Last edited by a moderator:
While it makes no sense gameplay wise, I assume it's a balancing choice not to let players have an easy way into power. Because I assume then it's always questionable just how to handle the difference between "this character is the faction leader" but also "this character is my spouse for spouse things" in a satisfying manner that makes sense.
Well. I married Alary, oldest son of Detherd. He can't really become King either. So technically, you'd have to hardcode it for any ruler offspring to avoid this exact issue.Balancing choice? Then hardcode in, if this is an Ira-specific problem, another civil war. Add more options, not less, always. Also, the Lords can choose to opt out of matrilineality and attack Rhagaea or something
I'll be honest - marrying a prince/princess and having your child inherit the throne of a faction is actually not that much easier than founding your own kingdom. In fact, I would argue that it would take far longer and would probably put you in a weird position when the coronation finally comes up. Your child is of your clan, but the original clan members probably won't be happy with this - it should honestly lead to an instant civil war.
So, if the player is allowed to marry Ira then I think Taleworld should allow the descendant to inherit the Imperial Throne.
While it makes no sense gameplay wise, I assume it's a balancing choice not to let players have an easy way into power. Because I assume then it's always questionable just how to handle the difference between "this character is the faction leader" but also "this character is my spouse for spouse things" in a satisfying manner that makes sense.
An interesting compromise would be that you can also request to summon your spouse's party into your army. Other than that, I don't feel like being married to the faction leader should actually have advantages. Much as I love "marry my way to the top" tropes, it shouldn't become a cheap shortcut to power.It should definitely require gameplay mechanics that don't currently exist, instead of just catapulting you into a kingdom ruler status.
In the game, it specifically says that Rhagaea is looking for a man to marry Ira to reign her in and she doesn't have the support of the senators who are wishy washy about her. She is the heir-apparent, but it also makes sense that she might not inherit if her mother dies and she is unmarried (as in senators might try to pull one over on her). It is a possible scenario, would be cool if they could implement some cool stuff around this somehow. Like, another rebellion or schism or something, or she raises an army and fights back if she doesn't inherit, but if she marries she inherits. Probably asking for too much though.
In the game, it specifically says that Rhagaea is looking for a man to marry Ira to reign her in and she doesn't have the support of the senators who are wishy washy about her. She is the heir-apparent, but it also makes sense that she might not inherit if her mother dies and she is unmarried (as in senators might try to pull one over on her). It is a possible scenario, would be cool if they could implement some cool stuff around this somehow. Like, another rebellion or schism or something, or she raises an army and fights back if she doesn't inherit, but if she marries she inherits. Probably asking for too much though.
The senators who don't want her to inherit are in the Northern Empire. The senators from the south support her hereditary right to rule, that's why they're backing Rhagaea in the first place.:p
They're basically describing why there's a civil war.
Not necessarily, they back Rhagaea because she is the wife of the Emperor, but it doesn't mean they back Ira. Also, if you talk to Ira, she even states how if she were a man, the senators would be all over her in supporting her. Just because they support Rhagaea doesn't mean they support Ira or perhaps they assume that she will marry and there will be an heir etc. anyway. It also states that Rhagaea really wants to find a husband for her to produce an heir, so I think that is a big part of it.
Again, she's talking about the Northern Empire. If you talk to the lords of the South, they say they're in favor of monarchy and letting the ruler's children inherit. That's literally the entire point of the southern Empire. They're all described as monarchist clans in the comments in the files, too.
Ira *is* the heir. That's what she's saying. She was saying none of this would have ever been an issue if she were a male, but because she isn't, there's this 3-way civil war.
The encyclopedia specifically calls her Rhagaea's heir apparent -- that means the set heir by blood. There's no doubting the claim of an heir apparent -- that's not the same as an heir presumptive. Rhagaea wants her to marry in order to 1. rein in her impulsive tendencies and 2. produce more heirs AFTER Ira.
If Ira isn't Rhagaea's heir, Rhagaea has no claim. Her whole basis for ruling is to rule on behalf of Arenicos's child. This, too, is made abundantly clear by Rhagaea -- she is fighting so that Arenicos can leave what he had to his child.
Also, her basis of rule isn't necessarily Ira, but the progeny of the emperor. Yes, Ira is the emperor's child, but the senators may be looking beyond that to Ira's children. Basically her having a son. They also might be thinking how they could maneuver to place one of their own as her husband so that the children are part of their family, etc.
if that would be the case, all players would marry only her to get free Empire. So please don;t add such possibility...