Sanguis Astroism

[vonGenf]

No one is demanding FR change its government type. Khari asked to be added to the Elder council like the theocratic rulers. As FR has adamantly stated every time the Church has tried to get them to do something (very reasonable things like don't let heathen priests preach in your realm, don't harbor enemies of the faith) that they're not a theocracy. The whole argument presented to the Elder council on the side of FR and not excommunicating Khari for allowing Allison was that they aren't a theocracy. FR made a HUGE deal when they were formed about being a republic.

That is an argument from game history. It's a perfectly valid point. Jonsu could make that point, but I haven't seen her make it yet.

Except the part, you know, that says, theocracy. Not republic.

This is not an in-game argument. It makes no sense for Jonsu to make this point.

See my point? Nothing forces you to accept Kharie in the Elder Council, but at least play the game, don't bring an OOC trump card to the argument.

[cenrae]

*beats the dust out of the thread with a cat* Ahem.

News of sorts, I guess. Gustav has expressed his wish to leave the church. Only to find that the bureaucracy was incredibly thick and slow-witted, leaving him stuck in a mire of paperwork and exasperation. No amount of cajouling and threats can persuade them to make the process faster, as if one bureaucrat falls, two more step in with piles of paperwork regarding the death of said person and his arrangements.(Yay for bugs...)

Then Khari informed him he would have to step down as Governor of Golden Farrow per FR laws if he left...

[Stabbity]

That is an argument from game history. It's a perfectly valid point. Jonsu could make that point, but I haven't seen her make it yet.

This is not an in-game argument. It makes no sense for Jonsu to make this point.

See my point? Nothing forces you to accept Kharie in the Elder Council, but at least play the game, don't bring an OOC trump card to the argument.

There is nothing about that that is OOC. The form of government is COMPLETELY IC. Its in the name of the realm. Furthermore, Jonsu has her own motivations.

Also the majority of the Elders don't care if a theocracy periodically holds elections for its rulers, as long as its a theocracy. Apples and oranges.

[vonGenf]

There is nothing about that that is OOC. The form of government is COMPLETELY IC. Its in the name of the realm. (...) Also the majority of the Elders don't care if a theocracy periodically holds elections for its rulers, as long as its a theocracy. Apples and oranges.

So what happened to this?

No one is demanding FR change its government type.

[Stabbity]

There is a difference between demanding something, and not treating something like something it isn't.

Khari wanted theocratic privileges. There is one way to get them. FR seems to the be ones hell bent on gaining theocratic status, no one is forcing them to want that. But it isn't free.

[vonGenf]

There is a difference between demanding something, and not treating something like something it isn't.

Khari wanted theocratic privileges. There is one way to get them. FR seems to the be ones hell bent on gaining theocratic status, no one is forcing them to want that. But it isn't free.

When someone asks you "What do I need to do to achieve X?" and you answer "Do Y", you are demanding Y. You may not get it in the end, but you are demanding it. And what you are demanding in answer to an IC question should be something that is possible and SMA, otherwise what you are really saying is "No".

If you want to say no, just say no. Don't say "Well, I'd say yes, but see there's this game mechanic label, so you lose anyway and it's not my fault". That's hiding your character's IC desires behind a rule to avoid having to play the game.

I imagine Jonsu has her own motivations, but if she wants to achieve her goals, I expect her to have to lay them down on the table at some point. Calling game mechanic is playing a trump card to avoid playing your own.

[Stabbity]

NO ONE IS FORCING FR TO BE A THEOCRACY.

However, if they want to be treated like a theocracy, they well... HAVE TO BE A THEOCRACY. Government type is in character information. Always has been, always will be. I agree, there should be a better way to change government type, but there isn't.

Your argument has zero merit. Nobody is just going to bend over and give FR everything they want. They knew what would happen when they formed the republic.

And maybe, just maybe, Jonsu doesn't want Khari as an elder. Something about resisting the Church every step of of the way on everything, and then suddenly "oh I want to be an elder!"

[Feylonis]

Upon reading the Charter, specifically, contested Article X XI, it's worded in such a way that makes a distinction between the Church (SA itself), theocratic realms (Astrum, Corsanctum, Morek, etc.), and "those states whose existence is in their entirety dependent upon the historical conquests and benevolence of theocracies" (FR).

The Article goes on to outline the rights, privileges, and duties of theocratic realms. These include having representation through Archons (equal to Consuls), which is what Khari is asking for. FR, however, is not a theocratic realm -- it is the latter, a state whose existence is in their entirety dependent upon the historical conquests and benevolence of theocracies.

With this considered, FR really has its hands tied -- it can either become a theocratic realm, or leave the umbrella of the Church completely. The second option leaves FR with only the 'Moot as possible allies (unless it decides to buddy up with the Aurvandil-Asylon-Luria coalition). The first option leaves FR as not a republic.

Or, FR can challenge the definition. By adhering to all the requirements of Article X XI, FR is essentially 'theocratic', that is, 'like a theocracy'. That's what's not clear regarding Khari's campaign to get FR an Archon.



Let us ponder why I am playing the forums instead of the game.   

[Lefanis]

And what you are demanding in answer to an IC question should be something that is possible and SMA, otherwise what you are really saying is "No".

I don't accept your premise that anything is demanded from Farronite. On the contrary, they demanded privileges, so they should meet the requirements. Part of those requirements are being a theocracy and following the charter rules.

No one is asking them to stage a rebellion, but if the theocratic elements there want to overthrow the Republic, that's perfectly SMA. Alternatively, they could decide that they were wrong about the republican method, and not vote in the rulership elections, destroying their old government by letting it slip into anarchy out of penance for their error, and then reform into a theocracy.

Is there a game block to them? Not at all. Would it be difficult for them to get what they want? Of course, but then its up to the Farronites to decide how much being recognised as a theocracy is really worth to them, and not expect handouts.

Oh yes that part, the very same part that many of the elders say is no different if we changed our goverment type to Theocracy and kept our republican form of rule. So yes its a wording and a game Label only.

If its just a game label, how come characters are getting so worked up about it?

[vonGenf]

And maybe, just maybe, Jonsu doesn't want Khari as an elder. Something about resisting the Church every step of of the way on everything, and then suddenly "oh I want to be an elder!"

I know that. It's fine. She'll probably win too.

Pierre wants Kharie on the Elder Council because it gives him leverage to bind D'Hara further to the church. He also thinks church expansion is more important than purity. We can fight it out. It's a game, let's see who win! But we can't play the game in a SMA way if you insist on framing your argument on a DB label.

[Stabbity]

I'm framing it on REALITY. If the Database says X, then X is reality.

[vonGenf]

I'm framing it on REALITY. If the Database says X, then X is reality.

The database does not say Kharie cannot be an Elder. You are saying Kharie cannot be an Elder because of the database. That is what I take issue with. You can say you don't want Kharie to be an Elder all you want, but don't invoke the database to prove your point.

[Indirik]

No, he's saying that she can't be an elder because FR isn't a theocracy. It's a provable IC fact, because government style *is* an IC thing. It is obvious that the label is more important to FR than being a full partner in the church. That's fine, it's their choice.

[vonGenf]

It is obvious that the label is more important to FR than being a full partner in the church. That's fine, it's their choice.

It's your choice, not theirs, to base the level of partnership on government style. Other people would rather base it on adherence to church rules. You are treating the issue as if basing it on government style was mandatory, and therefore accepting Kharie as an Elder would break the rules. It wouldn't.

[Stabbity]

It breaks the rules we just voted on and accepted as Church Law. So yes, unless Khari wins a consul or regent election, or takes up the cloth and gets appointed Luminary or Light, or joins a theocracy and becomes ruler, she will not be an elder.