Author Topic: Sanguis Astroism  (Read 1042643 times)

Marlboro

  • Noble Lord
  • ***
  • Posts: 499
  • With Claws
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2745: May 20, 2013, 08:48:25 PM »
By diversion I didn't mean an active war. Why doesn't the Farronite Republic start something with Asylon? Or Morek with Libero. Hell maybe Niselur and Morek could get in a fight over the rights to keep Libero as a vassal. These are all viable options but no one wants to take the risk so they decide to play as level headed wise leaders rather then the greedy power mad megalomaniacs that really ran the medieval world.

They're not getting involved with Terran cause they're out of ideas, they're getting involved with Terran because for once they're oath bound to do so plus it's pretty safe.

By the way while Phantaria is the main realm involved is by no means the only opponent to Terran. Asylon was involved briefly and may get involved again, Saffalore actually sent troops and Aurvandil is still technically at war with Terran.

Like I said, very WWI.

FR actually already has some !@#$ going on and this crusade is absolutely threatening to get in the way of that.
When Thalmarkans walked through the Sint land, castles went up for sale.

pcw27

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 979
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2746: May 20, 2013, 08:53:26 PM »
How so?

Perth

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 2037
  • Current Character: Kemen
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2747: May 20, 2013, 08:54:01 PM »
Because it's reforming to a theocracy and the charter obligates the church to defend theocracies. These kind of obligations were a big part of medieval society and they frequently came into conflict. That's what a lot of Arthurian stories are all about, the clash between different Chivalric values and oaths.

But it wasn't a theocracy when we attacked it. It wasn't when the Crusade was called. It still isn't a theocracy. Maybe I should just declare Phantaria a "reforming theocracy" and say we'll be one "soon" and see if I can get a Crusade called in our name and the full armies of Astroism at my beck and call because we'll be one "any day now, guys."

But regardless, the state and health of Astroism in the area was under zero threat. You can say that all you want but bottom line this had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with Hireshmont's buddies. Which is fine that happens, but just don't be shady about it and call it what it is.


Have you tried getting Asylon and Aurvandil involved?

Oh yes, because the two best things I could do to ensure the Church doesn't ROFLSTOMP my realm would be to try to one-up them by bringing in my best buds Asylon and Aurvandil, SA's favorite realms.

"A tale is but half told when only one person tells it." - The Saga of Grettir the Strong
- Current: Kemen (D'hara) - Past: Kerwin (Eston), Kale (Phantaria, Terran, Melodia)

cenrae

  • Noble Lord
  • ***
  • Posts: 226
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2748: May 20, 2013, 09:15:07 PM »
Oh yeah FR has had plans in motion for quite awhile and this crusade is getting in our way.
Kye Family: Khari (Farronite Republic), Kalidor (Tara), Astridicus (Astrum)

Stabbity

  • Marketing
  • Mighty Duke
  • *****
  • Posts: 1336
  • Formerly the Himoura Family. Currently ?????????
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2749: May 20, 2013, 09:22:32 PM »
As the Elder council has pointed out multiple times, FR is not a theocracy, and thus need not mobilize for the crusade.
Life is a dance, it is only fitting that death sing the tune.

cenrae

  • Noble Lord
  • ***
  • Posts: 226
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2750: May 20, 2013, 09:29:46 PM »
Exactly.

And I have advised others of that very fact.
Kye Family: Khari (Farronite Republic), Kalidor (Tara), Astridicus (Astrum)

pcw27

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 979
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2751: May 20, 2013, 09:32:00 PM »
But it wasn't a theocracy when we attacked it. It wasn't when the Crusade was called. It still isn't a theocracy. Maybe I should just declare Phantaria a "reforming theocracy" and say we'll be one "soon" and see if I can get a Crusade called in our name and the full armies of Astroism at my beck and call because we'll be one "any day now, guys."

But regardless, the state and health of Astroism in the area was under zero threat. You can say that all you want but bottom line this had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with Hireshmont's buddies. Which is fine that happens, but just don't be shady about it and call it what it is.

But see there's no debate that the realm is becoming a theocracy, and you unfortunately waited until after the announcement of these intentions to declare war. You can't ignore the timeline of events here. I have no doubt that if Terran doesn't become a theocracy the Church will step in and force it to become one.

Astroism certainly is not under threat but we would be losing an opportunity to expand into an area which has never had a theocracy before. I'm certainly not roleplaying that Turin has any special loyalty to Hireshmont. He's in it because he's a fanatic obsessed with destroying Aurvandil and a theocratic Terran could be a stepping stone to doing just that.

Oh yes, because the two best things I could do to ensure the Church doesn't ROFLSTOMP my realm would be to try to one-up them by bringing in my best buds Asylon and Aurvandil, SA's favorite realms.

Hey if you don't want to play hardball then don't complain about the conflict fizzling out. If you're not willing to risk your throne don't complain that the rulers of larger realms aren't willing to risk theirs.

Let me tell you from experience, losing a realm is fun.

pcw27

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 979
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2752: May 20, 2013, 09:33:18 PM »
As the Elder council has pointed out multiple times, FR is not a theocracy, and thus need not mobilize for the crusade.

True but its individual astroists are obligated to support the crusade in whatever way they can. At the very least FR needs to remain neutral to Phantaria so willing crusaders can defend Terran.

Perth

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 2037
  • Current Character: Kemen
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2753: May 20, 2013, 10:00:58 PM »
But see there's no debate that the realm is becoming a theocracy, and you unfortunately waited until after the announcement of these intentions to declare war. You can't ignore the timeline of events here.

I don't care if there is debate or not. We didn't declare war on a theocracy, we aren't warring a theocracy now, and a Crusade was called to defend a realm that is not a theocracy. It's just silliness to pretend you were "obligated by the charter" when you weren't.

Astroism certainly is not under threat but we would be losing an opportunity to expand into an area which has never had a theocracy before. I'm certainly not roleplaying that Turin has any special loyalty to Hireshmont. He's in it because he's a fanatic obsessed with destroying Aurvandil and a theocratic Terran could be a stepping stone to doing just that.

All it is going to do is make the region more anti-SA because is forcing itself on the region, whereas before it was already a heavily SA influenced region, but by its own volition. Honestly, it's just going to make things harder for SA because every realm in the area now is paranoid of being Crusaded on now for any war because there is clearly no secular war you can wage on a theocracy now. It's just going to polarize the whole issue.


don't complain that the rulers of larger realms aren't willing to risk theirs.

When did I do that?

Hey if you don't want to play hardball

Let me tell you from experience, losing a realm is fun.

How is that playing hardball? All that is is a sure fire way to ensure my realm dies, that isn't hardball... that's just sticking a huge "hey, come kill me, SA!" sticker on my head. Stupidity and "hardball" aren't the same thing.

And I've lost a realm before, a huge one. I have no apprehension to "losing my throne" but that doesn't mean I'm going to throw it and the realm away willy-nilly... that isn't fun for anyone.
"A tale is but half told when only one person tells it." - The Saga of Grettir the Strong
- Current: Kemen (D'hara) - Past: Kerwin (Eston), Kale (Phantaria, Terran, Melodia)

Indirik

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 10849
  • No pressure, no diamonds.
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2754: May 20, 2013, 10:02:59 PM »
As the Elder council has pointed out multiple times, FR is not a theocracy, and thus need not mobilize for the crusade.
Crusades are not realm-limited. When a Crusade is called, it is incumbent on all church members to help in whatever way they can. So while FR itself is not a theocracy, individual nobles who happen to reside in FR are under obligation.
If at first you don't succeed, don't take up skydiving.

Marlboro

  • Noble Lord
  • ***
  • Posts: 499
  • With Claws
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2755: May 20, 2013, 10:20:33 PM »
Crusades are not realm-limited. When a Crusade is called, it is incumbent on all church members to help in whatever way they can. So while FR itself is not a theocracy, individual nobles who happen to reside in FR are under obligation.

No see it's alright, Hireshmont told us to piss off shortly before he was invaded.
When Thalmarkans walked through the Sint land, castles went up for sale.

Stabbity

  • Marketing
  • Mighty Duke
  • *****
  • Posts: 1336
  • Formerly the Himoura Family. Currently ?????????
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2756: May 20, 2013, 10:38:19 PM »
Crusades are not realm-limited. When a Crusade is called, it is incumbent on all church members to help in whatever way they can. So while FR itself is not a theocracy, individual nobles who happen to reside in FR are under obligation.

In whatever way they can. If the secular government doesn't see fit to mobilize because it has better things to do, oh well. Our prayers go with the Crusaders. Faith is stronger than the sword after all.
Life is a dance, it is only fitting that death sing the tune.

Daimall

  • Knight
  • **
  • Posts: 93
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2757: May 20, 2013, 10:44:53 PM »
Have you tried getting Asylon and Aurvandil involved?

That sounds like a perfect way of making the SA bloc even more united.

pcw27

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 979
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2758: May 20, 2013, 10:51:29 PM »
I don't care if there is debate or not. We didn't declare war on a theocracy, we aren't warring a theocracy now, and a Crusade was called to defend a realm that is not a theocracy. It's just silliness to pretend you were "obligated by the charter" when you weren't.

The only thing stopping it from being a theocracy was the fact that the game mechanics take forever to accomplish that. Therefore several of us chose to roleplay that the realm is a theocracy and the official records only say otherwise because the clerks take forever to write it down (sort of the way realms stay on the info page for weeks even after they've been destroyed, we don't keep pretending those realms exist just because the game says otherwise).

All it is going to do is make the region more anti-SA because is forcing itself on the region, whereas before it was already a heavily SA influenced region, but by its own volition. Honestly, it's just going to make things harder for SA because every realm in the area now is paranoid of being Crusaded on now for any war because there is clearly no secular war you can wage on a theocracy now. It's just going to polarize the whole issue.

There is a secular war you can wage on a theocracy, one that doesn't involve destroying it. There have been some in the past. In some cases the realms involved will intentionally say they don't want church intervention. Before I got ousted I was hoping Asylon would poke Iashalur a little more so I could have a border war with them. I would have told the church to stay out and only asked Astrum permission to garrison Walefshire.

How is that playing hardball? All that is is a sure fire way to ensure my realm dies, that isn't hardball... that's just sticking a huge "hey, come kill me, SA!" sticker on my head. Stupidity and "hardball" aren't the same thing.

And I've lost a realm before, a huge one. I have no apprehension to "losing my throne" but that doesn't mean I'm going to throw it and the realm away willy-nilly... that isn't fun for anyone.

If you succeeded in getting them on board you would stand more then a chance of winning. Who says you need to be official allies, just talk to them under the table and convince them to smash Terran, hell then you might get SA to call a crusade you YOUR side in order to reclaim the lands from those heathens. If they wont get on board, no worries. Asylon rats you out "You believe them? They're a bunch of drug addicts!" Aurvandil rats you out "Lies they approached me out of a desire to destroy SA"

And I've lost a realm before, a huge one. I have no apprehension to "losing my throne" but that doesn't mean I'm going to throw it and the realm away willy-nilly... that isn't fun for anyone.

And it's not throwing the realm away willy-nilly, its standing up to an oppressive hegemony refusing to back down even in the face of certain destruction.

That sounds like a perfect way of making the SA bloc even more united.

It's also a good way to completely disorganize their forces. Imagine the chaos if an Asylonian army occupied Darfix while Niselur's forces were away.

« Last Edit: May 20, 2013, 10:56:33 PM by pcw27 »

Vellos

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 3736
  • Stodgy Old Man in Training
    • View Profile
Re: Sanguis Astroism
« Reply #2759: May 20, 2013, 11:42:53 PM »
But it wasn't a theocracy when we attacked it. It wasn't when the Crusade was called. It still isn't a theocracy. Maybe I should just declare Phantaria a "reforming theocracy" and say we'll be one "soon" and see if I can get a Crusade called in our name and the full armies of Astroism at my beck and call because we'll be one "any day now, guys."

But regardless, the state and health of Astroism in the area was under zero threat. You can say that all you want but bottom line this had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with Hireshmont's buddies. Which is fine that happens, but just don't be shady about it and call it what it is.

Terran was and is a theocracy, facts be damned. Government is what you make of it. Hireshmont managed to convince people that Terran is, for all intents and purposes, a theocracy. If you can convince people the same of Phantaria, be my guest.

This war is not about Hireshmont and his buddies. Choosing to think that way will continue to leave Kale blindsided by events. Believeing that it was a secular conflict about unifying Terran left Kale vulnerable, and continuing to believe that will continue to leave Kale vulnerable. He needs to realize it is, in fact, a religious war, and needs to find a way to win the religiosity of it. I wasn't going to suggest this earlier, but here's a thought: outflank Hireshmont in the religious realm. Convert and raze the Triunist temple in Shokalom.

Astroism's elders would have to admit the goal of the crusade was essentially accomplished; the faith was defended (even expanded!), and then Kale might have more leeway in how he deals with Terran. A war between Libero and Morek does not require a crusade, for example, or even Summerdale and Morek, because nobody has any doubts that the relative position of SA is at stake. But a Triunist Republic vs. Astroist Theocracy? Yeah, the relative influence of SA is totally at stake. Advice on how to win the propaganda war: convert and then carry out radical acts to demonstrate your zeal.

In absolute terms, you're right, SA wasn't under threat. But absolute terms don't matter, RELATIVE power is what matters, and the RELATIVE balance of power WAS under threat.

Or think of it this way: in Terran's war with Kabrinskia, Hireshmont began putting out feelers about his conversion before the war began. He was in close communication with multiple elders (including Mathurin) for weeks prior to war, and continued this non-political discussion during the war. He converted during the war (or right on the cusp of it, I forget). SA could stay out because Kabrinskia was the aggressor and because the trajectory of SA power was obvious: no matter who won, SA was going to be stronger.

But the current situation is different. If Phantaria wins, SA will be weaker. An influential Elder will lose secular power and the replacement power will be demonstrably less committed to the church's priorities and interests. On the other hand, church support loses the church nothing (people who hate the church will hate it anyways), but potentially gains it a theocracy.

And for all that people claim that these kinds of things turn people off to SA, I call bologna. People don't join religions in a medieval game because they want to teach the values of moderation and tolerance. We do it because it's a path to power and an excuse for war and a chance to interact with other players. So yeah, the losers will be bitter at SA: and everybody on the sidelines will get a take-home message– "Conversion is the path to power."
"A neutral humanism is either a pedantic artifice or a prologue to the inhuman." - George Steiner