How to deal with 2 kingdoms in CP?

[laagamer]

Hey, so I've got me a custom kingdom using Iceland dudes. Confederate Partition. I'm still a ways off from fuedal or an empire, but I'm now grabbing enough of Scotland to potentially make a second kingdom.

Enter problem with CP. It will auto-create that second kingdom and split off, right?

So, what are my options here?

My first thought is I'm rolling in resources from raids and bullying small territories I'm war. So, disintherating sons is my first thought. I could always land them later after my new heir takes power.

A new elective succession is possible, but that seems even more unreliable.

Can I create a custom empire with a certain amount of kingdoms?

[jerrypocalypse]

Couple main options:

1. Disinherit all your heirs except the best one (it doesn't have to be your eldest with this method, just keep the one you want to play and disinherit the rest). This is the easiest, but can also cost a bunch of renown depending how many you have.

2. Get heirs killed (I personally don't like doing this). Not as reliable as disinheriting, but doesn't potentially tank your renown.

3. Assuming you're playing Norse (I think you were based on your other posts, but I don't know if you restarted), enact Scandinavian Elective on ONLY your 2 Kingdom titles. Then elect your chosen heir on both and befriend or get hooks on enough other voters so they vote for your chose heir. This is risky depending on your current position and relation to your vassals. It also requires you to manual created the second Kingdom title so you can enact the law on it. If you do this, you HAVE to put the elective law on BOTH Kingdom titles and ONLY the Kingdom titles.

For an extra method, what Faith are you using?

[jerrypocalypse]

Originally posted by laagamer:

Can I create a custom empire with a certain amount of kingdoms?

You can, but it requires quite a few counties. There should be a "Found a New Empire" major decision you can see the requirements on. It works similarly to the New Kingdom decision.

[Razorblade]

Partition isn't really a huge deal with only 2 kingdoms. Worst case scenario, you can just nearly-instantly reconquer your second kingdom from your brother and his inferior army. I personally wouldn't waste the Renown on disinheriting; it's better used elsewhere.

[Toblm]

There is the question of might you be better off with an allied kingdom ruled by your family in Scotland (or Iceland) and focus your energy elsewhere.

My understanding if you create and primary Scotland, Iceland will be given away (you may be able to do this before inheritance to have a little more control on what goes where) then you can proceed to to North Sea empire type things with an allied kingdom at your back.

[AC Denton]

Originally posted by laagamer:

but I'm now grabbing enough of Scotland to potentially make a second kingdom.

no. stop. go away. leave us alone. pls.

[Kimlin]

There’s a few options for multiple kingdoms.
A let the realm split for the renown.
B let the realm split and retake the land
C conquer enough land to give to your non-primary heirs so they no longer inherit anything.(my preference)
D kill/disinherit (my least preferred)

[laagamer]

Originally posted by Kimlin:

There’s a few options for multiple kingdoms.
A let the realm split for the renown.
B let the realm split and retake the land
C conquer enough land to give to your non-primary heirs so they no longer inherit anything.(my preference)
D kill/disinherit (my least preferred)

Can you tell me a bit more about A and C, please?

How can making my Kingdom smaller be a good thing? I'm not as powerful then.

What type of land do I give them to influence inheritance, and how much?

[Toblm]

Originally posted by laagamer:

Originally posted by Kimlin:

There’s a few options for multiple kingdoms.
A let the realm split for the renown.

How can making my Kingdom smaller be a good thing? I'm not as powerful then.

CK3 is a family game. Not a nation game, like say EU4. The "scoring" comes from your dynasty being successful. Two independent kings in your family earns renown more quickly than having one king with two kingdoms (though that is still better than one king one kingdom). Having a brother as a neighboring king as long as you get along also provides you an ally which will also pursue their own goals, such as expanding on their own.

A smaller more closely knit kingdom can be more militarily powerful than a larger kingdom in which you vassals hate you because hostile vassals provide little or no levy and do obnoxious distracting things.

So letting you kingdoms be spit, for a generation or two, ideally with a inheritance method that would let you elect the kingdoms back together. Scandinavian elective for example. Could provide your dynasty with the renown boost needed to advance other agendas. It could also provide you the momentum to move off and away from Iceland which is actually a challenging place to power project from.

[CrUsHeR]

Iceland is actually among the easiest places to start.

It is too far away for anyone to raid or try sieging your capital. This alone makes a huge difference because you can blindly rush the enemy capital, fingers crossed you take their ruler or heir. Never worry about having your capital province raided and your family abducted while you're raiding france and the mediterranean.

Only actual disadvantages: Iceland itself is a garbage capital once you become feudal, and you can only recruit Norse mercenaries while your capital stays up there.
But that isn't really relevant, because the snowballing from the absolute safety of Iceland is so strong that you can choose literally any place on the map as your new capital, whenever you want.

[ZetroKing]

Originally posted by laagamer:

Originally posted by Kimlin:

There’s a few options for multiple kingdoms.
A let the realm split for the renown.
B let the realm split and retake the land
C conquer enough land to give to your non-primary heirs so they no longer inherit anything.(my preference)
D kill/disinherit (my least preferred)

Can you tell me a bit more about A and C, please?

How can making my Kingdom smaller be a good thing? I'm not as powerful then.

What type of land do I give them to influence inheritance, and how much?

With confederate partition the game is just trying to give all your sons equal titles or something as close as possible. Granting your sons land counts as an early inheritance as long as they dont become independent. So a viable strategy is to just conquer land that you dont really want and give them to your sons until they stand to inherit nothing. Another note is that you can swap what titles goes to who as long as your primary heir isn't involved. For example, a title that is set to go to your second son can be given to your third instead but you can't give any titles set to go to your second or third son to your first. Also, imo the only titles that really has to go to your primary heir are the county titles cuz these are the titles that generate a large majority of your income. Plus if your siblings do become independent you can always declare war immediately as every son has claims to all your titles but your primary heir gets the advantage of inheriting your entire army while your other sons have to make one from scratch.

[CrUsHeR]

Originally posted by Degenerate Zetro:

Granting your sons land counts as an early inheritance as long as they dont become independent. So a viable strategy is to just conquer land that you dont really want and give them to your sons until they stand to inherit nothing.

And that is the wrong strategy.

If you grant your son a duchy in one kingdom, as soon as there is enough land to form a second kingdom he will inherit that new kingdom AND keep the land you already gave him.

Also, whenever you grant a son land during your lifetime, he will immediately start hoarding gold and prestige, recruit MAA, forge alliances. So by the time of inheritance you will have a substantially strong vassal/rival with claims on all your titles. For absolutely no gain on your side at any point.


The only thing you need to do, is to have a duchy title for each extra son, in your possession until you die. Especially since they removed the "held too many duchies" opinion from vassals, you could have 20 sons and 20 duchy titles for them.

And in the situation of the OP, just let the other son inherit the kingdom. He starts with 1 county, no money no troops and thus is a pushover to reclaim.

[ZetroKing]

Originally posted by CrUsHeR:

Originally posted by Degenerate Zetro:

Granting your sons land counts as an early inheritance as long as they dont become independent. So a viable strategy is to just conquer land that you dont really want and give them to your sons until they stand to inherit nothing.

And that is the wrong strategy.

If you grant your son a duchy in one kingdom, as soon as there is enough land to form a second kingdom he will inherit that new kingdom AND keep the land you already gave him.

Also, whenever you grant a son land during your lifetime, he will immediately start hoarding gold and prestige, recruit MAA, forge alliances. So by the time of inheritance you will have a substantially strong vassal/rival with claims on all your titles. For absolutely no gain on your side at any point.


The only thing you need to do, is to have a duchy title for each extra son, in your possession until you die. Especially since they removed the "held too many duchies" opinion from vassals, you could have 20 sons and 20 duchy titles for them.

And in the situation of the OP, just let the other son inherit the kingdom. He starts with 1 county, no money no troops and thus is a pushover to reclaim.

I wouldn't say the strategy is wrong though I would say that there is a wrong way to do it. What you described only happens if you give them land that is dejure within the kingdom you want to keep, if u only give them land that is dejure part of the title you intend on actually giving them, they would only keep land that you intended on giving them. As for them being a rival to you, you are right it is possible that when the inheritance happens your brother could try to overthrow you but usually my armies are always better than his due to the fact that I play tall and the counties under my direct control are very developed


You're right though, the easiest thing for OP to do is just let his son take that kingdom and if OP really wants that kingdom it'll be really easy to take it back since the primary heir has a claim on it already

[laagamer]

Originally posted by CrUsHeR:

Originally posted by Degenerate Zetro:

Granting your sons land counts as an early inheritance as long as they dont become independent. So a viable strategy is to just conquer land that you dont really want and give them to your sons until they stand to inherit nothing.

Especially since they removed the "held too many duchies" opinion from vassals, you could have 20 sons and 20 duchy titles for them.

And in the situation of the OP, just let the other son inherit the kingdom. He starts with 1 county, no money no troops and thus is a pushover to reclaim.

No, they didn't. I was looking at that negative modifier just yesterday. 2 dutchy max for any king.

And I don't want to have to reclaim my realm every ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ 60 years. That's why I'm posting here.

[ZetroKing]

Originally posted by laagamer:

Originally posted by CrUsHeR:

And I don't want to have to reclaim my realm every ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ 60 years. That's why I'm posting here.

You could try throwing your son solo into battles during your next war and pray that he dies.


The only other solution I can think of aside from getting him killed and disinheriting him is giving him a different kingdom. If you give him a majority of the titles that is dejure part of another kingdom he'll instead take that kingdom. The only issue is if you have more than 2 sons then your 3rd son would get the kingdom you want to keep.


Overall its less of a hassle to just reclaim your land from your weak brothers with the claims you already own.