Dukes could operate this way even within a kingdom.
A King is reliant on his dukes' support, fiscally and militarily; it would be quite easy for dukes to withhold funds to get their way if the King was ruling badly. It would pretty much become a de facto constitutional monarchy, ruled by an oligarchical council rather than democratic parliament.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there always a "king", even if they are essentially a lame duck? So, you could easily have Dukes run kingdom like you said with a King who doesn't care, or a lame duck king who knows that he has to do it that way or he's heading out the door.
I think Esoba is correct. In SBS current system to be considered a kingdom you would still need a king if only a figurehead, however my understanding of the system would still require the king to implement the Ducal Council's wishes at his government tables, so in the end regardless of what the council decides he could always do as he wished. In which case it would be within your right to remove him.
I disagree per Caspian we are controlling the game and what changes we want. So if dukes/counts/mayor want to break off that would be up to them . Might be some resistance against you trying it but could be doable. Would make for some interesting story and events in game.
It's going to fun watch the top eat their own. It will be nervous Kings and Dukes of unknown character that take advantage shifting loyalty of such a council. Thoughts of Civil war will put strain and tension on the economy that will create power vacuums and produce glorious adventure!
It was said a group of dukes, I think 3 or more. Which that number may have changed now. Could break off from a kingdom and form their own group. Naturally you would have to deal with the chance that kingdom you broke away from may come after you or any other kingdom thinking you are an easy kill.
No, you cannot have a Kingdom officially ran by a council. HOWEVER, as many have said, in order for a King to maintain any kind of power, he needs to have control over the dukes below him. If they do not support him and band together, they can easily overthrow a king with no army. Because of his, a king will be forced to appease his nobles and make sure they feel well treated and rewarded. Even if the King doesn't like them, if they are sufficiently powerful enough in their own right, he needs them.
And even if it happens like Zantonny says, those Dukes would probably need to appoint a new King... correct?
Posted By Bricksta Riggz at 1:51 PM - Thu Aug 24 2017
And even if it happens like Zantonny says, those Dukes would probably need to appoint a new King... correct?
Did you mean Gunnlang? If so, that was my understanding as well. I thought I heard that having a king was a mechanical issue. I suppose that group of Dukes could just say that one of them was the Duke Chair, even though they all had equal power. Then, if that chair tried to overrule the council there would be a CB to remove them.
It was mentioned in a previous dev blog or Q&A that new forms of government can be eventually researched. So I wouldn't consider it impossible for a group entrepreneurial Dukes to do so. What the exact result would be I can't say, but based on what I know the game will allow it.
