The essence of this is to flag the rulers whose right to rule is somewhat undisputable or in any case looking very good.
The purpose is to give the game a tool to screen claims, claimant wars and such like.
The problem I'm trying to address here is the apparent lack of differentiation between someone like:
Stannis, who claims to be the direct senior legitimate heir of the previous monarch;
Danaerys, who claims to be the best heir of the previous, deposed dynasty;
Aegon, who claims to be the even better heir, who survived in secret;
Renly, who is just a claimant, one of many and not the seniormost;
the King's Landing party with kings of very suspected legitimacy, which some in the party know to be fakes (the queen's children but not the king's, ergo no right to the throne).
What I want it to do: Highly discourage characters with high AI honor from pressing the claim of a younger brother vs older brother in Primo and (less so) Gavelkind, or son vs father in Primo, Gavelkind, Seniority. Less highly but still discourage the pushing of claims of women or through women to purely Agnatic realms. At the same time encourage the pressing of claims of previously ruling but deposed monarchs and their proper senior heirs (like the Jacobite claim or the Blackfyre claim or Brightflame).
I wouldn't like to equip the game with a legalistic mindset and kill plain old human fallibility, subjectivity etc., but just to give it some sense of respect for Agnatic Primo and stuff like that, especially where the current history says 'inherited' and not 'conquered in a war' or 'installed by faction demand' down to the first recorded holder. Attacking such incumbents should make you look really, really bad unless they are Known Murdered Kinslayer Impaler Lunatics.
Real-life example: the Komnenos claim to BYZ from Trebisond is more serious looking than a younger Palaiologos brother or cousin trying to get lucky vs the sitting Basileus, or especially a Palaiologos son rising against a Palaiologos father.
Any surviving Godwinson or Wessex descendant (including perhaps even kings of Scotland through St. Margaret) would look more serious than a John Lackland trying to usurp an older Richard Lionheart or any of them giving grief to Henry II with 'hey, dad, I'm a claimant and pretender to k_England too!'.
This should leave people — sort of like Stannis said — with an honourable option to support Stannis, Dany, Aegon (if you believe his claim), Joff or Tommen (if you don't reject their legitimacy)... but not Renly. Unless maybe you're willing to admit that you like Renly and he'd be better etc., but that's just not rightful ruler but you meddling.
The purpose is to give the game a tool to screen claims, claimant wars and such like.
The problem I'm trying to address here is the apparent lack of differentiation between someone like:
Stannis, who claims to be the direct senior legitimate heir of the previous monarch;
Danaerys, who claims to be the best heir of the previous, deposed dynasty;
Aegon, who claims to be the even better heir, who survived in secret;
Renly, who is just a claimant, one of many and not the seniormost;
the King's Landing party with kings of very suspected legitimacy, which some in the party know to be fakes (the queen's children but not the king's, ergo no right to the throne).
What I want it to do: Highly discourage characters with high AI honor from pressing the claim of a younger brother vs older brother in Primo and (less so) Gavelkind, or son vs father in Primo, Gavelkind, Seniority. Less highly but still discourage the pushing of claims of women or through women to purely Agnatic realms. At the same time encourage the pressing of claims of previously ruling but deposed monarchs and their proper senior heirs (like the Jacobite claim or the Blackfyre claim or Brightflame).
I wouldn't like to equip the game with a legalistic mindset and kill plain old human fallibility, subjectivity etc., but just to give it some sense of respect for Agnatic Primo and stuff like that, especially where the current history says 'inherited' and not 'conquered in a war' or 'installed by faction demand' down to the first recorded holder. Attacking such incumbents should make you look really, really bad unless they are Known Murdered Kinslayer Impaler Lunatics.
Real-life example: the Komnenos claim to BYZ from Trebisond is more serious looking than a younger Palaiologos brother or cousin trying to get lucky vs the sitting Basileus, or especially a Palaiologos son rising against a Palaiologos father.
Any surviving Godwinson or Wessex descendant (including perhaps even kings of Scotland through St. Margaret) would look more serious than a John Lackland trying to usurp an older Richard Lionheart or any of them giving grief to Henry II with 'hey, dad, I'm a claimant and pretender to k_England too!'.
This should leave people — sort of like Stannis said — with an honourable option to support Stannis, Dany, Aegon (if you believe his claim), Joff or Tommen (if you don't reject their legitimacy)... but not Renly. Unless maybe you're willing to admit that you like Renly and he'd be better etc., but that's just not rightful ruler but you meddling.
Upvote
0