Wondering Why the Conclave Realm Laws Were Reverted Back to the Old Crown Authority Laws

[Frost1800]

During the stream, I noticed that the Conclave Ream laws were reverted back to the old crown authority laws. I wonder what the devs don't like about the conclave system. Personally, I prefer Conclave's system because it allows for more detailed tweaking of the laws.

Edit: To help make the point clearer, I added screenshots of crown authority laws in CK III from the stream.

 

[Furleppe]

It's true that crown authority is back, but it's important to note that some laws transferred to Feudal Contracts. So it's different than both pre and post conclave CK2.

 

[Frost1800]

It's true that crown authority is back, but it's important to note that some laws transferred to Feudal Contracts. So it's different than both pre and post conclave CK2.

I think the crown authority does what the pre-Conclave crown authority exactly did, i.e. affecting taxes, levies, title revocation, available succession types. The vassal contract is another independent system that works in addition to the crown authority, as it also affects certain things like taxes, levies, and title revocation specifically to that vassal.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

I think the crown authority does what the pre-Conclave crown authority exactly did, i.e. affecting taxes, levies, title revocation, available succession types. The vassal contract is another independent system that works in addition to the crown authority, as it also affects certain things like taxes, levies, and title revocation specifically to that vassal.

"High" and "Absolute" seem to affect taxes and levies. I'm intrigued by "Absolute" letting you designate heirs though, presumably this bypasses succession laws?

 

[Frost1800]

"High" and "Absolute" seem to affect taxes and levies. I'm intrigued by "Absolute" letting you designate heirs though, presumably this bypasses succession laws?

I assume it works like how the Eastern religions except Hinduism works right now in CK II, but I don't really know.

 

[Pointyearedgit]

I wouldn’t call it reverting, the system was maintained in parallel and still exists for those without the Conclave DLC. Regardless, we have a lot of granularity in the individual contracts.

That’s not to say I don’t how low they introduce more conclave mechanics (hopefully improved) in the future, maybe with more spouse interactions in the council as well!

 

[Vityviktor]

I was OK with Crown Authority laws. And while I think Conclave improved some aspects, it also made others worse.

 

[Finnishviking]

Personally while i found the conclave system interesting it also was fairly lacking in the sense that you could game your council in such a fashion that you would always win the votes for increased control and after a relatively short period you would in absolute regardless of your beginning situation while completely sidelining your vassals with the minimal malus of increased faction involvement from your strong vassals.

On the other hand the old system of having to make every single direct vassal above negative opinion was often infuriating and didn't leave much room for politicking and was often just a waiting game for that one rival vassal to die.

I'd hope these systems could be combined somewhat with the new vassal contracts where during a vote for a change in crown laws votes would be divied up between all vassals depending on rank and titles with you having to grant concessions to the powerful ones to increase control, but you wouldn't have to butter up every little count since a simple majority would be enough to win the vote with you having to still deal with the increased power of the vassals you chose to bribe.

 

[halbort]

Personally while i found the conclave system interesting it also was fairly lacking in the sense that you could game your council in such a fashion that you would always win the votes for increased control and after a relatively short period you would in absolute regardless of your beginning situation while completely sidelining your vassals with the minimal malus of increased faction involvement from your strong vassals.

On the other hand the old system of having to make every single direct vassal above negative opinion was often infuriating and didn't leave much room for politicking and was often just a waiting game for that one rival vassal to die.

I'd hope these systems could be combined somewhat with the new vassal contracts where during a vote for a change in crown laws votes would be divied up between all vassals depending on rank and titles with you having to grant concessions to the powerful ones to increase control, but you wouldn't have to butter up every little count since a simple majority would be enough to win the vote with you having to still deal with the increased power of the vassals you chose to bribe.

Now the Council does not vote on laws. The vote comes from Powerful Vassals. Powerful Vassals like Conclave still want to be on the Council though.

 

[Anonymous01]

Personally, I prefer Conclave's system because it allows for more detailed tweaking of the laws.

So do I.

This seems like a huge step backwards.

Sometimes I want to block vassals from waging internal wars, while also allowing their titles to be inherited outside the realm for example

I don't see the logic in taking away options from players.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

So do I.

This seems like a huge step backwards.

Sometimes I want to block vassals from waging internal wars, while also allowing their titles to be inherited outside the realm for example

I don't see the logic in taking away options from players.

Consistency and simplification, whilst giving them a clean base to start from when working with contracts.
The "inheritance outside the realm thing" sometimes did not work as one would expect from a plain reading of it, and could be very sensitive to which titles were handed out first - even when inherited theoretically simultaneously.

 

[GingerContingent]

So do I.

This seems like a huge step backwards.

Sometimes I want to block vassals from waging internal wars, while also allowing their titles to be inherited outside the realm for example

I don't see the logic in taking away options from players.

I'm not sure about inheriting outside the realm, but the vassal contracts do have an option to allow or disallow war declarations I believe.

 

[Pointyearedgit]

I'm not sure about inheriting outside the realm, but the vassal contracts do have an option to allow or disallow war declarations I believe.

They do, but I'm not *entirely* sure how it works (ie. can you ask your liege, thus it is "sanctioned"?).

 

[TheHundredDollarHeadache]

So if I'm reading this right, I can't get out of partition inheritance until high crown authority? As someone who always played CK2 with Conclave, quite a bummer.

 

[Bobwoodword]

Designating an heir is a powerful incentive to eat that massive opinion malus. I like that from a mechanical perspective.

 

[DreadLindwyrm]

So if I'm reading this right, I can't get out of partition inheritance until high crown authority? As someone who always played CK2 with Conclave, quite a bummer.

It's worth noting that we've only got 4 ranks of crown authority, and that your culture can apparently be researching "high" crown authority from the 1066 start.

Even with Conclave you didn't have a lot of hereditary options until high, as that's needed for primogeniture and ultimogeniture. Sure, seniority is an option at medium in CKII, but that's not always the best way to go.

It's *possible* there'll be a cultural innovation for some cultures that unlocks a specific non-partition succession, but I'd have to see the full list to be sure.

Edit: Because I'm a brainless muppet.

 

[Pointyearedgit]

Also consider that seniority succession isn't even widely available at 1066 (unless there are cultural exceptions) as the innovation required for "high partition" and "house seniority" succession is in the "high medieval" era and this can only *start* in 1050.

Edit: I think primogeniture etc, isn't available until "Late" which is 1200 if memory serves.

 

[Razmorg]

So if I'm reading this right, I can't get out of partition inheritance until high crown authority? As someone who always played CK2 with Conclave, quite a bummer.

A big change they've talked about is that a lot more people will be stuck in gavelkind/partition much longer.

 

[Xenrek]

Also consider that seniority succession isn't even widely available at 1066 (unless there are cultural exceptions) as the innovation required for "high partition" and "house seniority" succession is in the "high medieval" era and this can only *start* in 1050.

View attachment 606172
Edit: I think primogeniture etc, isn't available until "Late" which is 1200 if memory serves.

the Era system is honestly the one part of CK3 i just do not see the need for, and definetly just feels too gamey/restrictive

if they were worried about some innovations being too powerful, then just tie it to having other research finished first, or development levels in the kingdom, or both. But arbitrary "no matter how you focus your empire, everything is blocked until this year" just feels bad man.

its like, imagine if Crusades in CK2 were hardlocked behind years with no alternative unlock. 769 starts would basically never see crusades as one side would either take all of europe or the middle east, negating the need/opportunity. But in the extreme scenario of one side completely dominating the home turf of the other, crusades unlock early for the losing side.

dont see why their cant be similar "extreme scenario" unlocks in CK3; or just do ***what every other paradox game does*** and make an ahead-of-time penalty for tech

 

[TheHundredDollarHeadache]

Even with Conclave you didn't have a lot of hereditary options until high, as that's needed for primogeniture and ultimogeniture. Sure, seniority is an option at medium in CKII, but that's not always the best way to go.

IIRC, with Conclave, all it takes is Late Feudal administration to get to primo. Seniority only required that you weren't an unreformed pagan.