Benefits of Gavelkind?

[whosthebestcop]

There is also a huge advantage with dynasty members as vassals. Sure, they don't get the opinion bonus, but you could pick any single one you'd like to be your successor. Same dynasty means no game over. Sons turned out poorly, but third cousin Konrad seems like he'd make a good Kaiser? Go for it.

Exactly. As the King of Naples in my game I can still elect my cousin who is King of Sweden, my Aunt who is Queen of Jerusalem, and brother who is king of Croatia. I don't elect them but I could very easily.

If you are able to setup your dynasty members in a good separate realm it will never ever be game over. When I originally set my brother (Italian) up a hundred years ago in Sweden. I had to constantly bail him out of trouble for over 50 years until his Swedish heir finally took over which calmed all of his vassals. But now he always sends between 5k and 8k of troops when I call him into battle.

Elective is very useful when you have created separate dynasty branches in other realms.

[TheStrangerOrg]

y not go for seniority then, and kill them off one by one to unite all the lands!

[Held der Arbeit]

Until an option for Abdicating the throne on succession happens i'm always going to prefer elective. It is really annoying watching two sons develop and one becomes a paragon of man while the older grows up to be a waste of life and flesh. You'd think a Slothful content ruler would pass the throne onto his brother so he doesn't find himself stabbed by that very brother to get the throne.

That's one of these cases were the sensible solution is also the one most unlikely.

Flawed inheritance like that happened all. the. frikkin. time.
It's what made the feudal system so ̶m̶̶e̶̶s̶̶s̶̶e̶̶d̶̶ ̶̶u̶̶p̶ interesting

[Annibal]

I don't undersand why you guys are so much obsessed with +%30 demesne limit.

[Enoch Root]

I don't undersand why you guys are so much obsessed with +%30 demesne limit.

At the game start, extra demesne means extra income (specially if feudal taxes are at a minimum), and it may mean the difference between being able to afford mercs for some early expansion or not.

[Pallen]

Usually I prefer Elective, but the demesne limit with Gavelkind has my interest piqued. Only thing I'm concerned about is dynasty size; if I have to limit my heirs to one so that way I can keep all titles upon sucession, then how can my family grow? Also when succession occurs, who gets what titles when you have multiple heirs?

Any other info or opinions if you want as well, such as opinion modifiers and such...

Gavelkind is popular with -everyone- except your the person who would gain the most by primogentiture, usually the oldest son. You also do not get prestige penalty for unlanded sons, and I think the way the land is destributed is that your oldest gets all the main titles, like if your a King, he gets the king title and the capital. Then I think it all comes down to the wealth of the regions. The youngest gets the most poor regions, while the older ones gets 'better' demesnes. If you limit your heir to 'one', then your family wont grow very much, and you'll be one assassination away from loosing the game.

[iamdanthemansta]

OK I've played a few games but never used Elective. How exactly does the voting work after your king dies?

[Yazman]

I hate Gavelkind, I consider it to be the worst by far. I generally stick with elective, or sometimes primo if I feel like it. Losing titles, fucking around killing people or with succession etc is just too much hassle to deal with, when it comes to Gavelkind.

[Philo32b]

OK I've played a few games but never used Elective. How exactly does the voting work after your king dies?

Voting occurs while the king is still alive, and should be the first thing you do upon taking the crown/birth of a new hier/etc. In the Laws screen, it shows the heir and the two pretenders. If succession is elective, whomever is in the heir position has the most votes, with the pretenders in second and third place. You click on the heir person and choose from a popup list of people (much as in picking a bride). You (for example, as king) get to vote and everyone one position below you (duke) gets to vote. (The voters are indicated by a crown in your list of vassals/courtiers.) I'm not 100% on who gets to vote, though... someone please correct me if this bit is incorrect.

Generally if you are liked enough, you will get who you want elected, although sometimes weird stuff happens like your son doesn't vote for himself (he generally comes around, though).

[iamdanthemansta]

So the voting can change at any point?

[Dutchling]

Yes, but only the votes on the day the old king died matter.

[iamdanthemansta]

Doesn't this have the possibility of making a succession during a civil war really bad? Also I'm assuming that if it passes outside your dynasty that's just basically it.

[Philo32b]

Doesn't this have the possibility of making a succession during a civil war really bad? Also I'm assuming that if it passes outside your dynasty that's just basically it.

There are always two pretenders, so it isn't worse than other succession methods. Perhaps a touch better since you get a bonus in relations with everyone with elective. But you are correct--if a non-dynasty member is elected, that's game over, unless you have other kingdoms in which a dynasty member is elected.

[Sleight of Hand]

Presumably if you lose an election you'd just fall back to being count or duke of whatever lesser title you hold? I thought it was only game over once your dynasty was over?

[TheStrangerOrg]

ye, so if you start as the german kaiser and lose the election its not game over but it would be if you lost your last county, but im not sure wether counties can have elective

[Sleight of Hand]

I wouldn't image so though I know duchies can. Presumably baronies and counties are just straight primogeniture, though to be fair I'm guessing here and I've never thought to check. I never play below duke level anyway.

[SaintEsteban]

There are always two pretenders, so it isn't worse than other succession methods. Perhaps a touch better since you get a bonus in relations with everyone with elective. But you are correct--if a non-dynasty member is elected, that's game over, unless you have other kingdoms in which a dynasty member is elected.

With every non-dynasty vassal. I still greatly prefer elective but this is a detail that can't be overlooked!

[Dunedainjedi]

I typically stick with Elective. If you only have a few dukes and relations are high enough that everyone votes for your heir, you end up with no pretenders. Which I think is preferable to your sons stabbing each other. Also if you keep crown laws pretty low, your dukes get stuck with gravelkind which means a super duke never lasts longer than a generation.

And if most of your Dukes are dynasty members, you can select the best one if your children suck. And more importantly, when one of those dukes decides to have an expansion war all the other same dynasty dukes are allies.

[Dáin]

Doesn't this have the possibility of making a succession during a civil war really bad? Also I'm assuming that if it passes outside your dynasty that's just basically it.

I didn't notice a significant change of voting behavior before or during rebellions (though it often enough changes in your favor after you won a civil war since you are likely to revoke titles and install new supporters). Rebels are already voting against you long before the civil war breaks out. It is a popularity contest, though, so you definitely have to be a little more careful with tyrannical acts and other realm-wide negative opinion modifiers.

Secondly, the fact alone that people here aren't even certain what happens when you lose an election is already a hint about how often you have to fear that outcome.
Not that you are never in danger of losing the elective title, but it is such an obvious problem that you generally have several in-game years to think about and implement decisive solutions. The worst which ever happened to me was that another member of my dynasty (but not my personal favorite) became my heir.
Presumably, if you lose the election to someone not of your dynasty, you keep your other titles and demesne holdings and only the top-tier title changes hands. The winner would then rule the realm from his own former demesne. At least that's the way I imagine it.

[Philo32b]

Presumably if you lose an election you'd just fall back to being count or duke of whatever lesser title you hold? I thought it was only game over once your dynasty was over?

ye, so if you start as the german kaiser and lose the election its not game over but it would be if you lost your last county, but im not sure wether counties can have elective

This would be reassuring, but are you sure? I seem to recall seeing the Game Over Imminent warning appearing at the top of the screen, and I did have other dynasty members in existence.

I've come close, but never lost the direct thread of immediate dynasty succession. It's not game over if you have any dynasty holding land anywhere? I always thought it had to be dynasty members of one degree of separation, to something like that.