What is the definition of realm merger other than:
1. All nobles of realm A join realm B.
2. All regions of realm A join realm B.
3. Aside from government positions, all nobles from realm A retain all of their titles.
Using this argument, only "friendly realm mergers" are unallowed the realm council stupidly chose to ban the last Duke/Duchess of their realm and instead of the Duke/Duchess taking it lying down she chose to take her duchy with her. None of those falls under "friendly" terms, apparently it was done in protest to her ban and in spite of the judge and King that banned her, nothing about this says "friendly".
If the King and Judge didn't want this to happen .. then they shouldn't have attempted to ban a Duchess/Duke they hold considerable power, it's why they hold power to appoint Regional Lords.
- Should this have been able to happen? No.
- Should it have been announced in some form, in game until the issue was addressed? Yes.
- Was it? No.
Lets note that none of the three above are fault of the accused.
In Closing was there a merger? Yes, a merger of one duchy moving into another realm. However this was done on unfriendly terms and not in violation of the official rules of "No
FRIENDLY mergers" However technically by game mechanics should not have been possible. But we aren't arguing the semantics of game mechanics rather than if the accused party is guilty of violating a rule of the game. There was a civil internal strife in her previous kingdom that attempted to ban her in which turn she'd lose her Ducal seat, position as Margravine and instead of losing it all preferred to simply move her duchy away.
So If I was to make an opinion based on this, I'd say she isn't guilty however the dev. team should work on factors to prevent this from happening in the future.
