Council tyranny

[Kubissus_PL]

I think that going against the council shouldn't give you penalty to relations with every vassal in your realm but only with councilors.

For example:

We have duke Bob which isn't in the council. He really wants the neighboring County. Good king Steve wants to give this county to Bob but his council does not agree. King Steve doesn't care about opinion of the Council and gives land to Duke Bob. And then everyone thinks that king Steve is a tyrant, including Bob.

...

 

[Narvait]

Bob actually thinks Steve is great +100 pressed claim, but he is a bit worried that it was not done the right way -10.

 

[Sergeant Flutter]

Put bob on the council?

 

[Iron Chariots]

Bob actually thinks Steve is great +100 pressed claim, but he is a bit worried that it was not done the right way -10.

Exactly.

I've noticed a lot of players freak out about having tyranny penalties. A minor penalty can easily be outweighed by self-interested bonuses.

As far as why non-council members care if you go against the council... think about if a US President appointed a Supreme Court Justice, the Senate voted them down, and the President just had the army escort the candidate into the Court and demand they be seated anyway. People would be upset at such tyranny, even if they themselves weren't in the Senate, and even if they themselves would have approved of the candidate's appointment.

 

[Secret Master]

Going against the will of the council shows a blatant disregard for the laws of the land. Sure, the Duke of Earl might be happy you pressed his claim to Gene Chandler's county of Chicago by declaring a war against the will of the council, but everyone else is saying to themselves, "He broke the laws of the land today. He will do it again. How long before he comes after me?"

Your vassals have every right to be suspicious of your motives. Even if you are genuinely interested in helping the Duke of Earl, who says you are not buttering him and few other vassals up so you can take out everyone else later and recreate the realm along lines you prefer?

Hell, I've done it before, so they should be worried about my motives.

 

[Bjorn_Ginger]

As far as why non-council members care if you go against the council... think about if a US President appointed...

It's a big difference between a "democratic" President voted by the people and a non-democratic medieval King or Duke who received his title due to inheritance or betrayal.

 

[Kapitalisti]

It's a big difference between a "democratic" President voted by the people and a non-democratic medieval King or Duke who received his title due to inheritance or betrayal.

People seem to have this weird idea that a feudal king or a ruler in general was an absolute monarch. If you start trampling on a vassals rights and privileges of course everyone will start get nervous even if they happened to profit from this particular breach. They know that they might well be next.

 

[Thure]

It's a big difference between a "democratic" President voted by the people and a non-democratic medieval King or Duke who received his title due to inheritance or betrayal.

Medieval politics were a lot about consens. The king wasn' absolutists. He has to act in the laws of his realm.

 

[Sonmi]

It's a big difference between a "democratic" President voted by the people and a non-democratic medieval King or Duke who received his title due to inheritance or betrayal.

It's the difference between absolute monarchy and a realm where the general matters of the kingdom are supervised by the monarch as well as his vassals.

In this situation, being King doesn't mean you get to do what you want, you're held responsible by your vassals who expect to have a say in the direction the kingdom is going in.