Auto da fe and peasant mobs

[Stabbity]

It's not just some random bishop. It's one of the leaders of the faith, who also happens to be a royal of the realm the city used to belong to, not to mention the city's lord and duke himself.

BM priests are not random bishops, especially not elders. They represent the top class of the nobility, like the rest of BM characters.

The comparison to a TO is not moot. In both cases, it's a foreign power using armed commoners to oust the government in place.

I don't really mind the argument that in the chaos of things, the nobles' unit step in to prevent the mob from getting out of control (though I disagree with it anyways), but at the very least, they would never send the person responsible to the dungeons of the government they are trying to utterly destroy.

USED to belong to is a very key word. Nobody cares if you're the former Grand Poobah of Keplerville if you're smack dab in the middle of Evilstan.

And regardless of who you are in the religion, the religion lacks ANY sort of legal authority. As soon as you riled up a mob and attempted to remove a person from their lawfully appointed post, you violated the very core of nobility. The comparison to a TO is completely moot. You cannot compare the London riots to the English's campaign to take India, for example. One is an untrained mob who only sticks around to drag someone out of somewhere, and the other is a systematic, disciplined takeover of all government assets in a region. Night and Day.

As for the foreign troops handing  you over to the region owner, nobles are a curious breed remember. Handing over a criminal to the proper authorities, even if they were enemy authorities is gentlemanly and proper protocol. Yes, you may claim to be Royal XYZ, the Grand Kepler of Keplerism, but people who are under arrest will claim to be anything. I once had a teenage Talib claim to be Hamid Karzai when we detained him. I also had some 60 year old something tell me he was 800 years old and a Caliph. They were both lying through their teeth, and do you know what it got them? Flex cuffed, blind folded, and thrown in the back of an APC. I like to think I was considerably nicer than a soldier would have been circa 1100 AD.

[Daycryn]

The core of nobility is not that noble X has a particular lordship in region Y. Region takeovers prove that, as does the fact that you seem to think it's a completely different thing. No, it's not. It's a bunch of commoners (the troops) being led by a noble to oust another noble from a position of authority. In one case the leading noble is a knight or lord, in the other case a priest. Sure, you can say that one is more "disciplined" than the other, but so what? That doesn't change what it is: one noble ousting another noble from power using the force of the unwashed peasant masses. "Legal authority" doesn't enter into the equation either - a foreign force taking over a region doesn't have the "legal authority" to do so. It has the numbers. Screaming, dirty peasants, led by nobles: that's what it has. Same with a religious takeover.

It may not be neat and orderly, you may well (and you are) cry foul that it's not lawful or noble or whatever. Welcome to the medieval ages. !@#$ wasn't orderly and lawful. It's ultimately might makes right.

[vonGenf]

The core of nobility is not that noble X has a particular lordship in region Y. Region takeovers prove that, as does the fact that you seem to think it's a completely different thing. No, it's not. It's a bunch of commoners (the troops) being led by a noble to oust another noble from a position of authority. In one case the leading noble is a knight or lord, in the other case a priest. Sure, you can say that one is more "disciplined" than the other, but so what? That doesn't change what it is: one noble ousting another noble from power using the force of the unwashed peasant masses. "Legal authority" doesn't enter into the equation either - a foreign force taking over a region doesn't have the "legal authority" to do so. It has the numbers. Screaming, dirty peasants, led by nobles: that's what it has. Same with a religious takeover.

The screaming peasants in a military unit are lead by a troop leader. Ultimately, they answer to the orders the troop leaders give.

The screaming peasants in a religious takeover do not obey the orders given by the noble. The noble doesn't lead troops; that's what makes him not a troop leader. It is a peasant uprising, encouraged by a noble; surely a heinous act.

If a religious leaders want to lead orderly troops, there is a game-mechanic way to achieve it: switch to warrior and recruit a unit.

[Anaris]

The official position of the devs, and thus the reality in the game, is that a mob of peasants is not anything remotely like a unit of troops led by a noble. Any noble, of any realm, will attempt to break up such a mob and detain anyone who seems to be urging them on.

Don't like it? Don't whip up peasant mobs.

As Gustav says, please cease this discussion in this thread. Discuss the RP/RL background of it in the Background forum, or, if you're a masochist, request a change in the Feature Requests forum.

(Edit: This admonition was, of course, before this section of the thread was split off into a more appropriate place.)

[Gustav Kuriga]

Careful Anaris, I might be one of those... *dashes off to the Feature Request forum with some over-thought out and specific idea that won't be approved*