As I understood it, descent from Raynor- however distant, vague, or contrived- was a sine qua non of being Kaiser(ess); while in practical terms a zie might have gained the throne by bequest, conquest or election, the legitimacy of zir claim was nevertheless founded in blood. But by introducing the concept of Kaiser(esse)s who are explicitly not descended from Raynor, we are in effect renegotiating a central tenet upon which the Kaisership- and indeed the Shirerithian state- is founded.
While I respect your choice OOC, had I been more aware of this stance at the time, then there may well have been "IC" repercussions.Ryker wrote: Well I'm here on record saying that Ryker and Raynor are so far separated by blood and marriage that the two are just short of being different species. Any relation that future historians "find" I do hereby renounce in advance (are all my bases covered? ). I don't know how they would even find a tangible link considering that I just showed up with little to no memory of my pre-Shireroth past and (in an unreleased story I have somewhere around here) came from a place which no one knows existed and doesn't exist anymore anyways.
Lichbrook's rulers may be thought of as "super legitimists" whose rule over the former Duchy of Brookshire is rooted in their claim to be the heir general of Raynor, through descent from his daughter Mira...who in their eyes was scandalously passed over for the Kaisership in favour of the descendants of her younger brothers. Remember that Raynor inherited Brookshire from his mother, which implies that secession to the duchy has always been cognatic rather than agnatic, even if at one time females were not eligible for the Imperial Throne.
Given that the rulers of Lichbrook have such a dim view of the Lines of Metzler and Mortis, who they regard as little more usurpers, can you imagine how they would view the claims of a Kaiser who doesn't even pretend to be descended from Raynor?