Jure uxoris

[Leonello d'Este]

In the game, claims of female characters can only be used if the religion of that culture provides for gender equality or female dominance. Otherwise (ie if religion provides for male dominance) female claims can only be used against other women, children or incapable rulers. Which means that in most cases, female claims are only useful for being passed on to children.

It would be more functional (as well as historically accurate) to be able to use the wife's claims jure uxoris: the husband exercises rights that his wife cannot exercise.

 

[Viridianus]

Well, yes, with the obvious caveat of needing to implement analogous jure mariti for the inverted setting, too. (Though actually this might be government-dependent: I think jure uxoris is a specifically Feudal schtick.)

 

[Leonello d'Este]

Well, yes, with the obvious caveat of needing to implement analogous jure mariti for the inverted setting, too

Surely. It doesn't make much sense to give a claim to characters who then can't use it.

 

[Liquid Ghost]

I'm crossing fingers that PDX will do something like this once they incorporate regencies in-game. So they could model jure uxoris by having the wife hold the title, and the husband be a regent for that title.