M2TW Line of Royal Succession

[Traitorfish]

This has been confusing me lately- by what logic is the crown passed down through a family tree in M2TW? Generally, it seems to pass from the father to the firstborn son without much difficulty, but, all to frequently, it will leap off to the other side of the family tree without apparent warning, leaving my crown prince as some previously forgotten provincial governor.
I can understand some inaccuracies simply being down to the limitations of the game- the royal line passing to a second son and his children, for example, if the first son is deceased and his children are not yet of age- but the basic logic which seems to dicate the line of succession increasingly appears to ellude me.
Is this apparent madness simply a well-known flaw in the game that I am unaware of, or is there some logic that I simply failt to grasp? At the very least, is there some way to restore Rome's ablity to appoint your own heir?

 

[Phrossack]

To my knowledge, there is no real logic to succession, save the fact that your heir is usually a sadly ignorant homosexual alcoholic, which, due to a glitch, actually gives him 10 Authority. At least, that's what happens to me!

I don't think heir appointment can be modded in, sadly.

 

[Maniacal]

It is hard coded and not moddable.

 

[BurnEmDown]

If you get a really bad heir that you don't care about you can always send him to his doom.

 

[LightSpectra]

I find it rather annoying that you can't eliminate a faction by inheriting their kingdom through marriage. That's how Spain was born. That was England's primary goal in a great deal of the Hundred Years' War. It makes the whole family tree part of the game rather useless.

 

[Phrossack]

There would be no reason to marry your princess to someone if that would destroy you, though.

 

[LightSpectra]

There would be no reason to marry your princess to someone if that would destroy you, though.

You're using video game logic. The son of the King of Aragon and the Queen of Leon-Castille would inherit both thrones, but neither of the parents would think of it as "losing" their kingdom because of it.

Though I could see some game logic in it. Say you're England and you decisively route almost all of France's armies. Your peace conditions are that one of their princesses marries your faction heir. France could accept, since they're gambling that something will happen to this heir (say, assassination) before their reigning king dies; and this gamble would be preferable to, say, losing 2/3rds of their provinces desperately trying to raise enough of an army to fight your own back.

 

[Traitorfish]

The irony is, that used to be how the game worked, back in the first Medieval. In that, the "family tree" consisted only of the monarch and his immediate offspring, and if they were wiped out, it was possible for part or all of a factions territory to come into the possesion of another, to which it had ties of marriage, depending on the claims of royal-blooded generals in the faction itself. A far more interesting and accurate system, I feel.
If nothing else, it meant that the line of succession was far more dynamic, so that the heir of a 30-year old king would not forever be his brother or uncle, simply because he lacked mature children, and so you simply waited until Junior grew up, instead of praying for Uncle Wrinkly's death.