• If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
  • Please note that we've updated the Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord save file system which requires you to take certain steps in order for your save files to be compatible with e1.7.1 and any later updates. You can find the instructions here.

Why didn't the son (heir) become king?

Users who are viewing this thread

Googlesoar

Recruit
So I executed the main leader, the king, of the battanians expecting that his child would become next in line.

Can anyone tell me why he didn't and it was someone who was not related to him at all?

And can that happen with my own kingdom too?
 

Susel

Regular
Yes. In my play through Derthert died and the election started making me the new ruler of Vlandia.
However, if my main hero dies (tried only by console) and I choose an heir (wife or brother), the heir becomes the new ruler.
 

Googlesoar

Recruit
Yes. In my play through Derthert died and the election started making me the new ruler of Vlandia.
However, if my main hero dies (tried only by console) and I choose an heir (wife or brother), the heir becomes the new ruler.

Thank you for replying friend :smile:,

so is this historically accurate? I thought it was just always the case that the heir becomes the next in line (too much GOT maybe lol)
 

HugoTheFrenchMan

Master Knight
As @Susel said after the king dies there is an election but this does not seem to be the case for the player

It may be trying to represent a sort of most powerful clan is ruler since that is the requirement for the player if the king of a kingdom you are a vassal in dies and you are the most powerful clan you are the next king so it is probably just doing that as for historical accuracy it probably represents that the kings heir would not always become king since elective monarchies were rare or even non existent
 

Antaeus

Sergeant at Arms
Thank you for replying friend :smile:,

so is this historically accurate? I thought it was just always the case that the heir becomes the next in line (too much GOT maybe lol)

I guess historically, there was always debate in kingdoms about inheritance. Powerful lords always wanted a say. Weak kings couldn't always prevent that. Powerful kings wanted their kids to inherit, but sometimes their kids weren't capable of keeping power. There is no standard.

Often warlord societies could be elective in nature - for example, many early English kingdoms were very much elective - in fact England was nominally elective until the 18th century - even though by the early middle ages it had essentially become blood inheritance in practice. The same is also true of many steppe societies - the famous example being Mongol prince Batu's withdrawal from Europe to join the leadership election. The Holy Roman Empire was another famous elective monarchy, but again, the elective element became ceremonial over time. Heirs were often chosen and elected from within closely related ruling families - and by the middle ages, all the most important families were connected to the royal line, and even when these monarchies were elective, plenty of legitimacy was still gained from being anointed heir by the previous king. Over time as power and wealth was closely kept by one or two families and nations became more bureaucratic these elections became more ceremonial in nature rather than actual elections, or they were dropped altogether.

So I don't see any problem with elections for successors to kings in Bannerlord. Although variety would be a fun way of differentiating factions. But that's a whole lot of coding.
 

LordFeniks

Recruit
In Poland quite the other way around - was blood inheritance for centuries and at the end of middle ages changed to elections (teribble change to be honest - costed us degradation from empire to counrty erased from maps).
So there are plenty of historical examples of election based kings in many parts of the world. Guess this is the case developers choosed for Bannerlord.
 

Googlesoar

Recruit
In Poland quite the other way around - was blood inheritance for centuries and at the end of middle ages changed to elections (teribble change to be honest - costed us degradation from empire to counrty erased from maps).
So there are plenty of historical examples of election based kings in many parts of the world. Guess this is the case developers choosed for Bannerlord.

Thank you for the reply :razz:
 

Googlesoar

Recruit
I guess historically, there was always debate in kingdoms about inheritance. Powerful lords always wanted a say. Weak kings couldn't always prevent that. Powerful kings wanted their kids to inherit, but sometimes their kids weren't capable of keeping power. There is no standard.

Often warlord societies could be elective in nature - for example, many early English kingdoms were very much elective - in fact England was nominally elective until the 18th century - even though by the early middle ages it had essentially become blood inheritance in practice. The same is also true of many steppe societies - the famous example being Mongol prince Batu's withdrawal from Europe to join the leadership election. The Holy Roman Empire was another famous elective monarchy, but again, the elective element became ceremonial over time. Heirs were often chosen and elected from within closely related ruling families - and by the middle ages, all the most important families were connected to the royal line, and even when these monarchies were elective, plenty of legitimacy was still gained from being anointed heir by the previous king. Over time as power and wealth was closely kept by one or two families and nations became more bureaucratic these elections became more ceremonial in nature rather than actual elections, or they were dropped altogether.

So I don't see any problem with elections for successors to kings in Bannerlord. Although variety would be a fun way of differentiating factions. But that's a whole lot of coding.

Thanks so much for the in depth reply, I honestly thought it was blood inheritance all throughout
 

redcodelloyd

Recruit
Yes. In my play through Derthert died and the election started making me the new ruler of Vlandia.
However, if my main hero dies (tried only by console) and I choose an heir (wife or brother), the heir becomes the new ruler.
I needed this info to start my new playthrough. Thank you!
 
In my current playthrough Caladog died and I was elected King.

This was a surprise because no one like me, my highest relation with any lord is around 9. I have no favor, its -14. And I had not been a member of Battania for very long.

Is the game programmed to elect you to King?
 
In my current playthrough Caladog died and I was elected King.

This was a surprise because no one like me, my highest relation with any lord is around 9. I have no favor, its -14. And I had not been a member of Battania for very long.

Is the game programmed to elect you to King?
Happened to me twice now; I'm pretty sure if your clan has the most influence that is the main factor in deciding. Also, if you stick to the king like glue and fight with him constantly, he is bound to pine for the fjords eventually if you catch my drift. If you "help" him catch looters and he accidentally gets headshot, you could also become king (I've killed other lords this way, haven't tried the king yet but pretty sure it would work).
 
Top Bottom