Why foreign kings have vote for my new Law
- Thread starter Abathorn
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Yes, but it is not the case, in my example this rulers hasn't any title that makes them my vasalls. In my case I have completely independent rulers voting in my internals business.
- 1
That's because they are, BY LAW, a part of your crown. That's what de jure means, vs de facto.
- 2
- 1
Which is patent nonsense, is what he's saying. Why would a de facto independent state have any right (never mind desire) to vote in legal matters of a different independent state? And why would the ruler whose realm is holding the poll allow a head of state of a separate nation-state to vote in it, particularly if he wants to make the other state part of his own realm (as any in-game ruler with access to a de jure casus belli does)?
It's as if one was to let Canadian citizens living in Canada to vote in an American general election. It's nonsense.
- 1
I think PDS should add nominal members of the realm as an in-between de-facto vassals and independents living in one's de-jure lands.
As for what it would bring for gameplay: one thing would be less chance that the big blob attacks you just for being under their de-jure borders while the blob gets an ally or some other bonus.
As for what it would bring for gameplay: one thing would be less chance that the big blob attacks you just for being under their de-jure borders while the blob gets an ally or some other bonus.
- 1
My take is that it's meant to simulate the fact that Westphalian states as we understand them today do not exist during this time period. To explain "I don´t recall Palaiologoi emperors asking Bulgarian tzars to support their propositions to change laws": In reality, the Bulgarian tzars saw themselves as equals to the emperors. With in-game mechanics, it should be two empires, rather than a kingdom and an empire.
William's example brings up the main flaw in CK 2's simulation: characters cannot be vassals to a liege of the same rank. Another flaw is characters having only one direct liege to swear fealty to. In reality, many local rulers have allegiances to more than one "superior", and choosing which "superior" to support during times of conflict is a distinct feature of the era.
William's example brings up the main flaw in CK 2's simulation: characters cannot be vassals to a liege of the same rank. Another flaw is characters having only one direct liege to swear fealty to. In reality, many local rulers have allegiances to more than one "superior", and choosing which "superior" to support during times of conflict is a distinct feature of the era.
- 6
- 1
To be fair, having de-jure claims on all their land more than makes up for the annoyance that they also have a vote on your laws.
- 4
Where, pray tell, are you getting voter eligibility out of the tzar considering himself the equal of the Palailogoi emperor? The Bulgarian tzar isn't paying Byzantine taxes, nor does he have to provide soldiers to defend the Byzantine realm. He may be part of that realm in the basileus' fantasyland, but in truth and in his own mind he is fully independent (to be otherwise would kinda sorta, you know, make him an inferior of the Byzantine emperor rather than an equal), so how in the hell does he have any say whatsoever in how the basileus runs the Empire?
It's as if a Chinese tourist showed up at a polling precinct in Raleigh, North Carolina on November 7th and requested a ballot using his Chinese passport as photo ID. You know what would happen? He'd be laughed out of the room!
- 1
That's my point: Ideally, it should have been 2 empires, rather than an empire and a kingdom, with the kingdom being de jure part of the empire. The vanilla mechanics of "empire + kingdom" doesn't reflect that reality of Bulguria being both de jure and de facto independent.
In any case, explaining in-game rules for de jure empire and de jure kingdom crown laws interacting is not my strong point.
"If the kingdom is both a de facto and de jure vassal of its liege, its crown laws are the same as its de jure liege. Otherwise, the kingdom has and sets its own crown laws." It's silent on whether it can vote for the empire's crown laws.
Last edited:
- 3
Still not seeing an explanation for why landholders should have voting rights in foreign realms, just that they do.
By the way, this is also true of kingdoms and kingdoms: I had enough land in Scotland as Ireland to usurp the title, but my Scottish holdings were still governed by the existing Kingdom of Pictland's crown laws even though some of them had been part of my realm since the petty kingdom period 200 years earlier (de jure drift hadn't changed things yet because I didn't control the relevant duchy titles). E.g. I had enacted Free Investiture on my first King of Eire, but my Earl of Cataibh (Cait) and Duke of Dal Riata still had to use Papal Investiture because that was what was active in Pictland. This despite the fact that both the Kings of Eire and the Kings of Pictland had hated each other's guts for two centuries, so why the hell would they ever allow the other's laws and legislative proceedings to affect their own realms? That's like Canada trying to enforce its regulations on a company that operates wholly within the United States.
Last edited:
- 3
There can be a couple of reasons for it.
For starters, just because someone isn't a loyal vassal in game mechanics terms doesn't mean he not part of your realm. Say you're the King of England, but Wessex is not your vassal. In claiming to be King of England you are also claiming to be the rightful king of Wessex. So why is Wessex not your vassal? Because whenever you ask him for troops/gold or whatever, he tells you to go jump off a bridge. This doesn't meant that Wessex isn't part of your kingdom, just that one of your vassals is so disloyal as to be effectively independent. But while that may be true, he still gets a say in the running of the realm. If you don't like a disloyal subject having a say in the kingdom's affairs, then you have to do something about it.
Alternatively, such a petty-kingdom might be considered to be totally independent from your realm and doesn't technically have a vote in your affairs, but his influence is such that he can sway the opinions of those that do, abstractly represented by giving him a vote. Crude, but whatever.
Which of the above you decide upon is up to you (basically comes down to roleplaying). But I think it's a feature, not a bug. Medieval politics was a lot weirder than most people realise - we tend to think in terms of states, with clearly defined borders and systems of authority, which really wasn't the case back then.
- 6
- 2
Your are still thinking in terms of Westphalian nation states (which unfortunately Paradox is also coming to think in their latest updates) for medieval polities.
If you want an example from history, think of this - Edward the so called Third of England was King of England, an independent and sovereign realm, but he was simultaneously the Duke of Acquitaine (or Gascony, if you prefer). This means that as Duke of Acquitaine, he owed fealty, service, and taxes to the King of France as his overlord for his title and land of Acquitaine. Edward acknowledged the King of France as his overlord, and acknowledged both the local law of Acquitaine and the law of France, as set by the King of France, despite being the equal of that king in England. In a very real sense, the Hundred Years War was basically the fighting of a powerful vassal who happened to have a kingdom behind him fighting against the confiscation of his lands by his legal overlord.
In your example, your king would be acknowledging that the King of Pictland has a historic claim, and legally speaking is the overlord of the lands of Cait and Dal Riata. De facto, they were out of the control of the King of Pictland, but de jure, you are more like an overlord beneath the king of Pictland in those lands.
What the game doesn't simulate and really should is conquering and changing the borders of lands de jure - going back to the Hundred Years War example, at one point after one of his crushing victories, the King of France offered the old Angevin territories of Henry II to Edward III in full sovereignty. In game, that would be represented by England being de jure those king level of those titles (e.g. Normandy, Acquitaine, etc). In the Bulgaria example, with the Bulgarian Tsars proclamation, and recognition from Constantinople, the result would be Bulgaria becoming de jure its own Empire, but the Emperor in Constantinople being senior Emperor and therefore having the right to revoke that territory (a permanent claim in game), at least in the minds of the bureaucrats in Constantinople.
- 3
- 1
This is quite interesting. Today, I own land in two states and I have to pay property tax in both states. However I am only allowed to vote in one. In game it is the opposite. I pay tax to only one liege but I get a vote in every de jure kingdom where I own a province.
- 2
Yeah, see, I'm in a different position from the Plantagenets here; ditto the Angevins and Normans before them. I didn't expand outward from under Pictish control and become independent like William the Conqueror or his successors. My start was Dál Riata (d_isles, I believe), which is independent at the first two start dates, then a foreign holding of Norway. It doesn't become part of k_scotland until the 1337 start. Point is, the Circinn kings never had any actual control over my realm whatsoever: I was Áed Find Mac Gabraín, an independent Irish—not Pictish—chief whom Urguist Circinn tried to conquer once.
Once.
If I'd wanted the Picts to have any say in how I ran Dál Riata or later Éire, I would have submitted when Urguist the Usurper came calling with a de jure CB. Instead I called up 3000 or so very irritated Irishmen, squashed the Pictish army to uselessness, and spent the next couple years on a punitive expedition running around the country wreaking havoc before finally accepting his surrender. Pictland was never able to pose a serious threat again; I was part of that realm only in Clan Circinn's manifest destiny or revenge fantasies.
But I still couldn't appoint my own bishops within my home duchy of Dál Riata after I went feudal and created Éire.
That's because, LAWFULLY, that duchy is part of the Kingdom of Scotland/Pictland. The way that crowns were thought of in the middle ages was far different from today. Dal Riata starts off de facto independent, but is still de jure part of the crown of Scotland.
- 1
So you're saying that if I was King of England, I could write a law that said Belgium was de jure part of England and expect the Belgians to suddenly start following my laws?
And I mean at any point in history, not just after the conception of modern nation-states.See how stupid that sounds?
Lawfully I was an independent state that only belonged to Pictland in the king's delusions of grandeur, and had kicked the Picts' asses a dozen times by the time I finally took the title away altogether. Their kings never had and never would have any authority over me whatsoever, nor did my vassals pay them any heed: hell, at one point I had one of my dukes try to conquer a county from them independently. (It didn't work, admittedly, but it wasn't his fault: the war stalemated because several other countries invaded at the same time on non-conflicting CBs, meaning nobody could get enough warscore to win, then ended inconclusively because the Danes launched a prepared invasion of Pictland and I joined, overriding the duke's CB.) But I was still stuck with papal investiture in eight provinces for no logical reason.
One good thing about Conclave, it dumped this nonsense.
- 4
That's not what I'm saying at all. Do you have any concept of medieval laws and the thought process behind them like this, or are you going to just continue to anachronistically claim it's stupid? These Kingdoms were "ordained by God" (mostly rooted in Roman laws), so it didn't really matter if some petty King wasn't de facto part of your realm, because they are by (divine) law a part of your realm.So you're saying that if I was King of England, I could write a law that said Belgium was de jure part of England and expect the Belgians to suddenly start following my laws?
So you're saying that if I was King of England, I could write a law that said Belgium was de jure part of England and expect the Belgians to suddenly start following my laws?
See how stupid that sounds?
Lawfully I was an independent state that only belonged to Pictland in the king's delusions of grandeur, and had kicked the Picts' asses a dozen times by the time I finally took the title away altogether. Their kings never had and never would have any authority over me whatsoever, nor did my vassals pay them any heed: hell, at one point I had one of my dukes try to conquer a county from them independently. (It didn't work, admittedly, but it wasn't his fault: the war stalemated because several other countries invaded at the same time on non-conflicting CBs, meaning nobody could get enough warscore to win, then ended inconclusively because the Danes launched a prepared invasion of Pictland and I joined, overriding the duke's CB.) But I was still stuck with papal investiture in eight provinces for no logical reason.
One good thing about Conclave, it dumped this nonsense.
No, it's more like at one point if belgium was apart of england, but then became de facto independant and then you decided to write a law that you insist they follow. Most of the de jure kingdoms in game exist to allow historical polities to exist, the rest are just there to fill space and to speculate about what could have been.
Medieval laws do not make sense. Expecting them to make sense is quite foolish, they were a tangled mess of fealties and oaths that were trying to insure that a realm had enough troops to defend against foreign invasions and to gain enough plunder on their own incursions into foreign territory. Napoleon did away with a large number of these polities that were relics of a medieval past and tried to create a more rational system.
- 1
