• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Tinto Flavour #6 - 14th of February 2025 - Bohemia

Hello, and welcome one more week to Tinto Flavour, the happy Friday when we take a look at the content of the new, super-secret Project Caesar. Today we will be travelling to the Kingdom of Bohemia, a charming place that is worth setting video games in…:

"Charles IV, King of Bohemia and Holy Roman Emperor, had a long and successful reign…

The lands of Bohemia are a territory inhabited by Slavs in the heart of the Germanic Holy Roman Empire. After a long period under the Přemyslid dynasty, the current de Luxembourg rulers may tighten the ties the country has with the Empire, although King Jehan the Blind de Luxembourg is more Francien than German, having been educated in the royal court of Paris.

Keeping both the Nobility and the common folk satisfied under a foreign King, and navigating the political intricacies of the Holy Roman Empire will prove a hurdle for anybody. Fortunately, Bohemia is a strong Kingdom, but will it succeed in its ambitions?"

Country Selection.jpg

As usual, please consider the UI, 2D and 3D art as WIP.

Here you have the lands of Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia:
Bohemia.jpg

You might notice some location and country changes… More about that at the end of this post!

Bohemia starts in a very interesting diplomatic situation:
Diplomacy.jpg

From top to bottom: Rivals, Enemies (Rivals are the countries chosen by the player, while Enemies are the countries that chose our country as a Rival), Wars, Embargos, Subjects, and Alliances.

Here is a clearer view using the Diplomatic map mode:
Diplomatic Situation.jpg

Jehan ‘the Blind’ is Count of Luxembourg, his inherited and main title; King of Bohemia, after his marriage with Elizabeth Přemyslid, the last princess of that dynasty; and Duke of Wrocław and overlord of Silesia, after his agreement with King Casimir III of Poland on the Treaty of Trentschin, in 1335. His heir is his son Charles, who rules over Moravia. You can also notice that Lower Bavaria is your ally, and all the countries involved in the ongoing Teuton-Polish War. As usual, take the map as WIP, as we’ve already internally discussed that the colouring needs to be improved, to portray better the diplomatic situation shown above.

Bohemia starts with a unique government reform, the ‘Bohemian Commonwealth’:
Bohemian Commonwealth.jpg

It also has a couple of unique Estate Privilege. The ‘Inaugural Diplomas’ were granted by King Jehan in 1311, after he acceded to the throne:
Inaugural Diplomas.jpg

While ‘Ius Teutonicum’ is a privilege for the Commoners, it represents the German settlements across the country:
Ius Teutonicum.jpg

This privilege can be coupled with the ‘Invite German Settlers’ that we mentioned in Tinto Flavour #1, making for a strong combination if you want to grow the population of your country.

As a side note, the Parliament of Bohemia has a flavour name, that we added following your feedback in Tinto Talks #41:
Zemsky Snem.jpg

Let’s take a look at some of the unique advances of Bohemia, now. The first unlocks a unique unit, the ‘Wagenburg’:
Wagenburg.jpg

Wagenburg2.jpg

We also have advances for later ages, such as the famous ‘Bohemian Crystal’ in the Age of Discovery, or ‘Bohemian Thaler’ in the Age of Reformation:
Bohemian Crystal.jpg

Bohemian Thaler.jpg

Let’s take a look now at the narrative content for Bohemia because it is very interesting. The main historical event of the period probably is the Hussite Wars, which we’re representing with a Situation:
Hussite Wars1.png

The situation may trigger around 1400, with this event initiating it:
Hussite Wars Trigger.png

These are the two options:
Hussite Wars Trigger2.png

Hussite Wars Trigger3.png

If the player selects the first, Bohemia will convert to Hussitism:
Hussite Bohemia.png

Hussitism.png

Jan Hus will be a character appearing in the game and founding this religion, but we will talk about him in a future Tinto Flavour devoted to another situation, the ‘Western Schism’.

The Pope will be able to declare a Crusade to restore Catholicism in Bohemia with a follow-up event, and the Hussite Wars will start after that:

Hussite Wars2.png

I triggered the situation from the console, so we obviously have some weird behaviors here with the countries called to arms, the leaders, etc.; please take this panel as a ‘template’ of how the situation will look like when triggered organically in a regular gameplay.

Apart from the side of the situation (Defender of Rome and Defenders of Bohemia), and their respective leaders, there are a few actions that can be performed by Bohemia through the situation:
Force Conversions.png
Prepare the Defenses.png

Aligh with the Moderates.png

Align with the Radicals.png

The currency that you have to pay to perform these actions is called ‘Religious Influence’. We will talk more about it in the future Tinto Talks devoted to Catholic and Protestant religions.

More content and events will trigger during the situation. And, finally, these are the conditions that may end the Situation, either with a Catholic or a Hussite victory:
Catholic Victory.png

Hussite Victory.png

The 30 years that the situation may last is subject to future balance, as usual.

Let’s take a look now at some of the Bohemian Dynamic Historical Events:

‘Maiestas Carolina’ is an event that unlocks a unique policy of the same name for the Legal Code law, if the first option is selected:
Maiestas Carolina.png

Maiestas Carolina2.png

There will be the option to found a University in Prague:
University of Prague.png

And also to sponsor an artist to craft a new fancy crown:
Crown of Bohemia.png

Crown of Bohemia2.png
You may notice that King Jehan wears a fancy, new crown, compared with the previous event. The name of the country will also change to ‘Crown of Bohemia’, and the ‘Crown of Saint Wenceslas’ will be created as a ‘Regalia’ work of art.

Last, but not least, I think that I might be willing to get a cold beer after this Tinto Flavour:
Liquid Delight.png

Brewery.png
Pivo, prosím!

…And much more content will be available for Bohemia, but that’s all for today! I won’t be available for the replies, but my fellow coworker @Roger Corominas will be replying instead of me. For next week, we will have the HRE Tinto Maps Feedback on Monday, and next Friday’s Tinto Flavour country will be Bavaria. Cheers!
 

Attachments

  • Hussite Wars2.png
    Hussite Wars2.png
    907,3 KB · Views: 0
  • 110Like
  • 67Love
  • 4
  • 3
Reactions:
Yep. Because people who are "well read" and "have their thesis on that topic" need to mention this, because otherwise we wouldnt notice.

How about this: You actually try not to cherrypick ( yes, thats totally valid to say so far ) quotes and sources that fit only your into your set of arguments. Actually, you seem to ignore everything else regarding the HRE, where the hell are you from? Casually asking.

And a last thing, sources are biased at any given time. I thought this getting taught at Universities, but life is full of surprises. You cant take one or even a few sources and be like "now I am save". Nope. You have to compare so much stuff to get a just a hint of what actually happened.
Letters from people talking about the HRE, sources who are contrary in position to eachother, what about sources of observers like the danish or turkish at that time?

It seems to me you are just being a d*** to everyone here who isnt your opinion and back it up with "I have far more knowledge than you do". Congrats on that, please talk to your prof again and come back, thank you.
He asked for where I got the line "of the Italian Nation" how is that cherry picking when I just gave him what he asked for?

Do you know German? Have your read the sources in question? Otherwise I am doubting your assessment of me cherry picking lines. Also what am I ignoring from the HRE? We are talking about naming conventions here, so I am having trouble understanding you here.

I am from the Netherlands btw. And yes I think its relevant to state I worked on this topic because the other guy read it literally like two days ago for the first time when I have been working with the texts in question for months. Furthermore it illustrates to the other guy that he doesnt need to constantly explain basic concepts from the text which I already know and am not even disputing (i.e. proto-nationalistic rhetoric).

Where did I say Girtanner was not biased? Because I did not say that. If you actually read my posts you would even see in my previous one that I myself wrote about the proto-nationalistic rhetoric Girtanner is speaking in. I am not going to restate my argument about why I think its especially interesting that someone like Girtanner uses the term. For that argument you can actually reread my previous comment you responded to.

I have been using sources throughout the discussion so I dont see how I am just using the "I know it better" argument? I used it once in the comment you quoted and appeariantly you are so well read that you know I have been using it the entire time? Very funny my guy. The discussion was going well for most of the time with both me and the other guy being polite and giving arguments it was only at the end it got out of hand and because you disagree with me, not the other person, you only point at me to blame which is pretty hypocritical in my opinion.

You can decide to reply, I am not going to answer anymore though because I have spend enough time now in this discussion and it isnt going anywhere. Just wanted to say these last things because your comment really annoyed me.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
He asked for where I got the line "of the Italian Nation" how is that cherry picking when I just gave him what he asked for?

Do you know German? Have your read the sources in question? Otherwise I am doubting your assessment of me cherry picking lines. Also what am I ignoring from the HRE? We are talking about naming conventions here, so I am having trouble understanding you here.

I am from the Netherlands btw. And yes I think its relevant to state I worked on this topic because the other guy read it literally like two days ago for the first time when I have been working with the texts in question for months. Furthermore it illustrates to the other guy that he doesnt need to constantly explain basic concepts from the text which I already know and am not even disputing (i.e. proto-nationalistic rhetoric).

Where did I say Girtanner was not biased? Because I did not say that. If you actually read my posts you would even see in my previous one that I myself wrote about the proto-nationalistic rhetoric Girtanner is speaking in. I am not going to restate my argument about why I think its especially interesting that someone like Girtanner uses the term. For that argument you can actually reread my previous comment you responded to.

I have been using sources throughout the discussion so I dont see how I am just using the "I know it better" argument? I used it once in the comment you quoted and appeariantly you are so well read that you know I have been using it the entire time? Very funny my guy. The discussion was going well for most of the time with both me and the other guy being polite and giving arguments it was only at the end it got out of hand and because you disagree with me, not the other person, you only point at me to blame which is pretty hypocritical in my opinion.

You can decide to reply, I am not going to answer anymore though because I have spend enough time now in this discussion and it isnt going anywhere. Just wanted to say these last things because your comment really annoyed me.
Actually, Sileno was the one talking about sources being biased and what not. @ValarKat can you read ^.<?

And what really bothers me is that you are getting blamed for writing a thesis on that topic? As if that was something bad, lol?

I dont get this anti academic vibe - atleast I think that is the main reason why our nonliteral guy commented you.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Well, it was actually Jehan in 'old french' (Jean is the modern form).
Yeah but should he have the old french variant of his name when he is primarily a Bohemian King? I understand his participation in the Hundred years war but I still dont really see why he should be called Jehan?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
1. The name "Jehan" is completely unrecognizable to anyone Czech. Is it Jan?

2. Why is "align with radicals" a game option if all it gives is debuffs to diplomacy? In reality alignment with radicals and moderates both had their upsides and downsides. Moderates were popular among nobility, radicals among plebes.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
1. The name "Jehan" is completely unrecognizable to anyone Czech. Is it Jan?

2. Why is "align with radicals" a game option if all it gives is debuffs to diplomacy? In reality alignment with radicals and moderates both had their upsides and downsides. Moderates were popular among nobility, radicals among plebes.
It might be a good idea to make a suggestion of Czech names that were used between the 14th and 18th centuries.
 
Moderates were popular among nobility, radicals among plebes.
If so, @Roger Corominas suggestion incoming: aligning with the radicals should lower the satisfaction of burghers and nobles while aligning with the moderates should lower commoner satisfaction, both options would lead to a civil war between the two sides in Bohemia alongside the overall war against the papist crusaders
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
1. The name "Jehan" is completely unrecognizable to anyone Czech. Is it Jan?

2. Why is "align with radicals" a game option if all it gives is debuffs to diplomacy? In reality alignment with radicals and moderates both had their upsides and downsides. Moderates were popular among nobility, radicals among plebes.
I agree with you, but if you missed it, there are some significant internal benefits from aligning with radicals, but they are not mentioned in the screenshot:
You'd be more zealous in defending and promoting Hussitism (you get bonuses towards that)
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
How are you planning to represent the multicultural nature of Bohemia—specifically, the relationship between German-speaking and Czech-speaking Bohemians? German speakers were incredibly prevalent in Bohemia, and many (if not most) Bohemian urban centers had German names and a majority (or at least a significant minority) German-Bohemian population. [For example, to use a completely original and totally not inspired-by-a-certain-game case, Kuttenberg.]
It has always seemed strange to me that in games like Crusader Kings II & III and Europa Universalis IV, all Bohemian provinces receive only Czech names, with no German names at all. The cultural makeup and relations within Bohemia during this period are truly unique and incredibly interesting—not just from a sociohistorical perspective but also from a gameplay standpoint. Nowhere was the impact of the Ostsiedlung felt more vividly than in Bohemia.
I really hope you don’t overlook this aspect. It would be a huge missed opportunity to portray such a distinctive socio-political and economic situation.

I really loved the concept you introduced for the Hussite Wars, but I also think it’s important to avoid "gaming" such crises. The Hussites weren’t just a field army that, once defeated, brought an end to the entire conflict. Like most historical events, the Hussite Wars were complex and deeply nuanced—they didn’t simply "go away" after a short period. Their political, economic, and social impacts endured long after military victory was achieved.
In games like Europa Universalis IV, events such as the Jacobite uprising are often represented as a single event that spawns rebels who, once defeated, are essentially erased from history. Similarly, the French Wars of Religion can be resolved in a way that, after meeting certain conditions, allows the player to continue as if they never happened. But real historical conflicts left lasting consequences that shaped nations for generations.
In the case of Bohemia, one could argue that the Hussite Wars were one of the many factors leading to later upheavals, including the Defenestration of Prague, the coronation of the Winter King, and the eventual re-Catholicization of the region. I hope that the choices made during the Hussite Wars don’t just result in short-lived modifiers but instead leave long-term effects that shape future events and the nation's trajectory.
If a Hussite Bohemia takes a more radical path and is ultimately defeated, the consequences of those choices should persist, shaping future developments and the way the nation functions—differentiating it from a Hussite Bohemia that pursued a more moderate approach. Events like these define history; players shouldn’t see them as temporary crises or problems to be "fixed" but as pivotal moments with repercussions that last for generations. The weight of these decisions should be felt, making each playthrough a truly immersive historical experience.

Ultimately, as a player, I want to feel that the events I experience truly matter. In Europa Universalis IV, events like the War of the Roses often feel like mere obstacles—temporary disruptions that hinder my nation and need to be "fixed" as quickly as possible. Once the war ends, I simply return to whatever I was doing before, as if it never happened. These conflicts become nothing more than episodic inconveniences.
I would much prefer a situation that demands my attention, forces me to think strategically about how to handle it, and, most importantly, carries lasting consequences rather than being just another fleeting setback.

Finally, I just want to say: please don’t neglect Bohemian flavor after the first 100 years or so. You’ve done an incredible job portraying the complexities of personal unions, and I can’t praise you enough for it. However, this also means that countries like Bohemia and Hungary—both of which later became part of a larger monarchical network under a common sovereign (in their case, the Habsburgs)—will have more impact than ever before.
Bohemia has a rich and fascinating history, and even after losing its "main character" status to "Austria" (technically not true but yall get my point) , it remained a force to be reckoned with. It was the economic heart of the Habsburg Monarchy and one of the most important states in the Holy Roman Empire. I truly hope you give it the care and attention it deserves.
 
  • 4
  • 1Love
Reactions:
2. Why is "align with radicals" a game option if all it gives is debuffs to diplomacy?
the Variable "Promoted Radicals" has effects that are not seen unless we hover it and see. (These types of variables should be shown as sublists in the tooltip so we don't have to have the extra hover to see)

The same would be true for the variable "Promote the Moderates".
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Previously, I recommended in the "Carpathian Basin – Balkans Tinto Talks Feedback" to include this particular land between the Kingdom of Hungary and the Kingdom of Bohemia.

Medieval sources regarding this area are quite scarce, but I have seen many historical maps from the reign of Saint Stephen and Béla III of Hungary. Bálint Hóman created two maps, one from the reign of Saint Stephen and another from the reign of Béla III, where this land is depicted as part of the Kingdom of Hungary.

Bálint Hóman's work, reign of Saint Stephen



01-016.jpg



Bálint Hóman's work, reign of Béla III of Hungary

Hungary,_Croatia,_Bosnia_and_Galicia_in_the_12th_century.jpg


Based on medieval border practices, it is very likely that this land indeed belonged to the Kingdom of Hungary, as the northwestern border followed the Morava River. However, for some reason, the later Czech-Hungarian border stopped following the river at Szakolca (Skalica) and turned eastward. It is highly probable that this territory was annexed by the Bohemian king, and it is perhaps not unreasonable to suggest that this area came under Czech rule as a result of the Hungarian-Czech War of the Babenberg Succession (1250–1270s). Written documents could also support this claim.


There are three major cities that somewhat preserve the Hungarian presence in the area:

  • Uherský Ostroh – Magyarsárvár (literally "Hungarian mud castle"), referring to the timber-earthwork fortification. The castle was mentioned by Anonymus as "Saruuar" (Sárvár). The first known Czech mention dates back to 1275. While the settlement existed earlier as "Stenice," the fortification was built later, in the mid-13th century, against Hungarian conquests.
  • Uherský Brod – Magyarbród (in Hungarian, literally "Magyargázló") translates to "Hungarian ford," indicating a natural river crossing in the area. The city was founded by Andrew I of Hungary in 1049. A battle between the Hungarian and Czech kings took place near the Olšava River in 1116, ending in the Hungarian king’s defeat. This may have been when part of this territory came under Czech control. The city was mentioned as "Brod" in 1140 and was later granted city status by Ottokar II of Bohemia in 1272, which aligns with the late reign of Béla IV and the early reign of Ladislaus IV of Hungary, who defeated the Czechs at Dürnkrut in 1278.
  • Uherské Hradiště – Magyarerőd/Magyarvár ("Hungarian castle" or "Hungarian fortification"). Originally founded as "Nový Velehrad" ("New High Castle") by Ottokar II of Bohemia in 1257, it was likely established as a defensive measure against Hungary. This could suggest the earliest date when this territory might have fallen under Czech control.
Other settlements potentially indicating Hungarian presence include:

  • Kunovice (Kunfalva?) – Possibly derived from "Kun" (Hungarian for Cumans), although it could also stem from a Slavic given name.
  • Bánov (Bánfalva?) – Potentially linked to the Hungarian title "Bán," which, despite its Slavic origin, was predominantly used by Hungarians. A similarly named settlement, Bánkeszi, exists in Slovakia. The title "Bán" traces back to the Avar chief Baján.
  • Salaš (Pásztorszállás?) – Likely derived from the Hungarian word "szállás" (meaning "shelter" or "lodging"), similar to settlements like Kunszállás and Jakabszállás.
  • Tasov (Tasfalva?) – Possibly from the Hungarian name "Tas." In 1217, Andrew II of Hungary issued a document stating that he had previously donated "a certain uncultivated and desolate land called Szakolca (Skalica), lying on the border of our kingdom opposite Bohemia" ("terram quandam nomine Skalza rudem et desertam, sitam in confinio nostri regni versus Bohemiam").
  • Strážnice – While the name suggests a guard post, it could indicate an earlier Hungarian presence. The area was once protected by Hungarian Székelys before their relocation to Transylvania. The name "Šaštín-Stráže" (Hungarian: "Sasvár-Morvaőr," meaning "Eagle Castle – Moravian Guard") refers to guarding the Morava River. The Slavic "Strážnice" could be linked to the Hungarian verb "strázsál" ("to guard"). The settlement may have been fortified against the Hungarians in the 13th–14th centuries.
This territory is known in Czech as "Lucká provincie" ("Provincia Lucensis" or "Campus Lucsko" in Latin).

The Area from czech wiki

Campus_Lucsco_et_Provincia_Lucensis.png


I've also tried to recreate on Google Maps

morvaföld5.PNG


morvaföld7.png


The territory is somewhere between 1.690 - 1.800 km2 - could be a little bit more/less I kinda draw the Northern border of the province a little bit to the south

My suggestion:


Locations.png


According to the Czech Wikipedia:

The former presence of the Hungarian border in today's Moravian interior is evidenced by the establishment of the fortified border settlement of Uherský Brod—originally "Brod near the Hungarian borders"—on the Olšava River (from which the epithet "Hungarian" was later adopted by Uherské Hradiště and Uherský Ostroh as well). In Uherský Brod and Kunovice, Přemyslid customs stations were located, and trade routes led from there further into Hungary. Hungarian influence can also be observed in Slavičín (the dedication of St. Adalbert's Church), Blatnice pod Svatým Antonínkem (the Hungarian dedication of St. Andrew), and Bánov (the dedication of St. Martin's Church). Even in the 16th century, the area on the right bank of the Olšava River in the village of Nezdenice was called Moravian Nezdenice.

The former naming of this region is also reflected in the names of some land areas in the region—Lusko, located between the built-up areas of Slavkov and Dolní Němčí, or Lucko in Bánov. The etymology of the town name Hluk remains unclear; due to a letter transposition ("Hlucké pole"), it was mistakenly linked to Lucké pole by František Palacký, a connection later followed by many other authors.

As a border region and a passage for an important trade route to Hungary, this area served multiple times as a meeting place for the leaders of both neighboring countries. In 1099, Czech Prince Břetislav II met Hungarian King Coloman on the Lucké field (possibly near Dolní Němčí), and in 1116, Czech Prince Vladislav I met Hungarian King Stephen II. Following this meeting, on May 13, 1116, the so-called Battle of Lucké Field took place, in which the Hungarians were defeated.

The victorious clash further strengthened the Czech presence in this part of Moravia, making it a significant moment in the process of establishing the Czech-Hungarian (Czech-Slovak) border. In the following periods, settlers began arriving here from other parts of the Czech principality. Meanwhile, Hungarian troops frequently raided across the border, plundering and looting the area.

The consolidation of Czech interests in the territory of Lucko followed the defeat of Béla IV by Přemysl Otakar II on July 12, 1260, at the Battle of Kressenbrunn after the so-called Cuman Wars. At that time, in part of the Lucko territory, bordered by the Velička River and the White Carpathians ridge, the administrative formation of the Lucko Province began as part of the Margraviate of Moravia. Compared to the original Lucko, the newly established province included the area between the Olšava and Dřevnice rivers in the north, while the southern part between the Velička River and the Sudoměřice Stream began developing separately within Moravian Břeclavsko. Meanwhile, the regions of Záhoří and Pováží became part of the Kingdom of Hungary (and later Slovakia).

The Lucko Province ceased to exist at the beginning of the 14th century when provincial divisions lost significance in favor of smaller administrative units centered around towns. However, in the Roman Catholic ecclesiastical administration, the so-called Lucko Deanery continued to exist until the mid-14th century, eventually evolving into today’s Uherský Brod Deanery.
 

Attachments

  • morvaföld2.PNG
    morvaföld2.PNG
    3,2 MB · Views: 0
  • korakp1.png
    korakp1.png
    602,9 KB · Views: 0
  • 2079.png
    2079.png
    114,1 KB · Views: 0
  • 4Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
" King Jehan the Blind de Luxembourg is more Francien than German, having been educated in the royal court of Paris."
hmm sending characters to foreign courts to change their culture is a thing we can do? if so is there any reason to?
not related or anything but cant wait to send Jehan grandson to Hungary, where he'll become its king then declare a dynastic claim war on Bohemia, where pops would hate him for causing devastation and him being of a foreign culture, that hate would stay until hes the only ruler left for Bohemia, thats when the Hussite wars would begin i will convert to hussitism out of spite
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
The portraits look fantastic. Take my money, I WANT TO play this game NOW!
 
  • 3
Reactions:
What culture groups will Czech be in? Will they share any groups with their German neighbors or just be in a west slavic group, will there be a group that's literally just Czech and Moravian to illustrate their bonds, will there be an eastern German group, I really want literally any information on culture groups.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Silesian duchies werent part of HRE until Bohemian King Charles IV Luxembourg decided to incorporate them into Crown of Bohemia in 1348. Also give Poland cores on Silesia bcz de jure they were part of Kingdom of Poland and Poland treaten them as part of Poland until Polish-Czech war over Silesia in 1345-1348 when Casimir III the Great accepted the lose of Silesia but hasnt revoke Polish claims over the area. That is proven by the year 1404 when Wenceslaus IV promised Władysław Jagiello to give back Silesia for military support. But after that there werent any attempts to reclaim Silesia by the Polish kings.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
What if I want to play just as Luxembourg, without Bohemia or Moravia? Can I give Luxembourg to a younger son and start playing as him?
You can start as Luxembourg at game start, them being in a union doesn't prevent that. Your gameplay is then centered around not getting annexed. Of which one of the options, I'm sure, is having one of the non-primary heirs of the king inherit you.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: