Yet another idea for a schism mechanic

[Eldargard]

I like the idea of being able to take over another religions temple. The requirements for doing so would need to be carefully weighed but it sounds so cool.

This might have already been thought of before, but I really like the idea of allowing religions to form groups rather that having sects within a religion. Joe starts the Catholic church then Steve later splits off and creates the Lutheran church. Steve and Joe decide to ally themselves under the Christian banner and are now both considered Christian. Later Jill begins the Baptist church. Jill and Steve decide to unite as Protestants and Jill joins Joe and Steve as Christians.

These alliances give special messaging options, temple coolness and all that one would get if there was a christian church with three sects.

It might be too complicated or too difficult to code though. Just a thought that popped into my head as I read this thread.

[OFaolain]

That idea reminds me of a question: is it possible to have temples to more than one religion in a region?  If no, would that be difficult or desirable to implement?  I don't see it as exploitative or terribly unrealistic (especially since as gets pointed out often, regions are big), and if the local lord is not tolerant then he could just have one or the other torn down.

[Anaris]

That idea reminds me of a question: is it possible to have temples to more than one religion in a region?

Yup, you can have lots. It's not common, because it requires Lords of multiple faiths to have held the region.

[OFaolain]

Yup, you can have lots. It's not common, because it requires Lords of multiple faiths to have held the region.

Okay, so if a character is a lord and wants to change religions, he can do that (as long as he can get to a temple) and can just construct a new shack to his new faith right next to the old one.  That also sounds like an excellent way to start converting regions without having to worry about the peasants revolting if you tear their temple down because the new temple will also be converting peasants.  Would two temples of equivalent size and without any priest interference eventually lead to the region being split 50/50 between two religions?

[Anaris]

Okay, so if a character is a lord and wants to change religions, he can do that (as long as he can get to a temple) and can just construct a new shack to his new faith right next to the old one.  That also sounds like an excellent way to start converting regions without having to worry about the peasants revolting if you tear their temple down because the new temple will also be converting peasants.  Would two temples of equivalent size and without any priest interference eventually lead to the region being split 50/50 between two religions?

Given sufficient time and no outside factors, yes, I believe that would be the case.

However, you do have to take outside factors into account, particularly conversion from nearby regions. If you have a level 2 temple of Keplerism and a level 2 temple of Evilism in your rural region, but the city next door has a level 8 temple of Evilism, you're going to have a lot of Evilists in your region.

[De-Legro]

I like the idea of being able to take over another religions temple. The requirements for doing so would need to be carefully weighed but it sounds so cool.

This might have already been thought of before, but I really like the idea of allowing religions to form groups rather that having sects within a religion. Joe starts the Catholic church then Steve later splits off and creates the Lutheran church. Steve and Joe decide to ally themselves under the Christian banner and are now both considered Christian. Later Jill begins the Baptist church. Jill and Steve decide to unite as Protestants and Jill joins Joe and Steve as Christians.

These alliances give special messaging options, temple coolness and all that one would get if there was a christian church with three sects.

It might be too complicated or too difficult to code though. Just a thought that popped into my head as I read this thread.

Does that really end up being conceptually different to sects within a religion?

[pcw27]

Hey, one more idea, what about zoning religions?

When you have a temple of sufficient size you can declare it the headquarters of a diocese. Region lords with temples can decide which diocese their region belongs to in a manner similar to choosing duchies. The diocese with the largest temple is considered the arch diocese of the religion. The head of a diocese must be an elder and they have to be appointed at either the diocese headquarters or that of the whole religeon. The head of a diocese has the power to declare the temples under him independent of the arch diocese and thus a new religion.

[De-Legro]

Hey, one more idea, what about zoning religions?

When you have a temple of sufficient size you can declare it the headquarters of a diocese. Region lords with temples can decide which diocese their region belongs to in a manner similar to choosing duchies. The diocese with the largest temple is considered the arch diocese of the religion. The head of a diocese must be an elder and they have to be appointed at either the diocese headquarters or that of the whole religeon. The head of a diocese has the power to declare the temples under him independent of the arch diocese and thus a new religion.

Sooo pretty much a sect, that requires a temple of a certain size to set up the sect.

[vonGenf]

Sooo pretty much a sect, that requires a temple of a certain size to set up the sect.

Yes, except that it feels more natural in that you don't have to specifically create a sect, it just arises organically from geographic expansion. If you automatically make, let's say, any temple of size 5 and more the head of a diocese, then sects will automatically appear, creating schism opportunities, while someone who wants to create a sect specifically to schism will be able to do it more or less under the cover.

The problem is that if sects have no other purpose than to allow schism, then it becomes a pretty unsubtle move to create a sect. By tying it to temple size, you make it more akin to Duchies.

I like the idea!

[De-Legro]

Yes, except that it feels more natural in that you don't have to specifically create a sect, it just arises organically from geographic expansion. If you automatically make, let's say, any temple of size 5 and more the head of a diocese, then sects will automatically appear, creating schism opportunities, while someone who wants to create a sect specifically to schism will be able to do it more or less under the cover.

The problem is that if sects have no other purpose than to allow schism, then it becomes a pretty unsubtle move to create a sect. By tying it to temple size, you make it more akin to Duchies.

I like the idea!

You still have to declare it a diocese. Then have a reason for the Diocese to split off. The original post had nothing about a diocese being automatically generated.

Sects would not exist purely for schism. They would exists as a way for characters that follow a specific teaching or belief to group together in a identifiable way. Depending on exactly how it is implemented you could do things like say each sect is allowed to have a single elder in the council, or have a system where sects are required to reach a certain size before being large enough to be recognised by the greater church and allowed representation on the elder council. Mostly things that are already possible, just with a bit more support from the game and potentially some nice little title add-ons.

Sects keep coming up with Schism because once they exist, they are a logical path to allow schism. However that hardly means they have no other purpose.

[OFaolain]

So this is my idea for the actual mechanics for sects and schisms:

Allow a sect to be created by any priest of the religion (ideally requiring said priest to hold a region with a temple in it).  It creates a sub-religion that they are the head of with it's own rank structure which is in addition to the church ranks (but not modifiable by the church elders).  Add to "religion" messaging tab "everyone/some people in your sect" (and the ranks in the sect would show in the message signature here).  Once a sect exists it can be joined from any temple of the religion.

Sect structure would be the same as religion structure including elders, full members and regular members.  Elders in the sect need not be elders in the primary religion.  If the leader of a sect leaves, then the sect the is disbanded and all members lose membership in the sect.

The head of a sect has the power to "declare schism" (which will also occur automatically if the head of the sect leaves or is removed from the church) which makes him the head of a new religion.  When a schism is declared, all temples of the primary religion in regions belonging to members of the sect are converted to the new religion but the peasants are not (this will take time and effort from priest actions and temple influence).  At that point the sect becomes its own religion with all the corresponding mechanics.

It seems like a lot of work to me but I don't know that there can be a "quick and dirty" solution other than implementing temple re-dedication.

[De-Legro]

So this is my idea for the actual mechanics for sects and schisms:

Allow a sect to be created by any priest of the religion (ideally requiring said priest to hold a region with a temple in it).  It creates a sub-religion that they are the head of with it's own rank structure which is in addition to the church ranks (but not modifiable by the church elders).  Add to "religion" messaging tab "everyone/some people in your sect" (and the ranks in the sect would show in the message signature here).  Once a sect exists it can be joined from any temple of the religion.

Sect structure would be the same as religion structure including elders, full members and regular members.  Elders in the sect need not be elders in the primary religion.  If the leader of a sect leaves, then the sect the is disbanded and all members lose membership in the sect.

The head of a sect has the power to "declare schism" (which will also occur automatically if the head of the sect leaves or is removed from the church) which makes him the head of a new religion.  When a schism is declared, all temples of the primary religion in regions belonging to members of the sect are converted to the new religion but the peasants are not (this will take time and effort from priest actions and temple influence).  At that point the sect becomes its own religion with all the corresponding mechanics.

It seems like a lot of work to me but I don't know that there can be a "quick and dirty" solution other than implementing temple re-dedication.

This is similar to my thinking. How temples are divided is something I'm not 100% on. The method that allows Lords to set it gives the most control, but doesn't reflect that in some cases the Church is relatively independent of the region Lord, or wields enough power at that level to ignore the wishes of mere Lords.

Automatic systems likewise so far do not thrill me, yet I don't want another level of complexity that allows for multiple ways for temples to be assigned.

The problem is, who owns a temple? In my mind there is a local priest for each temple. If that priest belonged to a sect there is a good chance that he is firstly preaching the truth as that sect see's it, and b willing to bring his church and his flock to the sect if it splits off. The problem with this of course is where are these NPC priests, they certainly don't exist in any structure we have.

[OFaolain]

This is similar to my thinking. How temples are divided is something I'm not 100% on. The method that allows Lords to set it gives the most control, but doesn't reflect that in some cases the Church is relatively independent of the region Lord, or wields enough power at that level to ignore the wishes of mere Lords.

Automatic systems likewise so far do not thrill me, yet I don't want another level of complexity that allows for multiple ways for temples to be assigned.

The problem is, who owns a temple? In my mind there is a local priest for each temple. If that priest belonged to a sect there is a good chance that he is firstly preaching the truth as that sect see's it, and b willing to bring his church and his flock to the sect if it splits off. The problem with this of course is where are these NPC priests, they certainly don't exist in any structure we have.

Historically, many bishops were appointed by lords (free investiture was a particular quarrel between the Holy Roman Empire and the Papacy and appointment to a bishopric was a handy way to disinherit sons) so I don't see it as too odd that the lord would have appointed the priest at his local temple.  Converting the temple but not the peasants allows priests of the parent religion to strike back by whipping the local population into a furor while striking a compromise between who the church "belongs to" and what the peasants believe.

You could have a roll similar to what happens when nobles raid temples that allows the locals to stop the priests they like from being replaced, if you wanted.  That way a schism would require coordination between nobles in the schismatic sect to take control of the temples with extra troops or some such (I assume quantity of troops affects the outcome of that roll).

I don't mind it being automatic that all nobles join when schism is declared; if you go into it knowing that as a player then your character should also know that he is placing his soul in the hands of the leader of his sect.  And this way if the noble wants to go back, his region already follows the old religion and tearing down and replacing (or rededicating if that gets implemented) the temple should take only time and gold.

[De-Legro]

Historically, many bishops were appointed by lords (free investiture was a particular quarrel between the Holy Roman Empire and the Papacy and appointment to a bishopric was a handy way to disinherit sons) so I don't see it as too odd that the lord would have appointed the priest at his local temple.  Converting the temple but not the peasants allows priests of the parent religion to strike back by whipping the local population into a furor while striking a compromise between who the church "belongs to" and what the peasants believe.

You could have a roll similar to what happens when nobles raid temples that allows the locals to stop the priests they like from being replaced, if you wanted.  That way a schism would require coordination between nobles in the schismatic sect to take control of the temples with extra troops or some such (I assume quantity of troops affects the outcome of that roll).

I don't mind it being automatic that all nobles join when schism is declared; if you go into it knowing that as a player then your character should also know that he is placing his soul in the hands of the leader of his sect.  And this way if the noble wants to go back, his region already follows the old religion and tearing down and replacing (or rededicating if that gets implemented) the temple should take only time and gold.

Its not so much that I disagree with Lords appointing a Temple leader and therefore controlling the temple. The issue is I don't like yet another system that tells Religions how they are structured when the goal is to free them from structural restrictions to start with. Ideally temples should have a whole lot of parameters that the Elders decide on, and one of those would be who controls investiture. Well really if it was Ideal then there would also be ways for conflict between what is set and what is done but that is yet another complexity that we probably don't need.

[Indirik]

Keeping things simple is really a big concern. The more complex things are, the more likely they are to break, or be exploitable due to edge cases and the like. This shouldn't be something that happens often, like rebellions. But when it does happen, and it breaks, then there is a whole lot of damage that can be done by a minor bug.

The more conditions, exceptions, options, and controls any given proposal has, the less likely it is to ever get implemented due to the sheer quantity of effort required to program it, test it, debug it, and maintain it.