My understanding of the realm merger rule is that it is intended to prevent a king from voluntarily giving up not only his kingship but his domain, which is not something a King should do.
(This applies equally to other titles of ruler.)
He isn't voluntarily giving it up. Had Terran not been under threat of destruction, he'd never have even sought it probably. He's not choosing to die, he's just choosing who to die to.
That is not even a little bit true.
They are welcome to leave the dying realm. They do not, however, have any particular right to keep their regions.
Terran is merging with a realm they are friendly with.
So it's against the rules to try to keep their regions? But it's against the rules for rulers to accept not keeping their domains? This is inconsistent, and I thus completely disagree with your take.
And D'Hara and Terran are NOT friendly. Not being at war doesn't mean they are friends.
This is planned between the rulers, it is not a surrender, and it is clearly a violation of the realm merger prohibition.
How is this NOT a surrender?
I'd find it OOC spiteful. And besides, the Solaria merge was found to be illegal. People were punished. So you CAN'T say it was legit. Or did you ignore that entire case?
Pretty sure that the move of the last region, via a bug, was what was found to be against the rules, and NOT the fact that Malus had taken the whole realm (minus an non-viable region) to Luria Nova in order to preserve the status quo of the lurian empire.
Sanguis Astroism's theocracies benefit directly from Phantaria not expanding. You didn't do this for D'Hara. You certainly didn't SURRENDER to a realm you're in a Federation with.
The Federation argument is bull!@#$. If breaking the federation with Terran didn't mean D'Hara and Barca would need to go through a war period with each other, both would long since no longer be federated with Terran. They aren't friends. D'Hara is friendlier with Farronite Republic (you know, the realm doing the destruction?) than Terran. Plenty of D'Harans are silently cheering FR's invasion of Terran.
Wasn't this rule added sometime after the Rines Republic and Irombro merged into Riombara, as two entities merging to give themselves a fighting chance against Eno Chia?
That's probably what lead to the "on equal terms" part of the rule. The previous two cases regarding realm mergers dealt with bug exploits, this one does not, and shall have to dealt with on the sole issue of the merger.
If this is the case, then it would greatly explain the rule, and its wording. It's essentially an extension of the "no strategic secession" and "no strategic capital move". Having a bunch of realms merge as equals into the realm closest to the battle front is the same kind of abuse as the other actions which are against the rules. And it's the only reasonable explanation of this rule that doesn't make it sound totally arbitrary and stupid.
The rule states that it can be legal for realms to fold into each other, though, and provides an example of how. I seriously cannot understand how anyone can claim that this is "a merger between equals".
