• 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.
what governs whether you have the option to turn down affairs? do you need a certain level of piety?
 
I think it's based upon traits. The OP must have had a lustful ruler. Celibate or chaste rulers, for example, would never get the option to have an affair

That's not what I mean though.

Depending on your character, sometimes an affair pops-up but you can turn down "it's not proper."

Sometimes it pops up and you have no choice.

HOWEVER, maybe it has to do with family. Because I notice "it's not proper" when affair with a family member pops up, but I can't recall if I've seen it when it's just a random courtesan. I'm sure it does though.
 
Lustful can still receive the decline option, it depends on other factors and I believe that the Diplomacy stat is the primary gatekeeper for what options are presented, even in this. I can't back this up, only from what I have seen. Low diplomacy means less means to woo or options to choose in a given situation.
 
ok so what traits specifically allow you to decline affair pop ups?
 
Well, I had the option a-plenty with these stats. I have declined several, either having just re-married to a Strong or Genius and wanted to maximize my chances with kids. One affair was with a granddaughter, another a son's wife, that were declined with extreme prejudice. :p Even with the addition of Cruel I retained the option.

Emperor%20Cedric%20traits.jpg
 
Now I will say having your former lover in an affair become your son's wife, they have kids, and you rekindle the relationship and hit it again for another bastard through the might fancy me event, could be an achievement. :)
 
Ploughing your own daughter should result in instant civil war.

There was no such thing as investigative journalism back then. Same goes for Facebook. Nobody would have known the king had knobbed his own girl. Rumored, sure, but not enough for any sort of casus beli. So no civil war, unless you want to take the game into absurd territory.

Besides, a few historical kings (real jackasses) insisted their sons weren't 'man enough' and bedded their daughter-in-laws on their wedding night. Hardly anyone protested (certainly not the sons, who just wanted to avoid being killed for 'treason').
 
There was no such thing as investigative journalism back then. Same goes for Facebook. Nobody would have known the king had knobbed his own girl. Rumored, sure, but not enough for any sort of casus beli. So no civil war, unless you want to take the game into absurd territory.

Besides, a few historical kings (real jackasses) insisted their sons weren't 'man enough' and bedded their daughter-in-laws on their wedding night. Hardly anyone protested (certainly not the sons, who just wanted to avoid being killed for 'treason').


Maybe it was good then that "love" wasn't exactly a big marriage factor back in those days.