Why do you need vassal approval to change succession laws on absolute crown authority?

[Illusion17]

It just seems kinda weird that I have to defer to my vassals when the whole reason I'm on absolute crown authority is because I've stolen all the good land for myself and turned them into weak puppets who can't resist me. Like really, I don't want to deal with having to get rid of their -100+ opinions every time I need to change a succession law. My army is over twice the size of all of their's combined even without their feudal levies. At the very least I wish there was an option to force the law through without their approval, resulting in an uprising similar to if you fail to imprison one.

[Rislav / Morrominut]

Since you seem to be taking the "North Korea" route, may I suggest imprisoning them all? Their opinion doesn't matter if they're imprisoned and you can change the laws as you wish.

[Illusion17]

Originally posted by Kaiser PoncDeLeon:

Since you seem to be taking the "North Korea" route, may I suggest imprisoning them all? Their opinion doesn't matter if they're imprisoned and you can change the laws as you wish.

Nah, I'm not going full north korea. I have several of them imprisoned, but not all of them. I don't have enough territory to go over my domain limit without being screwed, so I just ensure that all the good land is mine. In this game I currently personally own all but 2 duchies in Ireland while they control Scotland.

[BoydofZINJ]

Imagine if TRUMP passed a law, "President for Life." Some states or vassals like Texas may be okay with it - but other states or vassals like California would not be. While this is not a great example - since in the United States to pass an amendment it does NOT take 100% approval - but a true 2/3rds majority. (the real rules are: All 27 Amendments have been ratified after two-thirds of the House and Senate approve of the proposal and send it to the states for a vote. Then, three-fourths of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.)

Regardless, the laws of your land are the laws. Learn then and then abuse them, if you want. Revoke all the titles to any vassals who dislike you and then you can pass any law.. even if you are the only one controlling all the lands for a bit.

[Illusion17]

Originally posted by BoydofZINJ:

Imagine if TRUMP passed a law, "President for Life." Some states or vassals like Texas may be okay with it - but other states or vassals like California would not be. While this is not a great example - since in the United States to pass an amendment it does NOT take 100% approval - but a true 2/3rds majority. (the real rules are: All 27 Amendments have been ratified after two-thirds of the House and Senate approve of the proposal and send it to the states for a vote. Then, three-fourths of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.)

Regardless, the laws of your land are the laws. Learn then and then abuse them, if you want. Revoke all the titles to any vassals who dislike you and then you can pass any law.. even if you are the only one controlling all the lands for a bit.

Er a democracy and an absolute monarchy are so different that I honestly don't get that analogy at all. I just would like if you could just pass it and have them revolt like with other tyrannical things you can do. Why can i unjustly revoke their titles but can't change succession laws.

[BoydofZINJ]

Originally posted by illusion goddian:

Originally posted by BoydofZINJ:

Imagine if TRUMP passed a law, "President for Life." Some states or vassals like Texas may be okay with it - but other states or vassals like California would not be. While this is not a great example - since in the United States to pass an amendment it does NOT take 100% approval - but a true 2/3rds majority. (the real rules are: All 27 Amendments have been ratified after two-thirds of the House and Senate approve of the proposal and send it to the states for a vote. Then, three-fourths of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.)

Regardless, the laws of your land are the laws. Learn then and then abuse them, if you want. Revoke all the titles to any vassals who dislike you and then you can pass any law.. even if you are the only one controlling all the lands for a bit.

Er a democracy and an absolute monarchy are so different that I honestly don't get that analogy at all. I just would like if you could just pass it and have them revolt like with other tyrannical things you can do. Why can i unjustly revoke their titles but can't change succession laws.

Your monarchy laws still have laws. Your vassals and your ancestors agreed upon them. If you disagree with them - that is on you, not the game or the laws fault. You can bypass that nasty "ALL VASSALS MUST LIKE YOU" option by revoking their title or killing them. Problem solved. However, revoking them might cause OTHER problems.

[Ficelle]

No matter who he is and how much power he thinks he has...a ruler doesnt have any power by himself

Ok, he has his 2 fists...this wont stop a whole unhappy nation
A ruler isnt a god either, he can die from anything, just like any human
He also cant be everywhere and must delegate anyway...delegating to people hating you...not good

So, a ruler who want to keep ruling has to at least please some people and give them power
The more he is hated, the more he has to be really liked by powerful people who have an interest to keep him in charge


Imagine how short of a life a ruler being hated by...

all his ministers / councilors / generals / whatever...
his whole army
his whole secret service
his whole police
his guards, cooks...etc...
the clergy
add in the people

...would be...

Such 'absolute dictator' wouldnt last a day
Noone would have any interest to keep him in charge

[Admod, the Equivocal]

Originally posted by BoydofZINJ:

Imagine if TRUMP passed a law, "President for Life." Some states or vassals like Texas may be okay with it - but other states or vassals like California would not be. While this is not a great example - since in the United States to pass an amendment it does NOT take 100% approval - but a true 2/3rds majority. (the real rules are: All 27 Amendments have been ratified after two-thirds of the House and Senate approve of the proposal and send it to the states for a vote. Then, three-fourths of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.)

Regardless, the laws of your land are the laws. Learn then and then abuse them, if you want. Revoke all the titles to any vassals who dislike you and then you can pass any law.. even if you are the only one controlling all the lands for a bit.

Lol. Between Texas and California, who you think have more guns and people ready to fight for their country?

[corisai]

Originally posted by illusion goddian:

an absolute monarchy

There was NO absolute monarchy in medieval age, it's appeared much later - near end of Renaissance age.

[Admod, the Equivocal]

Originally posted by corisai:

Originally posted by illusion goddian:

an absolute monarchy

There was NO absolute monarchy in medieval age, it's appeared much later - near end of Renaissance age.

Mongol Empire

Edit: The Papal States. :)

[OneAngryGamer]

Originally posted by Admod, the Equivocal:

Originally posted by BoydofZINJ:

Imagine if TRUMP passed a law, "President for Life." Some states or vassals like Texas may be okay with it - but other states or vassals like California would not be. While this is not a great example - since in the United States to pass an amendment it does NOT take 100% approval - but a true 2/3rds majority. (the real rules are: All 27 Amendments have been ratified after two-thirds of the House and Senate approve of the proposal and send it to the states for a vote. Then, three-fourths of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.)

Regardless, the laws of your land are the laws. Learn then and then abuse them, if you want. Revoke all the titles to any vassals who dislike you and then you can pass any law.. even if you are the only one controlling all the lands for a bit.

Lol. Between Texas and California, who you think have more guns and people ready to fight for their country?

Certainly not commieformian tardz, they would've instantly gave up like they did against blm/antifa trash.

[Illusion17]

Originally posted by Ficelle:

No matter who he is and how much power he thinks he has...a ruler doesnt have any power by himself

Ok, he has his 2 fists...this wont stop a whole unhappy nation
A ruler isnt a god either, he can die from anything, just like any human
He also cant be everywhere and must delegate anyway...delegating to people hating you...not good

So, a ruler who want to keep ruling has to at least please some people and give them power
The more he is hated, the more he has to be really liked by powerful people who have an interest to keep him in charge


Imagine how short of a life a ruler being hated by...

all his ministers / councilors / generals / whatever...
his whole army
his whole secret service
his whole police
his guards, cooks...etc...
the clergy
add in the people

...would be...

Such 'absolute dictator' wouldnt last a day
Noone would have any interest to keep him in charge

That's the thing, my ruler isn't hated by his nation. After playing a bit more after making that comment, I now hold personal control over all of Ireland proper. All of my territories there have 100% control and are very strong from all the money I've been pumping into them. I also purposely gave my Irish vassals control over the duchies of Scotland because it means they have to deal with constant peasant revolts due to the culture difference. Not to mention that my realm now controls York, Northumbria, and East Anglica, all 3 of them owned by my siblings meaning I can enter into alliances with them preventing them from rebelling. So pretty much I'm in a position where I'm incredibly powerful with vassals who aren't able to resist me. Not to mention that I purposefully burnt some prisoners at the start of my reign so all of them are too scared to oppose me as well.

[corisai]

Originally posted by Admod, the Equivocal:

Mongol Empire

Edit: The Papal States. :)

Mongols had a lot of internal conflicts so they wasn't absolute monarchy in fact (as in absolute monarchy vassals lack any power to armed coups and forced to rely on intrigue & assassination).
Papal States were a theocracy :P

[Messsucher]

Originally posted by Admod, the Equivocal:

Originally posted by BoydofZINJ:

Imagine if TRUMP passed a law, "President for Life." Some states or vassals like Texas may be okay with it - but other states or vassals like California would not be. While this is not a great example - since in the United States to pass an amendment it does NOT take 100% approval - but a true 2/3rds majority. (the real rules are: All 27 Amendments have been ratified after two-thirds of the House and Senate approve of the proposal and send it to the states for a vote. Then, three-fourths of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.)

Regardless, the laws of your land are the laws. Learn then and then abuse them, if you want. Revoke all the titles to any vassals who dislike you and then you can pass any law.. even if you are the only one controlling all the lands for a bit.

Lol. Between Texas and California, who you think have more guns and people ready to fight for their country?

Canada.

[archonsod]

You need their agreement because you're modifying their feudal contracts. You can modify the succession laws on individual titles (owned by you) without needing permission. Works out better to be honest - if my vassals want to stick with partitioning let them; stops any of them growing big enough to ever challenge their primogeniture Emperor ....

[Jotun]

Originally posted by archonsod:

You need their agreement because you're modifying their feudal contracts. You can modify the succession laws on individual titles (owned by you) without needing permission. Works out better to be honest - if my vassals want to stick with partitioning let them; stops any of them growing big enough to ever challenge their primogeniture Emperor ....

This. As an emperor of Scandinavia
in my game now, I can see how primogeniture can be a double edged sword.