Suggestion for CK3 Inheritance

[Maelstrom_64]

I think a really sweet feature for CK3 would be to allow you to choose which of your landed heirs to play as upon succession.

Let's face it: sometimes your natural heir is undesirable & succession law change isn't feasible (especially if your ruler's death is unexpected), and it might be more appealing to play as a better quality heir from a slightly weaker position. Rather than saving, resigning, and logging back in to choose another, it would be a cool feature to just be able to choose who you want to play as (provided they are a Count or higher rank, of course).

It could potentially even allow you to choose anyone in your Dynasty (or just your House, if the coding would be too involved for landed Dynasty member selection). Since the new game is focusing more on Dynasty success, and this gives you better options for roleplay, I can't see it doing any harm.

I have no idea how difficult this would be to implement, but I would certainly love to have the option. I'd be interested to hear any thoughts or further suggestions!

 

[RagingJaws]

As a game rule feature (that breaks ironman when turned on), similar to how one can turn off demesne limits in CK2, sure.

Otherwise, no. Bad heirs in CK2 can still lead to interesting stories and (ab)using this...quantum leap-esque heir switching would cut out potential for said stories.

 

[Crunbum]

I'd say:

1. It would have to be a game rule whether to allow it or not.
2. You should imho be limited to choosing between the proper heir, your ruler's succession-eligible children, and the most prestigious member of your house that still remains below sixty years of age, with the latter two only being an option if they are landed.

 

[Schlimm]

I already do this informally in CK2: exiting out and reloading as a different heir upon succession, if I think it'll be more interesting to play as a secondary heir than it would be to play as my primary heir. Not a trick you can pull in Ironman, but I tend to play more casually.

That said, it'd be nice to be able to do it seamlessly -- perhaps similar to how they currently handle swapping to a crusade-beneficiary character in CK2-- but I'd agree with keeping it as a feature that disabled Ironman.

 

[Kieran FW]

Heir selection was in practice across Medieval Europe so it's entirely feasible as a game mechanic. It was fairly common when the eldest son was not necessarily the ideal character to inherit a kingdom.

Example:

Thomas of Gloucester was selected to inherit after Henry IV; as he didn't like his eldest son Henry

 

[sortulv]

I would like this sorta backward - not to escape from a bad heir, but rather to go to one... As a game rule, be able to go to any landed child (randomly selected).
Would be nice if it didn't break ironman (can't really see how it would be abusable, but then I generally don't try to abuse any part of the system )

 

[kviiri]

Heir selection was in practice across Medieval Europe so it's entirely feasible as a game mechanic. It was fairly common when the eldest son was not necessarily the ideal character to inherit a kingdom.

This is not about selecting your heir in the in-universe sense, but selecting which heir to play as when your current character dies.

I really like the idea, all too often the really interesting people of my dynasty are some semi-powerful dukes minding their own business.

 

[Ezumiyr]

Bad heirs in CK2 can still lead to interesting stories and (ab)using this...quantum leap-esque heir switching would cut out potential for said stories.

It's not necessarily to play as the best heir, though. It's about picking an interesting character of the same dynasty. It can be a member of your dynasty ruling in a crusader state for example. The son of the favourite wife of the previous character. Or just a heir with the same first name as the previous character.


I really like the idea and I wanted this in CK2. We should really be able to pick any ruler of our dynasty at character death (or when you lose all your lands). This would allow the player to pick interesting characters (including those in cadet branches...) instead of always playing as the most important line within your dynasty, which generally happens to also be the most powerful. In CK2 playing as vassals also tend to be more interesting.


It doesn't have to be a game rule btw. If you just want to play as the direct heir, you'll just pick the direct heir when you have the choice.

 

[Bas3]

It especially sucks when your primary title is elective and you are forced to play some random old-geezer far in your dynasty tree. Would much rather play as my son so I would like at least to see an option to always play as your son even if another dynast inherits your primary title.

 

[Chlodio]

Thomas of Gloucester was selected to inherit after Henry IV; as he didn't like his eldest son Henry

Taking Shakespearean fiction to its word is horrible. Thomas was never the heir apparent to Henry IV, because his father never disinherited the Star of England, nor is there to my knowledge any evidence that Henry had any intent in doing so. Indeed, even if they quarreled, disinheriting transcends their personal opinion, e.g. Henry II had a very rough relationship with his heir apparent, Henry the Young King, that erupted to civil war, yet Henry II wanted young Henry to succeed him and was sad about his untimely death.

 

[Lordy's]

As a game rule feature (that breaks ironman when turned on), similar to how one can turn off demesne limits in CK2, sure.

Otherwise, no. Bad heirs in CK2 can still lead to interesting stories and (ab)using this...quantum leap-esque heir switching would cut out potential for said stories.

I don't see why it should break ironman if it is implemented with restrictions. For example I find that having the option to play as any landed child with gavelkind succession (they get their titles as normal, you're just allowed to choose which one you control) should be there in any case. Just because with gavelkind, all your kids (that get some land) are equal - so why shouldn't you choose.
Also, it's not unbalanced: The older ones will still get the better titles (possibly the higher one) so you start in a weaker position. Also, in CK2 you can inherit as the oldest, get yourself killed (hire a spymaster that hates you) without children and play as the younger brother. You get the same effect but + the lands of the older brother.