Auto da fe

[Chenier]

Participated in a battle   (just in)
Your aide comes to you with an urgent message: the priest Machiavel Chénier has whipped up a mob of followers of Sanguis Astroism into a frenzy and is about to send them to attack Fulco D`Este's estate! You quickly mobilize your troops to go to Fulco D`Este's aid. Some of the militia also joined in to support their Lord. When you get there, the mob is just arriving, and you are forced to fight the maddened peasants. Your troops fight valiantly, but the fanaticism of the peasants turns the tide quickly, and you are forced to retreat with heavy casualties.

Let's put aside the fact that I'm a priest and as such have no troops, and getting a message of using my men against myself is silly... I do not get the basis for this game mechanic. Why do all nobles go against auta da fes (weak acts enough as it is)? Shouldn't the faithful stand by their priests? It's been claimed that the nobles just see a bunch of random peasants and seek to put them down, without knowledge of their allegiance. This doesn't make sense. Surely, if I was going to raise a mob against a heretic, I'd invite the faithful nobles to join me/them. They'd at least get a missive to stand out of the way.

I've always strongly disliked game mechanics like this that turn people against their allies, much like how friendly troops in a region increase the odds of an infil being sent to an enemy prison. It doesn't make any sense and it only makes weak actions even weaker.

I'm also amazed how I could raise thousands of peasants to wreak havoc against their lord, and yet the region stat damage is minimal, if there is any at all. To top it off, the duke can just re-appoint himself, with no penalties as far as I know.

I don't expect anything to change, but this just reminds me how awfully underpowered religions are.

[Anaris]

First, sending you that message is clearly a bug. I'll have to look into that at some point.

Second, we've been through this many times before, Chénier. What an auto da fe consists of is a peasant mob descending upon a noble's estate, trying to kill him, and burning the estate to the ground, with servants still inside.

If you don't want to be opposed in your actions by every noble of good conscience, then take actions that don't involve whipping up unruly mobs of peasants against nobility. It's that simple.

[Chenier]

First, sending you that message is clearly a bug. I'll have to look into that at some point.

Second, we've been through this many times before, Chénier. What an auto da fe consists of is a peasant mob descending upon a noble's estate, trying to kill him, and burning the estate to the ground, with servants still inside.

If you don't want to be opposed in your actions by every noble of good conscience, then take actions that don't involve whipping up unruly mobs of peasants against nobility. It's that simple.

It's a noble that instigating the mob. When a lord instigates his faithful to persecute heretics, does the militia or noble-led troops interfere? No, they do not. The game is inconsistent. This is about killing heretics, not about upsetting the social system. Nobody's trying to put peasants in charge. What's the difference between peasants (Troops) replacing a lord via takeover than via a priest action? I don't see units resisting other nobles' units attempting to oust the local nobles.

This is a ridiculously weak action that doesn't even make sense. It could be outright removed and religions would be no weaker for it.

[Anaris]

It's a noble that instigating the mob. When a lord instigates his faithful to persecute heretics, does the militia or noble-led troops interfere? No, they do not.

Then maybe that's an oversight that we should correct.

This is a ridiculously weak action that doesn't even make sense. It could be outright removed and religions would be no weaker for it.

Bull!@#$.

It's a way to remove a Lord from his Lordship. It is, in fact, the only way to do that besides banning him. That is an incredibly powerful action in this game.

[Chenier]

Bull!@#$.

It's a way to remove a Lord from his Lordship. It is, in fact, the only way to do that besides banning him. That is an incredibly powerful action in this game.

Powerful for who? The duke of said region. That's the sole person who can take advantage of this feature. If he wants to replace said lord. If he's the duke himself, or supports the lord, it's utterly pointless, because the duke will just reappoint the guy. This feature gives nothing to the religion of the priest doing it, it just causes the loss of followers and exposes the priest to arrest. Negative gain. The only person who can benefit from this feature is the duke of the target, and as such it's a pointless feature for religions. It doesn't even harm the region or offer deterrents to just reinstating the guy.

[Stabbity]

Dude, you killed three thousand peasants, and like Delvin said, booted a Lord out of his Lordship, which is the only way shy of banning to do so in the game. There are correct ways to use this mechanic. its not a "push button to win" mechanic. I can think of at least four different scenarios just off of the top of my head.

Furthermore, nobody should be forced to ally with you. Yea, I'm a follower of religion XYZ, and a priest of XYZ just booted my Duke out of his lordship because he was recently excommunicated. However, my loyalties lie with my Duke as opposed to my religion at present. I'm going to side with him. Or, it could be reversed. However, I agree with Delvin's assessment:

Whipping up mobs of peasants to depose the rightful lord should bring down the scorn of every noble. You're causing a riot. It is natural to put down riots, as opposed to join in. When a lord persecutes followers of his religion, it is an organized action. Troops are involved, and they carry the weight of the law around with them. Some random foreign noble peddling a religion does not carry that authority.

For historical reference see: every dispute between the catholic church and secular rulers ever.

[Daycryn]

I think we need to realize that just as we as 21st century citizens of mostly democratic nation-states don't really intuitively 'get' the whole 'natural order' of the aristocracy thing, we similarly don't intuitively understand the whole 'natural order' of religion thing either. Troop leaders may have the weight of [realm] law behind their troops, but a high ranked noble priest has the weight of God's Law [or equivalent] as well. Both are pretty important factors in premodern non-secular aristocratic societies.

[Chenier]

Dude, you killed three thousand peasants, and like Delvin said, booted a Lord out of his Lordship, which is the only way shy of banning to do so in the game. There are correct ways to use this mechanic. its not a "push button to win" mechanic. I can think of at least four different scenarios just off of the top of my head.

Furthermore, nobody should be forced to ally with you. Yea, I'm a follower of religion XYZ, and a priest of XYZ just booted my Duke out of his lordship because he was recently excommunicated. However, my loyalties lie with my Duke as opposed to my religion at present. I'm going to side with him. Or, it could be reversed. However, I agree with Delvin's assessment:

Whipping up mobs of peasants to depose the rightful lord should bring down the scorn of every noble. You're causing a riot. It is natural to put down riots, as opposed to join in. When a lord persecutes followers of his religion, it is an organized action. Troops are involved, and they carry the weight of the law around with them. Some random foreign noble peddling a religion does not carry that authority.

For historical reference see: every dispute between the catholic church and secular rulers ever.

If your loyalties don't lie with your Church, then you can leave it.

[D`Este]

Alright.....

A stranger from a far away realm that is disliked but apparently a priest of the faith 70% of the peasants follow, riot against their lord, duke and king to whom the peasant loyalty is very loyal. The lord who commands the militia and you are surprised that not all join to revolt against a king?

Chenier, you are very lucky that the peasants just didnt tear you into pieces, you are asking for a feature that gives religions all the power. Furthermore, because you as noble of a neutral realm cant be arrested, priest can wander the lands unhindered. If you want a far stronger auto da fe, the counter measures against religions should also become far more powerful.

[Anaris]

If your loyalties don't lie with your Church, then you can leave it.

If your loyalties don't lie with your realm, you can leave it.

See? Works both ways. Conflicts of loyalty are intentional, and intentionally do not have an obvious "correct" resolution.

[Indirik]

Perhaps there should be a chance that some of the militia side with the mob? Our perhaps some of the troops don't get there in time participate? Regions are big. No particular reason that *everyone* is just sitting there ready to help out.

[Chenier]

Alright.....

A stranger from a far away realm that is disliked but apparently a priest of the faith 70% of the peasants follow, riot against their lord, duke and king to whom the peasant loyalty is very loyal. The lord who commands the militia and you are surprised that not all join to revolt against a king?

Chenier, you are very lucky that the peasants just didnt tear you into pieces, you are asking for a feature that gives religions all the power. Furthermore, because you as noble of a neutral realm cant be arrested, priest can wander the lands unhindered. If you want a far stronger auto da fe, the counter measures against religions should also become far more powerful.

I don't care for auto da fes. They are pointless. Claim region does everything an Auto da fe does, but at least in a meaningful way. They could be removed and religions would not in any way be any weaker.

I do dislike, though, the principle of the mechanics behind it, as others that do the same.

• Infils should not be arrested by their own realm mates, because their judges don't need to imprison them to ban them
• Murderous settings shouldn't send realm-mates in a frenzy against allies, because those who want a fight can just set themselves to murderous as well
• Faithful nobles shouldn't automatically turn against their priests, because they can just leave the religion if they don't respect their own elder priests

And no, Anaris, I don't think your analogy is valid. Right now, we have a systematic opposition that does not make sense RP-wise, balance-wise, or gameplay-wise. No matter what they do, there's no way for nobles to assist their priests if they value them. Religions had sway in people's minds, see the Walk to Canossa. When the church exommunicates the ruler, it's normal for the nobles to have to pick a side between their Church and their ruler. And it's a stretch to claim that they universally pick their ruler. As it is, it is IMPOSSIBLE for nobles to align with their priests against excommunicated nobles. Because what you said, that they could just "leave their realm", doesn't hold: they'd still automatically side against their priest.

[Anaris]

And no, Anaris, I don't think your analogy is valid. Right now, we have a systematic opposition that does not make sense RP-wise, balance-wise, or gameplay-wise. No matter what they do, there's no way for nobles to assist their priests if they value them. Religions had sway in people's minds, see the Walk to Canossa. When the church exommunicates the ruler, it's normal for the nobles to have to pick a side between their Church and their ruler. And it's a stretch to claim that they universally pick their ruler. As it is, it is IMPOSSIBLE for nobles to align with their priests against excommunicated nobles. Because what you said, that they could just "leave their realm", doesn't hold: they'd still automatically side against their priest.

Y'know, sometimes I feel like I'm talking to a wall.

There are loads of ways for faithful nobles to align with their priests, Chénier. Just not when you're whipping up a frenzied mob of peasants as your method of attacking them.

Don't like the way auto da fe and Declare Religious State work? Don't use them. Personally, I don't see any real problem with them. They are very powerful weapons, but like all weapons, they will be much less powerful if not used wisely.

Just walking into a region and kicking out the Lord, in and of itself, is, indeed, not all that powerful. It's more like the "one" of a "one-two punch." Only instead of following it up with a "two", you just stood there looking proud of yourself.

You're clever, Chénier. Figure out some ways to use an auto da fe in combination with other actions by, as you say, faithful nobles, to achieve your ends. But quit complaining to me that being a highly skilled priest doesn't give you an "I Win" button. Because right now, that's all I'm hearing.

[vonGenf]

Perhaps there should be a chance that some of the militia side with the mob? Our perhaps some of the troops don't get there in time participate? Regions are big. No particular reason that *everyone* is just sitting there ready to help out.

I think it makes sense that the militia fights against the mob. The militia is on the side of the current region Lord; a mob is necessarily against. Also, it makes sense for a region Lords who is at risk of being targeted by priestly actions to raise militia as a defense.

The issue is more pressing for troops led by actual nobles. The problem is that a priest can be in the situation where he has friends with troops in the region, but would need to ask his friend to leave the region so he can act. This is counter-intuitive; it should never be damaging to have friends around.

I can compare this to the looting options. Defending troops will try to stop you from looting; however not all noble troop present will do so. If you go looting, it's helpful to have friends around.

Then again, I agree with other commenters: in a case where siding with your religions means going against your realm, it's not true that everyone will automatically choose the religion; however neither is it true that all would choose the realm. Since it's not possible to wait for each troop leaders to express an opinion (actions must be resolved at turn), I don't see any obvious solution.

[dustole]

I thought the text said that militia will likely side with the priest since they are just peasants and they follow your religion too.