Why do dynasties die out so quickly?!

[Ydrgn]

I really love this mod, but there is one thing, that annoys me:

Very often, women inherit but because they have a normal wedding, the title passes to another family.

It would be okay, if the woman was the last of her dynasty or the male members were old and childless...

But to often, the familiy is strong and great, with 2-5 young males, which are close enough to the main line to inherit..

I wonder, if it would be possible to create an event, in which a court is simulated and the higher lord decides which family will inherit. If the "old" family is still strong enough, ths would make sense, fits to the ASOIAF World and prevents small lords from growing strong by marriage, which is a mayor concern for higher lords.


Those families sometimes ruled 200-300 years, and it's a shame that so many die out within the first 20 years of the game...

Another solution could be to make most of the titles agnatic...

Is there anyone interested in writing these events?

I am too bad to do this, and sry for my bad english

 

[homeworlder]

I agree, though i think paradox should make more AI moddable instead of blobbing more events up.
Also, the families ruled thousands of years, not just hundreds.

 

[P5166661]

My solution as king of the Iron Throne is to arrange marriages in advance when things like this are going to happen.

It takes a bit of work and watchfulness, but if you really want them to stay in power...

Besides, the Lords Paramount of Westeros all get strong claims on their regions. My method is just to prevent civil wars.

 

[JonStryker]

In my own mod I pre-set most titles to agnatic inheritance. I do like the result, dynasties hold on to titles much longer

 

[mjohnson85]

In my own mod I pre-set most titles to agnatic inheritance. I do like the result, dynasties hold on to titles much longer

I also do this. It works darn well.

 

[D Toccs]

fits to the ASOIAF World and prevents small lords from growing strong by marriage, which is a mayor concern for higher lords.

Also makes playing as a small lord hugely unbalanced as you are actually blocked from moving up the ladder. Which is why this sort of thing is best suited for a submod.

 

[Azarias59]

It's because the game doesn't adequately represent the inheritance system from the books.

1. If you inherited the title, then you would take up the house name. (For example: Harry the Heir would become an Arryn upon inheriting.) This wasn't really a set rule, but people tended to adopt the name for diplomatic and/or prestigious reasons. (For example, if you refused to change/pass on that name while a living member of that house was alive, this could cause a lot of issues.)

2. But, if you were *given* the title, then the title would be attached to *your* name. (For example, Petyr Baelish was *given* Harrenhal after it the King revoked it from Lady Whent; Lancel Lannister was *given* Riverrun after the King revoked it from the Tullys. Another example: House Lothston died out, and then the Whents were *given* the title.)

3. Also, a title's inheritance could be changed by the titleholder at will. (There are several examples in the books where Lords allowed/disallowed certain people to inherit. If a Lord only had one daughter, he could disinherit her in favour of his brother/nephew/cousin. Or, he could set a restriction that required her to marry by a certain time, or else the closest male member of the house would get it.)

#3 Could be implemented by a series of events. #1 and #2 probably could not.

 

[Manic Eskimo]

It's because the game doesn't adequately represent the inheritance system from the books.

1. If you inherited the title, then you would take up the house name. (For example: Harry the Heir would become an Arryn upon inheriting.) This wasn't really a set rule, but people tended to adopt the name for diplomatic and/or prestigious reasons. (For example, if you refused to change/pass on that name while a living member of that house was alive, this could cause a lot of issues.)

2. But, if you were *given* the title, then the title would be attached to *your* name. (For example, Petyr Baelish was *given* Harrenhal after it the King revoked it from Lady Whent; Lancel Lannister was *given* Riverrun after the King revoked it from the Tullys. Another example: House Lothston died out, and then the Whents were *given* the title.)

3. Also, a title's inheritance could be changed by the titleholder at will. (There are several examples in the books where Lords allowed/disallowed certain people to inherit. If a Lord only had one daughter, he could disinherit her in favour of his brother/nephew/cousin. Or, he could set a restriction that required her to marry by a certain time, or else the closest male member of the house would get it.)

#3 Could be implemented by a series of events. #1 and #2 probably could not.

Except that it is by no means a hard and fast rule and I don't see enough evidence to even make it a tendency. The one example I can think of is for number 1 is the Lady Hornwood situation. Where one of the claimants offers to take the Hornwood name in order to cement their dubious claim. But that did not make the other claims redundant. And in fact it's Ramsay, who kidnaps and marrys Lady Hornwood, then kills her, who has the best claim as her legal husband. Nothing about him taking their name though.

Other examples could be the Lannisters who are matrilineally descended from Lann, less an adoption than a matrilineal marriage. But I struggle to think of any other situation. An exception does not make a tendency.

 

[Ydrgn]

Could You please post your sub-mod?

 

[Rubidium]

Except that it is by no means a hard and fast rule and I don't see enough evidence to even make it a tendency. The one example I can think of is for number 1 is the Lady Hornwood situation. Where one of the claimants offers to take the Hornwood name in order to cement their dubious claim. But that did not make the other claims redundant. And in fact it's Ramsay, who kidnaps and marrys Lady Hornwood, then kills her, who has the best claim as her legal husband. Nothing about him taking their name though.

Other examples could be the Lannisters who are matrilineally descended from Lann, less an adoption than a matrilineal marriage. But I struggle to think of any other situation. An exception does not make a tendency.

There's Bael the Bard. And of course, the Dornish (we know that e.g. Doran is descended from a female Martell, but he kept the name).

But beyond that there's the problem that houses have been reigning in their current territory for thousands of years (the Freys are looked down upon for being "only" several hundred years old), despite the fact that "a daughter comes before an uncle," which would seem to imply agnatic-cognatic inheritance even in the North.

The bigger difficulty is in-game: both the actual coding, but also that the player needs to be able to rise and expand.

 

[Ivashanko]

It isn't realistic the way it is done in the books, and that is why it doesn't really work in the game.

 

[Gunburned]

Some family trees have almost no know members based on the History of AGOT.
I believe this is why for instance Gergor the Mountain has a daughter so that the dynasty can live on a bit longer.