Kingdom vs Kingdom laws

[Elitech]

So, what it comes down to is this:

I was playing kingdom of Croatia. Hungary managed to get out of HRE and became independant. YUM!

So I conquer a couple of counties (Vas, Fejer, Bacs)... During truce, I get "Kingdom of Hungary is instituting High Crown Authority... Accept or ignore?"

I believe this needs some major fixing. A king asking another king to approve his laws? I understand I'm holding "hungarian" land, but this is ridiculous. Stay on your side of the fence there, King of Hungary. I just hope this doesnt happen with every kingdom whose lands you hold...

[jpr123]

It does. Those counties are part of de jure Hungary, and de jure borders never change. They will always be part of Hungary even if you own then for the entire game. If you want to have full control over the laws there, then your going to have to take the kingdom of Hungary for yourself.

[vince0018]

Yes, and when playing as England, 1066, since you own Normandy, the King of France will ask you (King of England) to vote on the laws he's passing. As jpr123 said it's to do with de Jure territory.

[Valinn]

This doesn't make sense to people now, but it's how it worked during the feudal age. A king might own land in other kingdoms. That land he conquered was considered to still be part of that other kingdom, however. In theory, he was a king in his own land, and in the other kingdom just a duke and vassal to its king.

Of course, because he had his own kingdom and army, he didn't have to listen to that other king. But on paper, he was still his vassal for those duchies. When England took land in France, that territory didn't become part of England. It was still part of France. The French Duke in charge just happened to also be an English king. That's what de jure kingdoms are all about. When you take land in another kingdom, during the middle ages it was considered to still be part of that other kingdom just with a foreign person as duke who happened to also own titles in other kingdoms.

This is why the king has to get your approval to change laws. He's asking you in your capacity as a duke and his vassal. Which on paper you are. De facto -- meaning in fact -- you're not, because you have your own throne and army to back you up. But on the official maps, your land in France is still France.

The kingdoms were basically permanent. All that changed was who held the various titles and land inside them.

[Elitech]

So you're saying that, historically, the french king sent every law he wanted to pass to an english king for approval? I don't think so... I think it was more along the lines "this is the law for the land I control/occupy". I might be wrong though.

All this de jure and de facto stuff is nice, sometimes it makes sense, but it takes too much out of the game considering possibilities. It shackles you in bonds that are supposedly already established, yet the game itself plays as a fantasy (what could have been) - i.e. using Ireland to conquer north Africa etc...

It's like they're having a joke with us, saying "you can play any way you like, any consequence whatsoever is ok... but you can't cross this line". If I am so strong, why can I not establish a new kingdom? Sure, bring on the world, I'll take em all down. Establish a "Holy Pendorian Screwup" instead of HRE if i can...

But ok, sure, Ill just conquer all the Hungarian provinces except one (cause its in the middle of nowhere) and continue ignoring hungarian kings laws. Cause that makes sense. And no, I will not usurp his title, why should I? I am king of Croatia and population in those provinces is croatian now. Vassals are croatian. I have no desire upon the hungarian crown.

Question: Does that mean that my vassals who are in my kingdom, but are de jure part of Hungary (i.e. cities, bishoprics) still vote on hungarian laws? Or not? If they do, does it mean they vote twice (on my laws AND hungarian)?

[Zarine]

So you're saying that, historically, the french king sent every law he wanted to pass to an english king for approval? I don't think so... I think it was more along the lines "this is the law for the land I control/occupy". I might be wrong though.

Not to the English king, but to the duke of Normandie.


About your vassals, they will vote for CA and Investiture laws. Tax and levy law are based on the liege kingdom. And btw, you should never see a tax change request from another kingdom, only CA and Investiture laws.

[Elitech]

Not to the English king, but to the duke of Normandie.

Who was the english king at that moment... Which makes me wonder - when he said NO to the law and the law passed and he still said NO, I WILL NOT LISTEN TO YOU, what happened? War perhaps? Winner makes the laws? 2 masters on the same land never worked.

Why should my vassals vote for CA (or anything else) in another kingdom? That makes NO SENSE whatsoever. And no, do not go explaining de jure and de facto to me, I know all of that. It only serves as a justification for that mechanic, not as a reasonable argument. They were in the kingdom of Hungary for lets say 100 years. Vassals were hungarian, population was hungarian. Now, after 250 years under my rule, population is croatian, vassals are croatian, nobody even remembers they were ever a part of Hungary, yet... they VOTE????

When a kingdom took land from another, the population never said "oh... ok, im still gonna vote in my old kingdom too". When England took land from Wales and/or Scotland piece by piece, the vassals there were loyal to England and did not vote on other kingdoms laws.

The game itself I like, some...design... options i do not agree with at all and thats what bothers me. Good work Paradox, keep releasing patches

[Zarine]

When a kingdom took land from another, the population never said "oh... ok, im still gonna vote in my old kingdom too". When England took land from Wales and/or Scotland piece by piece, the vassals there were loyal to England and did not vote on other kingdoms laws.

It's not until 1707 that Scotland vote for English law! And That's 103 years after King James declared the kingdom of Great Brittaine as being England/Scotland which was both his title at that time.
So that's the way it worked and as a historical game, it's fine.
What could be great is that the de Jure could progress slowly in like 200+ years to match changes... but would be very ahistorical.

[londoner247]

Why should my vassals vote for CA (or anything else) in another kingdom? That makes NO SENSE whatsoever. And no, do not go explaining de jure and de facto to me, I know all of that. It only serves as a justification for that mechanic, not as a reasonable argument. They were in the kingdom of Hungary for lets say 100 years. Vassals were hungarian, population was hungarian. Now, after 250 years under my rule, population is croatian, vassals are croatian, nobody even remembers they were ever a part of Hungary, yet... they VOTE????

When a kingdom took land from another, the population never said "oh... ok, im still gonna vote in my old kingdom too". When England took land from Wales and/or Scotland piece by piece, the vassals there were loyal to England and did not vote on other kingdoms laws.

The game itself I like, some...design... options i do not agree with at all and thats what bothers me. Good work Paradox, keep releasing patches

I think this is your best point.

Once you have completely changed the culture in conquered territory so that any significant remnant of the de jure overlord is gone there should be a mechanism to change the rules of the game so that the weakened overlord acknowledges that he no longer has any claim on that territory.

Having said that, it was only a little over two hundred years ago that we in England stopped crowning our monarch as the King (or Queen) of France so it does seem to take a while for people to accept the reality of the position on the ground ...

[londoner247]

It's not until 1707 that Scotland vote for English law! And That's 103 years after King James declared the kingdom of Great Brittaine as being England/Scotland which was both his title at that time.

History on this side of La Manche is far from clear and simple so I can understand why you said that but, in fact, James was never King of Great Britain. He simply ruled over a Personal Union (to borrow a term from the EU series) under which he was simultaneously King James I of England and King James VI of Scotland. The Act of Union in 1707 was, as you say, when Great Britain came into existence under Queen Anne.

[Zarine]

Anyway, that's not really medieval time anymore in 1700+.

Fact was that even if the duke of Normandy was king of England, he remained vassal of France as duke of Normandie. Of course, this wasn't easy for their relationship but it was what it was.