should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

For any general subject related to the mod

should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

PostPosted by NightWatchman » Sun Apr 09, 2017 22:11

Image

I'm pretty sure the additional tyranny and prestige maluses are new to this version of the mod as I always take that option when I can. In general I think this is a very good change to stop players/lord paramounts from hoarding land, but something about it in this situation seems off to me.

1) Would the lords of the north really consider Jon a tyrant for keeping the Dreadfort when they literally all just rose up with me to topple him and his father?
2) Would Jeyne really want to live in the ancestral home of her abuser? And would she really have a claim in the eyes of the lords, considering she was passed off as another person and so the whole marriage was kind of a sham just to get a (non-existent) claim in the first place?

I think the simplest way around this, if you guys agree with me and decide the above situation is kind of strange, would be to have Jon usurp all of Roose and Ramsay's titles after he wins his war for the north rather than just taking back Winterfell.

Note: This issue doesn't occur if you win the war for the north after Fat Walda has given birth, but then that causes another issue. After the execution/banishment to the wall of the Boltons, Fat Walda's baby will inherit both Hornwood and the county on the Stony Shore that was created for this version. The baby keeping the Dreadfort is fine, but keeping both of those as well seems ridiculous.
NightWatchman
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 18:57

Re: should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

PostPosted by Sourjapes » Mon Apr 10, 2017 05:00

If Jon joins with Stannis but loses does he become a deserter now? 'cause he should.
User avatar
Sourjapes
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 06:58

Re: should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

PostPosted by knuckey » Mon Apr 10, 2017 11:15

This situation is indeed strange, and being a unique one off case probably wasn't considered for the event. Will think on a solution for it!
User avatar
knuckey
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5601
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 23:21

Re: should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

PostPosted by suvantar » Thu Apr 13, 2017 12:44

It is honestly very difficult to imagine a scenario in the books where Stannis either wins his war or Jon wins the North through other means where the Boltons retain any land at all. Perhaps instead of Stannis simply pressing a claim on the Kingdom of the North at the beginning of the bookmark, he is instead 'Pressing All Claims' and presumably, he would have the same 'claim' on all lands that the both Roose and Ramsay hold that he somehow has over the Kingdom of the North.

Then subsequently, if he wins, he simply bestows all of those lands on Jon like he currently bestows Winterfell and the kingdom to him. This would also have the added benefit of stacking positive opinion on top of positive opinion for Stannis with Jon, meaning Jon would be far less likely to do one of those weird things later like rebel against the man who gave him his kingdom and support Stannis in his larger war.

(This still doesn't increase the likelihood that Stannis will win because Stannis almost always loses because his southern enemies are using the time he's spending fighting for the north to siege down all of his southern holdings.)

At any rate, at the point where Jon holds all of the former Bolton lands, he could then disburse them as necessary, possibly bestowing Hornwood on Larence Snow and so forth. A larger script would have to be written in this case because the AI is certain to muck it up if given the opportunity.

However, the real bottom line on all of it is that the war in the North is really a war to destroy the Boltons and currently it is not. For that reason, the end of it is currently sort of unsatisfying for the reasons the OP mentions. Right now, at the end of it, you haven't dispossessed the Boltons of everything. Fat Walda's child and possibly 'Arya's' child currently inherit quite a bit.

Doing it this way also prevents Jon from gaining a large chunk of Tyranny for usurping multiple lands from the Boltons once he becomes king, which he would if the OP's suggestion is implemented simply because of the CK2 mechanics. Unless he gains all of the Bolton lands in one shot, the game would regard each usurpation as an individual act and give him a level of tyranny for doing it.
suvantar
 
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 14:41

Re: should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

PostPosted by tirion1987 » Sat Apr 15, 2017 16:39

suvantar wrote:Doing it this way also prevents Jon from gaining a large chunk of Tyranny for usurping multiple lands from the Boltons once he becomes king, which he would if the OP's suggestion is implemented simply because of the CK2 mechanics. Unless he gains all of the Bolton lands in one shot, the game would regard each usurpation as an individual act and give him a level of tyranny for doing it.

Revokation is not tyrannical if he has claims on the title.
tirion1987
 
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 23:58

Re: should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

PostPosted by Sourjapes » Sat Apr 15, 2017 18:35

tirion1987 wrote:
suvantar wrote:Doing it this way also prevents Jon from gaining a large chunk of Tyranny for usurping multiple lands from the Boltons once he becomes king, which he would if the OP's suggestion is implemented simply because of the CK2 mechanics. Unless he gains all of the Bolton lands in one shot, the game would regard each usurpation as an individual act and give him a level of tyranny for doing it.

Revokation is not tyrannical if he has claims on the title.


I think it should be though. If the current lord at the very least is the direct descendant of the previous lord, and has not committed any crime against his liege, then his liege (who is perhaps a cousin in most cases) should not be able to just yank the title. I see the AI doing this all the time.

1.) Marry daughter to the King
2.) They have a child
3.) You die and your son inherits, the king dies and his son inherits
4.) The king revokes your kingdom just so he can give it away a year or two later


I wish there was some way to prevent that. I notice it happen a bit less within the sub-realms, like if I marry my daughter to the Lord paramount it is far less common for the next LP to try and take my primary title from me.
User avatar
Sourjapes
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 06:58

Re: should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

PostPosted by DownTheDrain » Sat Apr 15, 2017 21:20

Sourjapes wrote:1.) Marry daughter to the King
2.) They have a child
3.) You die and your son inherits, the king dies and his son inherits
4.) The king revokes your kingdom just so he can give it away a year or two later


I wish there was some way to prevent that.


Unless I'm missing something here the easiest way to prevent that would be not marrying your daughter to the king.
If you know that the AI is prone to doing stupid things with its claims why would you risk giving free claims to your direct overlord (or your strongest vassal for that matter)?
DownTheDrain
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 17:14

Re: should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

PostPosted by Sourjapes » Sun Apr 16, 2017 00:36

DownTheDrain wrote:
Unless I'm missing something here the easiest way to prevent that would be not marrying your daughter to the king.
If you know that the AI is prone to doing stupid things with its claims why would you risk giving free claims to your direct overlord (or your strongest vassal for that matter)?


Certainly and I don't do it anymore, but the logic of it still seems off to me. Why would anyone marry the liege when doing so is just going to cost them their lands? If anything the danger is usually on the liege's part, because marrying his daugther off to strong vassals grants them claim on a higher seat.

To me it would seem more consistent with ASIOAF culture in Westoros if it was a tyrannical act to revoke a title from a non-rebel/traitor lord who is the direct descendant of the previous lord. To visualize it another way, imagine Joffrey and Sansa's child attacking the North to claim it from Robb and (whomever's) child just because their grandfather was Eddard Stark and in this chain of events neither Eddard, Robb, or the current lord ever rebelled against the throne.
User avatar
Sourjapes
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 06:58

Re: should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

PostPosted by DownTheDrain » Sun Apr 16, 2017 01:02

Sourjapes wrote:
DownTheDrain wrote:
Unless I'm missing something here the easiest way to prevent that would be not marrying your daughter to the king.
If you know that the AI is prone to doing stupid things with its claims why would you risk giving free claims to your direct overlord (or your strongest vassal for that matter)?


Certainly and I don't do it anymore, but the logic of it still seems off to me. Why would anyone marry the liege when doing so is just going to cost them their lands? If anything the danger is usually on the liege's part, because marrying his daugther off to strong vassals grants them claim on a higher seat.

To me it would seem more consistent with ASIOAF culture in Westoros if it was a tyrannical act to revoke a title from a non-rebel/traitor lord who is the direct descendant of the previous lord. To visualize it another way, imagine Joffrey and Sansa's child attacking the North to claim it from Robb and (whomever's) child just because their grandfather was Eddard Stark and in this chain of events neither Eddard, Robb, or the current lord ever rebelled against the throne.


From a lore perspective I completely agree, but I doubt that making it a tyrannical act would discourage the AI from doing so.

In my most recent game I watched the reigning Targaryen queen of the seven kingdoms, dragonrider and all, imprison, torture and release the same insignificant lord 3 times, only to finally castrate the guy. Apparently they were rivals for whatever reason, but she was hit with tyranny points every time and she did it anyway.
I can only assume it's one of those hardcoded things, like pirate raiders endlessly attacking my well-fortified costal province, only to get instantly wiped over and over again.
DownTheDrain
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 17:14

Re: should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

PostPosted by Sourjapes » Sun Apr 16, 2017 03:51

DownTheDrain wrote:From a lore perspective I completely agree, but I doubt that making it a tyrannical act would discourage the AI from doing so.


Yeah, I know the AI is dumb and weird sometimes. Like the old days of Eddard giving out Moat Cailin to his sons, then demanding it back, imprisoning them, and beheading them.

Perhaps an event could be created to remove claims or something like that, from a King with an Emperor-tier title, or at least with the title of King of the Iron Throne?
User avatar
Sourjapes
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 06:58

Re: should jon get tyranny for denying "arya" the dreadfort?

PostPosted by Kripox » Thu Apr 20, 2017 18:19

The whole moat cailin thing is a huge problem in Aegon's Conquest too. Torrhen has 3 or 4 sons and a daughter, and its not uncommon for him to grant moat cailin to a son, kill said son or exile him to the nights watch, then doing the same to the next son, until all his sons are dead and his daughter stands to inherit. Which sucks because she is always married off to some Tully and her children are tullys.

One time Torrhen managed to execute all his sons AND send his half brother to the wall. Then he sent half his lords to the wall because Torrhen is also super prone to imprisoning his vassals, more so han anyone in the south it seems. In the end the North was lost due to no Stark heirs while half brother Brandon deserted the wall, became a wlidling, and at age 85-ish crowned himself king beyond the wall and legitimized himself a stark. Then he promptly died, his son was too weak to inherit, and then the last starks were 4 wildlings north of the wall losing all their lands to revolts. They fled to Skagos, were somehow scattered across the seven kingdoms, and all met their end in the gallows within a cpuple of years. And such ends to story of house Stark. Fuck Torrhen.
Kripox
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2016 21:56


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest