So... Rhaega is 68 and still campaining around in my game. Since I married her daughter, got 5 children (mostly all grown up now) and kept our relationship at 100 I've been wondering when my mother in law will kick the bucket and pass me the now unified calradian empire to me. Is this really implemented through death by natural causes or not? Did anyone actually see any npcs dying from old age on this game? Many lords were executed by me or some npc on this playthrough of mine but I don't think anyone lived to die from old age here. Some characters on my save are allready 85!
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Is death by old age really implemented?
- Thread starter VictorF
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
No, it isn't implemented yet.
When gets implemented, I believe the succession will be selected in some kind of election. I believe by tier clan or power base or support... But, I don't think succesion of some kind of primogeniture will appear, only elections.. So, when it's implemented you'll get your chance at the votes
Succession was implemented in the last patch (possibly the beta patch) but yes all the Kingdoms are Elective Monarchies so you will need to win the election. A little strange but it does make for a more turbulent experience and makes it more conceivable that you can get power legitimately.
Not really strange.. Ok, I agree a bit in feudal societies like the one we have in game, Vlandia ( the only one I beieve).
- Empire is common, it's said many Emperors were elected, even if it was passed down father to son, still the senate and the people of calradia ratified the choice: Arenicos, Neretzes, etc....
- Sturgia seens to be tenancy (Viking Style), the most powerful lord rules
- Vlandia - feudal
- Battania - tribal
- Khergit - Horse tribal, the times of Khans I don't know the name of government they had
- Aserai - feudal mixed with tenancy/tribal
P.s: I guess I'm what people called casual player, since only fridays and weekends I play, rarely after work, specially during this COVID time. I'm on the main branch and waiting for the new one
Yeah you are probably right; either way I think it's the correct choice for game mechanics. A strictly heir based system doesn't give much opportunity to climb the ranks... besides starting a war.
Well, a civil war to claim the throne? I'm up for it... Specially to punish the culprits for the fall of the Empire, by killing Arenicos. But, yes, the Emperorship as well is some kind of monarchy just not one marked down by blood inheritance
We know some form of civil war mechanic is being added; so nations will divide and fight amoungst themselves. i am guessing for the player the idea would be to become a high and powerful vassal and then seize the throne from the incumbent king.
Yes, please! hahaha
Although to my roleplay style, and the writing of my story ( i'm write some the story in gameplay, i like it).. I'm trying imitating a G. Julius Caesar or Augustus style, "by the law" (LOL).
But, yes it would be handy if any of my heirs doesn't get the needed support to be my heir.
I think it would be great end for one of the endings of the storyline... It would make more sense at least in some nations
Wait, that was kingdom succession and not clan succession?
Last edited:
IIRC Monarchy elections for a feudal society isn't strange, particularly during the sort of Early Middle Ages/Fall of Rome time period the game is inspired by, though it might have been a formality unless the family line had died out or the heir was someone everyone hated.
True, they usually did the election in case of a lack of heir of the royal family: a distant cousin, nephew, etc...To be honest the Roman/Italian way was much more appeling and more "fair", talking baout the kings of italy that are considered myth of course, the consuls and later the Julio-Claudian... Only the best got their place there. After that was just blodd bath until the Flavians and the again bloodbath
Last edited:
Similar threads
