Author Topic: Religious power rankings  (Read 45902 times)

Geronus

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 2332
  • Dum dee dum dee dum
    • View Profile
Re: Religious power rankings
« Reply #30: June 10, 2012, 09:02:10 AM »
Machiavelli was a hardcore sociopath....

You both make it seem like religion was just a tool, which it wasn't. Nobles of the western world grew up their entire lives having Catholicism drilled into them. They lived, ate, and slept religion. Having it be a dramatic influence in their everyday actions is the attribute at which Draco and I feel is missing. Most players in this game shove religion aside as an obstacle, giving it little to no attention as their rise their way through the ranks. Having everybody be Machiavelli is outrageous for a 'medieval atmosphere' game, Dwilight or not.

Which leads to my point. When religion was the major influence in everyone's life, it was then used as a tool at which to use the faithful. That is exactly what I'm trying to build in Sorraine. The tool Bardic has misinterpreted and Draco is speaking of is its in-game function in resisting takeovers - essentially - and the other code functional benefits that go along.

There are a hundred non-mechanical ways to apply religion to politics. On Dwilight, for example, my characters have historically been able to wield enormous power through their religion, and virtually none of that power came from the gross mechanical effects of what a priest can do in the game, nor did they seek to use it for exclusively religious ends. Neither have they been particularly zealous, though obviously they're not stupid enough to appear openly faithless (not that they are).

I see nothing wrong with treating medieval religion cynically. Many prominent historical figures of the medieval ruling class did exactly that in real life. Think Henry II, Henry VIII, and Philip IV of France. Think the Avignon Papacy, which came about for purely political reasons. Think of what happened to Joan of Arc. Think, for that matter, of virtually every French and English King ever. 'True faith' was for the peasantry. Nobles were too savvy and too cynical to care that much, and if they were true believers they generally weren't very good rulers. Being a successful monarch required more than a little ruthlessness and pragmatism.