Imprison the King with no retribution possible?

[Bramborough]

I have a couple hundred hours in CK2 but have never seen this before.

Started as Otto in that "form HRE" bookmark (forgot exact year). He died off early to some disease, currently playing as son. During one of the more quiet periods, just hanging out building demesne holdings, a little feasting, etc. Then this event happens: One of my vassal's vassals (some still-Slavic count across the Elbe) captures and imprisons me. Holds me for ransom, cost 250 to get free. I pay it, planning of course some sort of bloody vengeance. I mean, c'mon, kidnapping and imprisoning your boss' boss is pretty much a suicidal action in ANY era, no?

Apparently not. I have no war declaration option. I have no "Imprison" option without incurring the "tyranny" relations penalties. So I've got some sort of robber/bandit count in my realm who can nab the ruler with impunity and get paid? And I have no justifiable, non-tyrannical, or non-sneaky options to deal with him?

Even in the crazy world of CK2 this seems rather odd. I feel like I'm missing something. (and it actually happened a little while ago; several game years...if this was "Part I" of some sort of ongoing event, well, the other shoe has never dropped). Should I have let myself rot in chains a little longer, perhaps that would've triggered another event?

Legacy of Rome, Sons of Abraham, Way of Life and Holy Fury are the expansions I'm running, if that has any bearing.

 

[vandevere]

I have a couple hundred hours in CK2 but have never seen this before.

Started as Otto in that "form HRE" bookmark (forgot exact year). He died off early to some disease, currently playing as son. During one of the more quiet periods, just hanging out building demesne holdings, a little feasting, etc. Then this event happens: One of my vassal's vassals (some still-Slavic count across the Elbe) captures and imprisons me. Holds me for ransom, cost 250 to get free. I pay it, planning of course some sort of bloody vengeance. I mean, c'mon, kidnapping and imprisoning your boss' boss is pretty much a suicidal action in ANY era, no?

Apparently not. I have no war declaration option. I have no "Imprison" option without incurring the "tyranny" relations penalties. So I've got some sort of robber/bandit count in my realm who can nab the ruler with impunity and get paid? And I have no justifiable, non-tyrannical, or non-sneaky options to deal with him?

Even in the crazy world of CK2 this seems rather odd. I feel like I'm missing something. (and it actually happened a little while ago; several game years...if this was "Part I" of some sort of ongoing event, well, the other shoe has never dropped). Should I have let myself rot in chains a little longer, perhaps that would've triggered another event?

Legacy of Rome, Sons of Abraham, Way of Life and Holy Fury are the expansions I'm running, if that has any bearing.

That's not the only thing that's borked about the Law/Justice system. I've mentioned this before, about an AI-run Emperor of the HRE who had all five of his sons murdered by this Count. He killed them one right after the other. None of these murders were "Suspicious Accidents". In each case, this Count was a "Known Murderer".

You would think the Emperor-supposedly the most powerful man in the Western World, barring the Pope-would have some sort of legal recourse. Apparently not. The Emperor just sat there, over this ten-year period of time, seemingly helpless to prevent this Count from killing all five of his heirs.

Obviously it was CK2's Tryanny malus holding him back. But, in the real Middle Ages, that guy would have been arrested, revoked, and executed, at the by the first murder.

I'm hoping that CK3 will be a little more reasonable...

 

[Brodacious]

Isn’t it because of the intrigue focus? Try doing the same to him and his family of pagan scum.

 

[Ambion Iskariot]

This is one of the cases where I love how CK2 is true to real history, for example counts of Vermandois and others kept rulers as prisoners and got away with it (Herbert II. kept Charles III. in prison till his death 929).

 

[Bramborough]

This is one of the cases where I love how CK2 is true to real history, for example counts of Vermandois and others kept rulers as prisoners and got away with it (Herbert II. kept Charles III. in prison till his death 929).

Hmm. it's hard to imagine something like that happening during, say, the 12th century or later. Suggests that the bookmark I used for start is relevant. Kinda makes me wonder if this event is tied somehow to Centralization and/or Crown Authority laws (both of which were still minimum at the time).