Help me understand this...

[Larz1695]

I have absolute rule, I can revoke titles, I revoke a title from a traitor, my council doesn't like it, and I get a kingdom wide -10 tyranny relations penalty from it.

Question: How the hell do I get tyranny from a council vote that never should've happened in the first place? What am I missing here?

 

[Lewa263]

Did you have a regent?

 

[mrinku]

Just because they can't oppose it legally doesn't mean they support it. You want to BE a tyrant (which is really what Absolute rule is, pure and simple), you may have to suck up a tyranny penalty now and then.

 

[Dragatus]

Just because they can't oppose it legally doesn't mean they support it. You want to BE a tyrant (which is really what Absolute rule is, pure and simple), you may have to suck up a tyranny penalty now and then.

Except if you abolish the council you shouldn't get any tyranny for going against the council's wishes. They can oppose it all it wants, but its opinion is irrelevant and not considered. At least if everything is working properly.

 

[DB42]

Did you have a regent?

To expand on this what he means is when you have a regent he co-rules with a temporary council of your councillors.

 

[Tryvenyal]

Just because they can't oppose it legally doesn't mean they support it. You want to BE a tyrant (which is really what Absolute rule is, pure and simple), you may have to suck up a tyranny penalty now and then.

Gamewice this is not right. If you don't have the "Council vote on Title Revocation" law, there is no vote to be ignored, hence no tyranny. Unless OP had a regent when revoking...

 

[Yxklyx]

That revocation law only applies to the DeJure kingdom. Is the title you're revoking inside that Kingdom?

 

[sortulv]

In a regency you can't go against the council, so it can't really be that.

Did you revoke more than one title?
Are you sure you had the traitor opinion modifier against the traitor?

 

[Jaevelklein]

Are you sure you have abolished the council? This happens to me when I as the ruler have the right to revoke titles, but as long as the council is not abolished, I will be notified whether my council agrees or disagrees with my decision. If they disagree, I can revoke anyway as it's my right as a ruler. But I will be hit with a -10 penalty. It sounds exactly like what happened in your case.

 

[Sunshine Moon]

That's never been my experience...if something is set to a ruler power, there's no vote, if it's set to council authority, there is a vote, but you can still do it (but you incur tyranny penalties and the council becomes discontent), and the only time a vote completely blocks you from doing something is law changes and during a regency.

 

[mrinku]

Except if you abolish the council you shouldn't get any tyranny for going against the council's wishes. They can oppose it all it wants, but its opinion is irrelevant and not considered. At least if everything is working properly.

But is this a council tyranny penalty or a vassal tyranny penalty?

Just because the council has no power to oppose does not mean your other vassals will not react to a revocation (unless it's some filthy heathen or something). After all, they might be next...

 

[mattrhearn]

But is this a council tyranny penalty or a vassal tyranny penalty?

Just because the council has no power to oppose does not mean your other vassals will not react to a revocation (unless it's some filthy heathen or something). After all, they might be next...

It's this. In fact even if your council *does* approve a revocation without cause, that doesn't mean you'll escape a tyranny penalty for it. The target must commit treason against you first.

 

[Caeserion]

You get tyranny for revoking if you do not have a valid reason - claim on the title, vassal committed treason, government allows it. It does not matter if you have title revocation and absolute rule. That just means your vassals don't get a say in what you do, it doesn't mean they will like what you do.

 

[Ultima_Ratio]

Title revocation without reason is -15, not -10, and it's not a tyranny penalty.

 

[wzfcns]

maybe you hold serval title?

 

[MrParadux]

Screenshots would help to figure out what's going on.

 

[WJS]

Yes, see above. Just because you don't need council approval to revoke titles doesn't mean people are going to sit there and let you do it. Revoke a traitor's title, everyone gets it and understands. Revoke the title of a noble just sitting there, and people will be upset.

Never think you can do what you want without repercussions. Always be ready to manage the fallout.

 

[Dragatus]

Yes, see above. Just because you don't need council approval to revoke titles doesn't mean people are going to sit there and let you do it. Revoke a traitor's title, everyone gets it and understands. Revoke the title of a noble just sitting there, and people will be upset.

Never think you can do what you want without repercussions. Always be ready to manage the fallout.

But is this a council tyranny penalty or a vassal tyranny penalty?

Just because the council has no power to oppose does not mean your other vassals will not react to a revocation (unless it's some filthy heathen or something). After all, they might be next...

If you revoke a title without justification that's -15 opinion, not -10. It also only applies to landed vassals, lasts 5 years instead of 30, and is not. technically labeled as tyranny by the game. OP instead reported a -10 penalty that is labeled as 'tyranny'