is closer then somone who is 25th in line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back