The duchy limit is artificial. It forces you to hold counties without holding the duke title when you're at 10 or 12 (high stewardship, centralization). Two is too little.
Do we still need the duchy limit?
- Thread starter Citizen1oo1
- Start date
-
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.
It is a good thing that by having a negative modifier for too many duchies, that it makes your vassals dislike you more, meaning they are more likely to try and take titles off you.
Try not building cities in your spare holding slots?
It can simplify elections.
Say a kingdom with twelve duchies, and you hold two; there are ten other votes you need to worry about(have to bribe etc.).
If you own eight of the twelve, you only have to keep track of four other votes.
Maybe there should also be a hardcap on baronies, and counties.
I mean, to keep you small.
Maybe they should make a new government type everyone is default to, that make it when you die you keep only your lowest title, then all baronies and counties are passed out, then duke and above titles destroyed. Real reset for a real man.
Are you tough enough to man up and get it back?
I mean, to keep you small.
Maybe they should make a new government type everyone is default to, that make it when you die you keep only your lowest title, then all baronies and counties are passed out, then duke and above titles destroyed. Real reset for a real man.
Are you tough enough to man up and get it back?
Last edited:
I'm still not sure why you would want that. Prestige at the cost of opinion (and thus levies and taxes) and less dynasty prestige?
As has already been pointed out, there is a "too many elector titles held" opinion malus held for elective realms. The standard "too many duchies held" is literally only for non-elective realms.
Quoting myself because I am -that- person. Upping crown authority with holding all ducal titles in the realm yourself would be stupidly easy, that's in my opinion the purpose of the malus. Your vassals should dislike you for this, because as pointed out absolutism wasn't really looked favorably upon.
Indeed, in most King of England starts you tend to have a significant number of extra duchies you need to give away before you unpause.
HIstorically he was Duke of Normandy and Duke of Aquitaine. So no, he don't hold more then 2 duchy titles.
There isn't a limit to the number of duchies you can hold, just an opinion penalty for holding more than two. If your vassals like you enough there's no reason why you can't hold four or five.
Pretty sure the "Duchy of Aquitaine" he held was bigger than the de jure one in CK2. I've checked ingame, and the "Duchy" he held was basically what CK2 calls the "Kingdom of Aquitaine", that is the ingame Duchies of Aquitaine, Poitou and Gascogne. Not to mention that he is present on the list for Dukes of Anjou (another of the Duchies he holds ingame). In England he holds the Duchies of York and Lancaster. Historically he didn't do this, but only because they didn't exist prior to the late 14th century. I'm assuming he has the titles because he held the land.
While I can't see if what he holds in England is correct, his holdings in France seem to be. Which means he had at the very least all of: Aquitaine, Gascogne, Anjou and Normandy, with Poitou as a noncreated de jure title that is de facto under the Duchy of Aquitaine.
Why would it be? Elections for monarch in elective realms are the only situation where it's only directs vassals or dukes and over that can vote. For laws even counts have votes.
The best solution may be that Kings can only have two Duchies in their Kingdoms before vassals get upset, so the King of England can have maximum two Duchies in de jure England before his vassals in England get upset, and if he was also King of France he could have a maximum of two duchies in France before the vassals in France get upset. While he is not King of France he only counts as a "SuperDuke" within the de jure borders of France.
Of course that doesn't remove that in the effort to combat "Gameyness" and "Exploits". it has become impossible to play a historically accurate Philip II Augustus, but hey, playing a medieval ruler is less integral to CK2 than balanced gameplay right?
EDIT:
But the latter can be replaced by an increased malus for the former.
This is more because duchy of Aquitaine would be more like the kingdom of Aquitaine. But no. He was never duke of Gascogne or Anjou. Louis I was the first duke of Anjou. And the duchy of Gascogny was owned by Eleonor, his wife who should be duchess of Aquitain too (but Jus Uxoris isn't ingame).
Better exemples would be John of England who was the first who ruled Aquitaine, Gascogne and the Normandy as real duke in his own right. It's complex, yes. But I think it should stay that way that vasalls should be angry if you own too much titles for yourself and don't give them away.
I missed that his title was in fact "Count of Anjou", similar to the "Counts" of Flanders and Toulouse.
EDIT: And remember, we are exclusively talking about their French duchies, this is before we include any and all ducal titles within the Kingdom of England.
it's a thing that happened in history, and I don't think they had "levy and tax penalties"
He don't hold any duchy in England. So simple as this. It's unimportant which land he hold. He never was duke in England.
Too many duchies held could be tied to de jure kingdom like Haccoude suggests. Especially when a king has an existing de jure liege in the other kingdom (or empire).
The choice of titles was sometimes a pretty arbitrary matter — they could have been either overstated or understated on purpose, to appear grand or to avoid attracting attention. Sometimes counts owned ducal titles but didn't really use them (e.g. the counts of Toulouse were also dukes of Narbonne; unlike Toulouse, though, Narbonne was not really important or relevant). Sometimes counts had other counts as vassals (e.g. Poitiers). There were baronies larger than neighbouring domains with much grander titles attached to them (e.g. Albret was a plain lordship but much larger than some viscountcies and not even that much smaller, if at all, than the kingdom of Navarre, itself much smaller than the duchy of Brittany).
John was perhaps a multiduke in France (though not necessarily in the sense of actually creating those titles in the CK2 sense), but not in England. In game terms, English vassals could be upset with his number of ducal titles in France, but his French titles wouldn't be electoral titles for k_England before de iure drift, and in France he wasn't the king, so no opinion malus on account of electoral titles, only duchy limit per se.