This is a game mechanics argument against being forced to adopt the laws of the current king which you usurped by peaceful means (i.e. controlling the majority of the de jure provinces and paying money.) I'll illustrate using my current game as an example. (My mechanics argument is at the end if you want to skip the next part.)
--------------
Playing as the Duchy of Novgorod, I watched early in the game as the Duke of Rostov went on a rampage against the other Dukes of Rus early on, and formed the Kingdom of Rus by 1102. I went out of my way to stay on his good side early on, and pledged fealty as soon as he was crowned King. That freed me to develop and expand my holdings while provided protection from external threats like Norway, Sweden, and Bulgar - which had conquered its way up to the White Sea. I was able to expand in wars of opportunity against my neighbors, but a series of strong kings eventually brought the crown up to absolute authority. I eventually managed to break free a century ago, when a child king faced a large rebellion to replace him, and the Golden Horde sitting on their doorstep.
The horde threat petered out, wracked by rebellion, and eventually converted to Orthodox. Rus survived, but was plagued by constant independence and pretender wars. 100 years later the rebellions have reduced the crown of Rus to limited authority and elective succession. Meanwhile I've expanded to the point of controlling a majority or the de jure provinces. Of course, due to one successful war to put a pretender on the throne, and multiple other independence wars it took over 15 years for me to be presented with the opportunity to usurp.
Now, I do want the title because being stuck at limited crown authority with no opportunity to do anything about it is aggravating. There are no titular kingdoms available to form, I can't form Finland due to cultural restrictions, and trying to form Lithuania as a Russian state would just be weird. The problem is that if I take the crown of Rus, it eviscerates my own laws. In this case, putting dynastic control of my vassals in jeopardy, and completely gutting my town income.
---------------
It makes no sense to me at all that I would adopt the laws (both succession and vassal) of the old King of Rus in this case, aside from Crown Authority. I'm not taking his crown. I'm telling him that his no longer has any authority and I'm putting a new one on my head. I'm not taking his demesne (yet.) His vassals aren't swearing fealty to me (yet.) I'm not taking over his kingdom, I'm establishing a new one. The laws under which he administered his kingdom are irrelevant in any way to my own, unlike the laws under which I have been operating for centuries.
Those laws would be relevant if I had a claim to his throne, and went to war to put myself on it. I would then be recognizing the legitimacy of his crown, and taking his land and vassals. I'm doing the opposite in this case. By controlling the majority of the provinces, I am the de facto ruler of Rus. In this circumstance I see usurping his title as making de faco de jure, by legitimizing my own realm and de-legitimizing his. There should be no transfer of the legal framework of the other realm outside of crown authority (since you got to vote on it), though I wouldn't argue against simply resetting crown authority to limited in this case.
--------------
Playing as the Duchy of Novgorod, I watched early in the game as the Duke of Rostov went on a rampage against the other Dukes of Rus early on, and formed the Kingdom of Rus by 1102. I went out of my way to stay on his good side early on, and pledged fealty as soon as he was crowned King. That freed me to develop and expand my holdings while provided protection from external threats like Norway, Sweden, and Bulgar - which had conquered its way up to the White Sea. I was able to expand in wars of opportunity against my neighbors, but a series of strong kings eventually brought the crown up to absolute authority. I eventually managed to break free a century ago, when a child king faced a large rebellion to replace him, and the Golden Horde sitting on their doorstep.
The horde threat petered out, wracked by rebellion, and eventually converted to Orthodox. Rus survived, but was plagued by constant independence and pretender wars. 100 years later the rebellions have reduced the crown of Rus to limited authority and elective succession. Meanwhile I've expanded to the point of controlling a majority or the de jure provinces. Of course, due to one successful war to put a pretender on the throne, and multiple other independence wars it took over 15 years for me to be presented with the opportunity to usurp.
Now, I do want the title because being stuck at limited crown authority with no opportunity to do anything about it is aggravating. There are no titular kingdoms available to form, I can't form Finland due to cultural restrictions, and trying to form Lithuania as a Russian state would just be weird. The problem is that if I take the crown of Rus, it eviscerates my own laws. In this case, putting dynastic control of my vassals in jeopardy, and completely gutting my town income.
---------------
It makes no sense to me at all that I would adopt the laws (both succession and vassal) of the old King of Rus in this case, aside from Crown Authority. I'm not taking his crown. I'm telling him that his no longer has any authority and I'm putting a new one on my head. I'm not taking his demesne (yet.) His vassals aren't swearing fealty to me (yet.) I'm not taking over his kingdom, I'm establishing a new one. The laws under which he administered his kingdom are irrelevant in any way to my own, unlike the laws under which I have been operating for centuries.
Those laws would be relevant if I had a claim to his throne, and went to war to put myself on it. I would then be recognizing the legitimacy of his crown, and taking his land and vassals. I'm doing the opposite in this case. By controlling the majority of the provinces, I am the de facto ruler of Rus. In this circumstance I see usurping his title as making de faco de jure, by legitimizing my own realm and de-legitimizing his. There should be no transfer of the legal framework of the other realm outside of crown authority (since you got to vote on it), though I wouldn't argue against simply resetting crown authority to limited in this case.
Upvote
0
