Haktoo?

[Perth]

Monarchism reigns in Aurvandil.

Mendicant hasn't declared war on religion, he's merely rejected it within his own dominion. He certainly hasn't stated an intent to destroy religions external to his own Commonwealth. You don't need a church when you have a Monarchy, you don't need the promises of a religion when you have the earthly benevolence of Monarchism, and you soon find that God's become irrelevant in the shadow of a true Monarch, after all, God's were only ever modeled on the majesty of Monarchs.

You could call Mendicant a God-King, but that would just belittle the royal person as something seemingly inferior to the Highest of Sovereigns.

Doesn't sound SMA at all.

Monarchism > God. What?

[Marlboro]

Not non-SMA IMHO, he's just irritatingly IC on the forums for whatever reason.

You could call Mendicant a God-King

Ok.

[Glaumring the Fox]

I suggested to Mendicant to modify 'the cult of reason/ cult of the supreme being' religions developed during the french revolution as a form of religion he could you for his own realm. Basically a religion that worships himself etc as god. It would make him a bit more SMA and its a real world concept for a religion that he can modify.

[Vellos]

I suggested to Mendicant to modify 'the cult of reason/ cult of the supreme being' religions developed during the french revolution as a form of religion he could you for his own realm. Basically a religion that worships himself etc as god. It would make him a bit more SMA and its a real world concept for a religion that he can modify.

Of course, being from the French Revolution could give you a hint it might not be SMA.

[Geronus]

Monarchism reigns in Aurvandil.

Mendicant hasn't declared war on religion, he's merely rejected it within his own dominion. He certainly hasn't stated an intent to destroy religions external to his own Commonwealth. You don't need a church when you have a Monarchy, you don't need the promises of a religion when you have the earthly benevolence of Monarchism, and you soon find that God's become irrelevant in the shadow of a true Monarch, after all, God's were only ever modeled on the majesty of Monarchs.

You could call Mendicant a God-King, but that would just belittle the royal person as something seemingly inferior to the Highest of Sovereigns.

Yeah, if everyone's talking about the message I've seen, calling it a declaration of war on religion is reading a bit far into it. At best, it is arrogantly disdainful of religion. Of course, there are those who are quite intent on making sure that Mendicant's words are misconstrued...

[Foundation]

Priests are highly specialized careers requiring a union to fully functional to the best of their abilities, or are they?

[NoblesseChevaleresque]

Looks like a modern atheist dictatorship like North Korea or such, just that with the monarchist ideology instead of the communist. Hope you are not RPing him like that, as it is extremely modern. Or at least it seems so to me.

Middle Ages and Ancient Times had people fearful of the unknown, and sometimes people portrayed as equal to their deities, but never the view of the gods as beneath humans. Not even the Mongols who are likely those that got closer to something like it.

Not all religions are reliant upon the notion of a God to exist.

Doesn't sound SMA at all.

Monarchism > God. What?

Actually, it's:

Monarch > God
Monarchism > Religion
Monarchy > Churches

Not non-SMA IMHO, he's just irritatingly IC on the forums for whatever reason.

Ok.

Well, I don't bother with all the OOC conjecture.

[Perth]

Not all religions are reliant upon the notion of a God to exist.

Uhm.... okay. I'm gonna go ahead and say that all the religions in Medieval Europe are pretty reliant on that notion, yeah.

Not to mention, like, the primary bullet point for what a "religion" should have to have in every single SMA discussion over religion that has taken place on these forums.

[Geronus]

Not to mention, like, the primary bullet point for what a "religion" should have to have in every single SMA discussion over religion that has taken place on these forums.

Not all players agree with that position, which is why it keeps getting discussed. I sure as heck do, but there are some who don't.

[NoblesseChevaleresque]

Uhm.... okay. I'm gonna go ahead and say that all the religions in Medieval Europe are pretty reliant on that notion, yeah.

Not to mention, like, the primary bullet point for what a "religion" should have to have in every single SMA discussion over religion that has taken place on these forums.

Aside from all the religions in Europe historically that weren't reliant on the notion of a God, sure.

[JPierreD]

Not all religions are reliant upon the notion of a God to exist.

God, divinities, spirits. There was always something superior to men. Something men had to fear, no matter in which position they were. Please show me or tell me an example that proves otherwise.

Actually, it's:

Monarch > God

This is not really acceptable. You can consider the Monarch a god, like they did in the Ancient Times, and even consider all gods to be inferior to your own deity, which you might not call a "god" and address them with another title. But you still have other deities analogous to gods.

A medieval noble considering himself superior to Ares? Odd, but acceptable. A mortal superior to any divinity? Simply not medieval.

Monarchism > Religion

Only if Monarchism is a Religion. Everybody has a religion in BM, be it pagan beliefs or an established cult. And not sure if Monarchism qualifies as one. Or rather, I'm pretty sure it doesn't.

Monarchy > Churches

Though I'd rather it was not that way, this is acceptable IG. There is nothing forcing a realm or a noble to be part of a Church.

[vonGenf]

Aside from all the religions in Europe historically that weren't reliant on the notion of a God, sure.

Name one.

------

While the Aurvandil approach will get no IC love from my character, OOCly, it doesn't bother me. I think it's serious in tone, which is the most important thing.

There is a fine line between atheism and unspecified generic religion in BM, and I agree that anyone that approaches that line must tiptoe around carefully in order not to cross it, but in this particular case the roleplay is not about that line. The messages that I have seen do not espouse atheism or socialism or any other definitely modern notion. Rather, it boils down to saying "I hate everything I do not control or that is foreign. Since all the priests I know are foreign priests, then I hate priests".

It would be very easy, for example, to found a religion in Aurvandil that has Mendicant as a God-King. The player of the priestly class in this religion would be call by another name, let's say "Adorators". The players adhering to this religion would still hate priests, as all priests are foreign - their own are no filthy priests! That would be perfectly SMA.

However, while it would be SMA to do this, this doesn't mean they have to do it. No one if forced to found a religion. It is allowed to hate others religions. The end result is that you have no game-recognized religion, and that doesn't mean you need to include references to generic pagan gods in your roleplays just to ensure people understand you're not trying to move the game outside its period.

[vonGenf]

You can consider the Monarch a god, like they did in the Ancient Times, and even consider all gods to be inferior to your own deity, which you might not call a "god" and address them with another title. But you still have other deities analogous to gods.

Which basically means that their pantheon is upside down compared to the one we are used to. Is this so bad?

A medieval noble considering himself superior to Ares? Odd, but acceptable. A mortal superior to any divinity? Simply not medieval.

Is it legal in Aurvandil to suggest the King may be mortal? Maybe not.

How many gods is is necessary to be considered medieval? I thought one was enough.

If you are superior to other gods, should you worship them? Is it not normal to restrict worship to the superior god in your own realm?

Aurvandil at the moment is clearly fearful and defiant of religion, which means they acknowledge religion and gods generally. They don't suggest to ignore it, which would be non-SMA, they suggest to oppose the existing churches.

[Geronus]

While the Aurvandil approach will get no IC love from my character, OOCly, it doesn't bother me. I think it's serious in tone, which is the most important thing.

There is a fine line between atheism and unspecified generic religion in BM, and I agree that anyone that approaches that line must tiptoe around carefully in order not to cross it, but in this particular case the roleplay is not about that line. The messages that I have seen do not espouse atheism or socialism or any other definitely modern notion. Rather, it boils down to saying "I hate everything I do not control or that is foreign. Since all the priests I know are foreign priests, then I hate priests".

It would be very easy, for example, to found a religion in Aurvandil that has Mendicant as a God-King. The player of the priestly class in this religion would be call by another name, let's say "Adorators". The players adhering to this religion would still hate priests, as all priests are foreign - their own are no filthy priests! That would be perfectly SMA.

However, while it would be SMA to do this, this doesn't mean they have to do it. No one if forced to found a religion. It is allowed to hate others religions. The end result is that you have no game-recognized religion, and that doesn't mean you need to include references to generic pagan gods in your roleplays just to ensure people understand you're not trying to move the game outside its period.

Very well put.

[Perth]

Aside from all the religions in Europe historically that weren't reliant on the notion of a God, sure.

Oh yeah those ones.... like... hm... nope, drawing a blank.