what do you do to stop brothers taking the throne

[Gunsaremagic]

had to murder all my brothers what to do if i have a lot of family members and who should i give some of my counties

[CrUsHeR]

Don't sleep on learning. Having a single generation trained in learning is usually highly useful. I like to get that consecrated bloodline out of the way asap. As a bonus, if you're friends with the pope, he gives you free money. Also pagan religions need to be reformed before they are truly useful.

Indeed the Learning Lifestyle is very powerful. In particular in a situation where you can't simply use Holy War or Conquest, you get Buy Claim instead which is absurdly powerful.

This remark was just aimed at what your future brothers can do with their education, since the OP was asking about how to stop the succession wars in every generation. And i believe Learning is the least problematic, at least for theocratic faiths because then Theology only impacts the clergy opinion.

[Juicy Beefcake]

Rogress (UA)님이 먼저 게시:

I'm not sure what's the problem with prestige might be, because I have like 20k+ all the time. I always pick the raider legacy so it's +100% prestige per battle.

Not prestige, renown, dynasty points. The things you use to buy dynasty perks. Even after 5 or 6 generations, you're only getting a scant few/month. Each disinherit action costs 225 renown. If you're abusing disinherit you're probably never buying the good dynasty perks.

CrUsHeR님이 먼저 게시:

This remark was just aimed at what your future brothers can do with their education, since the OP was asking about how to stop the succession wars in every generation. And i believe Learning is the least problematic, at least for theocratic faiths because then Theology only impacts the clergy opinion.

Ah, got it. That makes sense.

In my experience, siblings are the least trouble as my ruler starts with claims on all of their nice things. Its always uncles and cousins that give me the most grief. And the remnants of houses that I've stolen titles from.

[Rogress (UA)]

Juicy Beefcake님이 먼저 게시:

Rogress (UA)님이 먼저 게시:

I'm not sure what's the problem with prestige might be, because I have like 20k+ all the time. I always pick the raider legacy so it's +100% prestige per battle.

Not prestige, renown, dynasty points. The things you use to buy dynasty perks. Even after 5 or 6 generations, you're only getting a scant few/month. Each disinherit action costs 225 renown. If you're abusing disinherit you're probably never buying the good dynasty perks.

CrUsHeR님이 먼저 게시:

This remark was just aimed at what your future brothers can do with their education, since the OP was asking about how to stop the succession wars in every generation. And i believe Learning is the least problematic, at least for theocratic faiths because then Theology only impacts the clergy opinion.

Ah, got it. That makes sense.

In my experience, siblings are the least trouble as my ruler starts with claims on all of their nice things. Its always uncles and cousins that give me the most grief. And the remnants of houses that I've stolen titles from.

But I have like +16 dynasty points per month and 600+ members in my dinasty. Am I doing something wrong?

[brownacs]

Juicy Beefcake님이 먼저 게시:

Rogress (UA)님이 먼저 게시:

I'm not sure what's the problem with prestige might be, because I have like 20k+ all the time. I always pick the raider legacy so it's +100% prestige per battle.

Not prestige, renown, dynasty points. The things you use to buy dynasty perks. Even after 5 or 6 generations, you're only getting a scant few/month. Each disinherit action costs 225 renown. If you're abusing disinherit you're probably never buying the good dynasty perks.

It's actually 75, 150 or 225 renown. You can save a crap load of renown if you use that to your advantage.

[Juicy Beefcake]

Rogress (UA)님이 먼저 게시:

But I have like +16 dynasty points per month and 600+ members in my dinasty. Am I doing something wrong?

lol no, theres nothing wrong there.
What year is it in that save? I think you might be quite farther along than the OP.
If you're at a point where you have that many renown coming in, you might as well spend them. Buy out your dynasty perk line of choice then go ham with disinherits.

I've still only disinherited a single son in my current save. I inherited half of Jerusalem from one of my crusade beneficiaries and didn't want to deal with it. So I granted it to my worst son, disinherited him, then granted him independence. I was also in the inheritance line of another beneficiary apparently because I later inherited the other half... It was a wacky situation.

[Rogress (UA)]

Juicy Beefcake님이 먼저 게시:

Rogress (UA)님이 먼저 게시:

But I have like +16 dynasty points per month and 600+ members in my dinasty. Am I doing something wrong?

lol no, theres nothing wrong there.
What year is it in that save? I think you might be quite farther along than the OP.
If you're at a point where you have that many renown coming in, you might as well spend them. Buy out your dynasty perk line of choice then go ham with disinherits.

I've still only disinherited a single son in my current save. I inherited half of Jerusalem from one of my crusade beneficiaries and didn't want to deal with it. So I granted it to my worst son, disinherited him, then granted him independence. I was also in the inheritance line of another beneficiary apparently because I later inherited the other half... It was a wacky situation.

That's like a year 1040 and I started as a viking county at the earliest start. I dunno, I think it's my experience from ck 2 influencing how I play. I just feel when to press on and when to be careful, not like there's a reason to stop before you're stronger than all of your neighbors combined anyway. XD

Playing as any of the Christian religion is much slower though, so maybe that's what slowing other people. I just hate all of those Christian religions since ck2 they're too restrictive so I always turn pagan at the slightest opportunity.

[TomOfFinland]

This gets out of hand as arabic ruler. My first game that I managed to finish was as an arabic ruler (don't remember the family but I had mecca) After I conquered all of Africa and ME I was having constant civil wars against my brothers and other relatives.
Eventually it started to slow down.

[Solitus]

I thought in CK2 if your brothers recieved counties in your de jure duchy you had a CB to take those duchies from them; but that doesn't seem to be the case in CK3.

Or is it just locked behind a higher succession law?

That was always my plan in CK2; only develop my capital until I unlocked primogeniture or ultimogeniture and then just fight my siblings for the land.

In CK3 so far my plan has been to not allow my heirs to get married until I take over; so I can sort of control how many offspring they have. Then, if I have new land, land the undesireable heir away from my capital, and disinherit the rest.

I would prefer the "let them have counties in my capital duchy and then I'll fight them for it with de jure claims" but the game won't let me.

[Juicy Beefcake]

Rogress (UA)님이 먼저 게시:

I started as a viking county at the earliest start.

Ah, that explains alot. Renown is much more abundant when you have 4 wives and are producing 12 kids per generation.
Succession is also easier to deal with when you have access to the tribal warlord casus beli.
You need an extra duchy or 2 for your extra heirs? Easy, just take your neighbor's.

The European Catholic playstyle is much more conservative in my experience. I'm around the same year and only getting like 6.5 renown per month. Most of it is coming from my 2 crusade beneficiaries.

I think people unfamiliar with the series come into it thinking its more like an RTS, when its actually more like an exceptionally rules-dense board game.
I think most people struggle with succession because they don't understand the rules and because its much harder to expand as a Catholic. Also, newbie island is very newb friendly in CK3 imo.

Solitus님이 먼저 게시:

I thought in CK2 if your brothers recieved counties in your de jure duchy you had a CB to take those duchies from them; but that doesn't seem to be the case in CK3.

Or is it just locked behind a higher succession law?

You should start with pressed claims on anything lost in succession. It will be a claim against that siblings highest tier title, though. So, you won't be able to war for a specific county if they are a duke unless you fabricate a claim on that county first. You will have to war for the entirety of their inherited property.
I'm honestly not sure how it works with the lowest tier succession law though. Maybe you don't get pressed claims on titles that are "created" for heirs. Confederate partition is very bad and you should ditch it at your earliest convenience. Either start at a later date or become culture head and research it yourself.

[Solitus]

That is what I have been doing, but (and I could be remembering it wrong) in CK2 I thought as their heir you received claims on your sibling titles; but it seems in CK3 you do not.

Yes. NUMBER ONE GOAL is to secure borders. Second goal is several learning focused rules to try and get out of these succession laws.

Actually...I think I answered my own question. The new succession laws are yet another method to try and stop players from blobbing; which is new in CK3 and why I don't remember it from CK2.

[Juicy Beefcake]

I can confirm, in my latest save at least, that I did receive claims on lost titles. I started in France, took the throne, took Brittany, didn't create the kingdom level title for Brittany, lost it through succession, then immediately warred the entire kingdom level title back from my brother.

I received a kingdom level title because confederate partition will try to create the highest level titles it can (up to the highest tier title held) for your extra heirs (assuming you meet the requirements and the title is not already held by someone else). So if you're a king it will create those kingdom titles you've been sitting on, trying to hoard prestige for your heir.
Regular partition will not create new titles, but will distribute the ones you have.
High partition does the same, but gives more titles to the primary heir.

Maybe they were a half brother? And inherited titles outside your previous rulers existing kingdom? I've never been in that situation but I would assume it should give you claims on the stuff that was in your kingdom.

Otherwise, it could be a bug.

[Solitus]

So you are King, and you have heir A, and heirs B and C. When death happens, you play as Heir A (first born son) I know Heirs B and C get claims on Heir A's titles; but does Heir A also get claims on B and C?

[brownacs]

Solitus님이 먼저 게시:

So you are King, and you have heir A, and heirs B and C. When death happens, you play as Heir A (first born son) I know Heirs B and C get claims on Heir A's titles; but does Heir A also get claims on B and C?

Only if they're not their liege. So if A, B and C are all independent rulers then yeap they all have criss-crossing claims. If A is a Duke level ruler and B and C are their vassals then A wouldn't get any claims on B and C, and B and C would both get claims on the other's title and A's.

[Solitus]

brownacs님이 먼저 게시:

Solitus님이 먼저 게시:

So you are King, and you have heir A, and heirs B and C. When death happens, you play as Heir A (first born son) I know Heirs B and C get claims on Heir A's titles; but does Heir A also get claims on B and C?

Only if they're not their liege. So if A, B and C are all independent rulers then yeap they all have criss-crossing claims. If A is a Duke level ruler and B and C are their vassals then A wouldn't get any claims on B and C, and B and C would both get claims on the other's title and A's.

Ah ok, that is the behavior that has changed between CK2 and CK3. So in CK3, it is better to have independent siblings that you can declare war on. Good to know.

Not that it matters...now that we have renown and a VERY easy way to get down to only one heir. That and you can control celibacy at will? easy mode, man.

[GAMER DOWN]

If youre greek, imprison them and either blind/castrate them