BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => Development => Feature Requests => Topic started by: Aldwoni on March 23, 2011, 10:36:57 PM
-
I'm not very good at explaining what I mean but I hope it is clear enough.
What if there is a new option in Battlemaster called "Cults":
If you are an elder member of a religion, you can start a cult. Cults are sub-groups of a religion.
for example: a religion called Christianity could have 3 cults: Protestantism, Roman Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox churches
So the religions are based on the same ideas(or at least have some ideas in common) but aren't the same. Other possible cults could be a group of 'mostly' infiltrators which act based on their believes but not always communicate with the religion.
A cult can own temples, have members but all members and temples are also part of the religion. Outsiders(members of other religions) mostly don't know of the existence of cults.
If a cult wants, they can start a new religion. Then all temples and members of the cult become part of the new religion. depending on how they split they will automaticly view the old religion as variant or evil as the split is friendly or brutal. the same applies for the old religion to the new religion.
The elders of a religion can also try to disband an cult. the elder members of the cult then have the choice to disband or split.
Elder members of a cult don't need to be elder members of the religion.
-
You can more or less do this by creating separate ranks in a religion for each section of belief. I've been in a few and read some that do this.
Still, its an interesting idea. The only issue I see with being able to suddenly split a cult from a religion to make a new religion is that they'd be losing and then competing for the same follower base and I cant think of too many religions that would want that.
-
It would be a Sect or a denomination. Problem for me is this isn't how it works. There is no over arching Christian religion that owns the property of all the denominations. While they may share several tenanted, and be lump together in a simplified category, they are for all real purposes separate religions. This can already be modelled by having several religions that are in communion with each other, or by using the ranking system to form your own distinct groups within the religion.
Religious schism is I believe already on the to do list. Not sure how they will handle which temples join which faction, or if that has even been decided at this stage. One point to remember, religions are supposed to be mostly about RP. They have got some nifty in game mechanics these days, but still by and large they are a RP construct.
-
"Denominations" of a religion would be separate religions that view each other as "variants". Like the Baptists and the Methodists. They're both Christians, but they're not the same organization at all. They are not sects of the same religion.
-
"Denominations" of a religion would be separate religions that view each other as "variants". Like the Baptists and the Methodists. They're both Christians, but they're not the same organization at all. They are not sects of the same religion.
Indeed, which is my response to the example given
If you are an elder member of a religion, you can start a cult. Cults are sub-groups of a religion.
for example: a religion called Christianity could have 3 cults: Protestantism, Roman Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox churches
So the religions are based on the same ideas(or at least have some ideas in common) but aren't the same. Other possible cults could be a group of 'mostly' infiltrators which act based on their believes but not always communicate with the religion.
Denomination - a group of religious congregations having its own organization and a distinctive faith.A Christian denomination is an identifiable religious body under a common name, structure, and doctrine within Christianity.
Sect - a subdivision of a larger religious group.The historical usage of the term sect in Christendom has had pejorative connotations, referring to a group or movement with heretical beliefs or practices that deviate from those of groups considered orthodox.
Cult - 1) A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
2) A system or community of religious worship and ritual.
-
"Denominations" of a religion would be separate religions that view each other as "variants". Like the Baptists and the Methodists. They're both Christians, but they're not the same organization at all. They are not sects of the same religion.
Well at one time they usually were. Denominations don't spring up out of nothing. They usually have their roots in another religion.
I think this suggestion could solve the problem you run into when trying to design mechanics for a schism: How to determine which nobles, temples, and peasant followers split off. If you allow religions to divide themselves into sects internally and then split apart later, the dividing lines are already there.
-
Well at one time they usually were. Denominations don't spring up out of nothing. They usually have their roots in another religion.
I think this suggestion could solve the problem you run into when trying to design mechanics for a schism: How to determine which nobles, temples, and peasant followers split off. If you allow religions to divide themselves into sects internally and then split apart later, the dividing lines are already there.
That's...A really good point. And you are correct that one of the most (probably the most, actually) vexing difficulties is figuring out who flips. And there are other things sects/cults/whatever could be good for. We have several religions in BM with multiple gods. You could have a Sect for each god or goddess, or for more pantheist religions a sect for Order gods vs the Chaos god sect, and so on.
-
It would be a Sect or a denomination. Problem for me is this isn't how it works. There is no over arching Christian religion that owns the property of all the denominations. While they may share several tenanted, and be lump together in a simplified category, they are for all real purposes separate religions. This can already be modelled by having several religions that are in communion with each other, or by using the ranking system to form your own distinct groups within the religion.
Religious schism is I believe already on the to do list. Not sure how they will handle which temples join which faction, or if that has even been decided at this stage. One point to remember, religions are supposed to be mostly about RP. They have got some nifty in game mechanics these days, but still by and large they are a RP construct.
My example may noy be the best, but there are always groups within religions who have a slightly different view. And ones in a while they make a fight and split. sometimes however it is simple a group within the religion who stay there for over decades. I used the name cult because I never heard of denomination and Sect is mostly used bad in dutch media.
-
Interesting, in the England, America and Australia cult has bad connotations. We talk of suicide cults, charismatic cults etc. For example Scientology is called a cult by its detractors, as are groups like the Exclusive Brethren.
-
I just checked wiki and found that when I want to look to the English page of the Dutch "sekte"( which I think is Dutch for Sect). Wiki gives me the choice to choose between Sect and Cult.
-
In America, cults are associated with polygamy, statutory rape, mass suicide, etc.
Still, that's easy enough to work around.
-
Cult, Sect and Denomination all mean the same thing.
To say any of the words is associated with *insert bad thing here* only means the media hasnt got a clue what it talks about. For instance, Christianity IS a Cult/Sect/Denomination of the Jewish Faith. And there are some who argue that Islam IS a Cult/Sect/Denomination of Christianity - though I personally would argue about the meaning implied by the word, after all unlike Christianity which grew out of Judaism, Islam did not grow out of Christianity - definitely dont remember any religious textbooks mentioning Mohammed being a Christian Teacher ;)
If a person is not familiar enough with the subject of the three words, which a lot wont be, why not just use Denomination as an overarching name?
However I would suggest that instead of immediately starting a subgroup and call it * Denomination* (For example) that instead when you create it you call it a Cult as it will simple begin as leaf on a tree, then as it gets larger enough to be a branch call it a Sect, and then once its ready to be its own tree, call it a Denomination.
You could also add in some underlying game mechanics:
A Cult could have at max 1 temple up to a Primitive Temple level. When it gains, say 10 nobles who follow it, it becomes a Sect and then it can have 5 temples up to a Medium Temple level. At 25 Nobles it becomes a Denomination and has access to Large Temples - say 15 temples. At 50 nobles it becomes its own Religion outright just because it has too many Noble Followers ergo too much influence. Would make things spice up as the main religion might try and suppress the Cult from gaining too much power etc. Would make for interesting intrigue and politics in religions.
-
Cult, Sect and Denomination all mean the same thing.
To say any of the words is associated with *insert bad thing here* only means the media hasnt got a clue what it talks about. For instance, Christianity IS a Cult/Sect/Denomination of the Jewish Faith. And there are some who argue that Islam IS a Cult/Sect/Denomination of Christianity - though I personally would argue about the meaning implied by the word, after all unlike Christianity which grew out of Judaism, Islam did not grow out of Christianity - definitely dont remember any religious textbooks mentioning Mohammed being a Christian Teacher ;)
If a person is not familiar enough with the subject of the three words, which a lot wont be, why not just use Denomination as an overarching name?
However I would suggest that instead of immediately starting a subgroup and call it * Denomination* (For example) that instead when you create it you call it a Cult as it will simple begin as leaf on a tree, then as it gets larger enough to be a branch call it a Sect, and then once its ready to be its own tree, call it a Denomination.
You could also add in some underlying game mechanics:
A Cult could have at max 1 temple up to a Primitive Temple level. When it gains, say 10 nobles who follow it, it becomes a Sect and then it can have 5 temples up to a Medium Temple level. At 25 Nobles it becomes a Denomination and has access to Large Temples - say 15 temples. At 50 nobles it becomes its own Religion outright just because it has too many Noble Followers ergo too much influence. Would make things spice up as the main religion might try and suppress the Cult from gaining too much power etc. Would make for interesting intrigue and politics in religions.
The three words mean SIMILAR things. However there are subtle difference in their meaning and definitions. Couple of minutes reading the dictionary definitions would reveal that. The Jewish, Christian and Islamic faiths are all Abrahamic faiths, so they all share a common basis. The various groups that would one day give birth to what we recognise as the Christian faith were indeed once operated within the Jewish faith. It can't be a sect any longer, as it is separate from the recognised Jewish structures, which is what generally defines the difference between a sect and a denomination. There is no clear separation that would define when a denomination has ceased being such and become its own faith. One might argue that since Christianity and the Jewish faith disagree on several tenant that form the core of their beliefs, that they are no longer close enough in faith in practise to have one associated as a denomination of the other.
-
The three words mean SIMILAR things. However there are subtle difference in their meaning and definitions. Couple of minutes reading the dictionary definitions would reveal that. The Jewish, Christian and Islamic faiths are all Abrahamic faiths, so they all share a common basis. The various groups that would one day give birth to what we recognise as the Christian faith were indeed once operated within the Jewish faith. It can't be a sect any longer, as it is separate from the recognised Jewish structures, which is what generally defines the difference between a sect and a denomination. There is no clear separation that would define when a denomination has ceased being such and become its own faith. One might argue that since Christianity and the Jewish faith disagree on several tenant that form the core of their beliefs, that they are no longer close enough in faith in practise to have one associated as a denomination of the other.
I don't think any practicing Jew or Christian would consider themselves to be a part of the same religion. Jews and Christians worship the same God, and hold some of the same texts as sacred. But Jews are waiting for the promised Messiah, while Christians insist that he came already.
On the other hand, Baptists and Methodists would agree that they are denominations of the same religion. They have the same core beliefs, but disagree on certain details, mainly in terms of worship experience (speaking in tongues, specifically). They typically recognize each other as being part of the same religion--Christian in this example.
A sect is a splinter off of a larger religious group. Christianity was considered by the Jews and Romans of the 1st century AD to be a Jewish Sect, until Gentiles started becoming Christians. If we implement the ability to splinter a religion, the feature should be called "Create a Sect". I think a Sect would eventually be considered a denomination, "sect" often applies to new schisms of the faith.
A cult is a small, controlling group led by a single charismatic individual, that has beliefs and practices that are considered bizarre by others, such as polygamy.
Note that I'm providing American English definitions, and that the European words that directly translate to "sect" are what Americans think of as a "cult". So we may need to consider the word choice in the game carefully.
-
In terms of game mechanics, the debate over semantics is, well, semantic. The proposal as I understand it and support it is to allow an Elder to create a subgroup within a religion that we can think of as a variant form of worship that is still recognized as being part of the parent religion and continues to operate under the same hierarchy.
For roleplay purposes, the actual differences that separate this group from the mainstream faith could be literally anything - overemphasis on a specific god within a pantheon (like a Cult of Apollo or some such), differences in worship practices, even doctrinal differences such as whether or not to accept the infallibility of a certain spiritual leader (*cough* Sanguis Astroism *cough*). Naturally, in some cases we could expect these differences to lead to a schism, but they do not have to, they can simply be used to create greater diversity within a faith and enrich the experience for all members.
Here are my thoughts about the actual mechanics:
*A member (including priests) could visit any temple in order to affiliate or unaffiliate with a sect (which is term I am choosing to use to describe the differentiation).
*Lords could choose to dedicate, rededicate, or undedicate (return it to the mainstream practices) a temple in their region to denote which form of worship is practiced there (i.e. which sect controls the temple).
*Within the religion, peasant worshippers could be converted into sects by priests of that sect, by the dedication of temples to that sect, and by being ruled by lords of that sect. Almost a religion within a religion, though to outsiders it all looks the same.
*Non-members cannot see distinctions of sect on followers, priests or temples. It all looks the same from the outside.
*A sect would be able to schism, creating a separate religion and taking all members, peasant followers and temples dedicated to it with it.
The schisming part is still a little tricky. Who can do it, and when? I would lean toward any priest of the sect could initiate one in the manner of a rebellion, but then noble members of the sect would still be allowed to choose whether or not to remain under the umbrella of the mainstream faith. I think a countdown of days would then begin during which members could choose to stay 'loyalist' or go 'rebel'. Temples follow their lords. Common followers would require some other kind of mechanic. Once the countdown finishes, all 'rebel' nobles and temples leave the religion and become part of a new one with the schismatic priest as its founder.
-
Geronus--perfect.
I still think we need a mechanism to allow the merger of religions. It would have to require that both faiths acknowlege each other as variants for a period of one year. And I think that some of the followers (hardliners) would think that the merger is heresy, and disband--leading to a 20% loss of followers.
-
Who can create a Sect/Cult?
I suggest either a priest ,an elder or both.
Who can Schism?
I suggest an elder (priest) in the cult/Sect.
What do peasants do?
- If there is an temple they follow the temple
- no temple but an priest estate, they follow the priest(multiple priests mean half the peasants join new religion)
- no temple + no priest estate, follow the lords religion
- none of the above: half for each.
-
Who can create a Sect/Cult?
I suggest either a priest ,an elder or both.
Who can Schism?
I suggest an elder (priest) in the cult/Sect.
What do peasants do?
- If there is an temple they follow the temple
- no temple but an priest estate, they follow the priest(multiple priests mean half the peasants join new religion)
- no temple + no priest estate, follow the lords religion
- none of the above: half for each.
I'd say creating a sect should be an Elder, Schism would have to be Elder Priest. What the peasants do makes sense (with some randomness added because nothing in life is ever neat).
-
My only concern about limiting the ability to schism to Elders is it makes it too easy to maintain control of the situation. A founder or other high ranker can simply demote anyone he suspects and never promote anyone who might schism, i.e. anyone who's in a sect.
It should be a spiritual leader who declares the schism (i.e. a priest), but I think it gets complicated to have sects have their own parallel group of Elders. After all, a sect theoretically still follows the hierarchy of the existing religion until they actually schism. This is why I thought to allow any priest of a sect to declare an *intention* to schism, but then create mechanics that force reliance on other nobles (players) going along with the plan. How many nobles you convince to join you affects how many temples, followers, etc. come with you.
-
what happens in a religion with 1 priest only and he decides to bugger off and have his own sect? does he basically start a coup and takes the whole lot over?
-
Not a bad question.
I'd say nothing really changes, except the old religion is left without any priests, and likely without any Elders either. Of course if there's only one priest and he's *not* an Elder who can basically take control of the religion and do what he wants with it anyway, then it's probably good that he can schism so that he can at least reclaim the role of Elder. Otherwise that religion is on the fact track to dying.
-
A religion without at least one elder priest will quickly fall apart, just like a religion without at least one temple.
-
Not a bad question.
I'd say nothing really changes, except the old religion is left without any priests, and likely without any Elders either. Of course if there's only one priest and he's *not* an Elder who can basically take control of the religion and do what he wants with it anyway, then it's probably good that he can schism so that he can at least reclaim the role of Elder. Otherwise that religion is on the fact track to dying.
When I was the only priest in my religion I was automatic promoted to highest non-founder rank.
-
ok... imagine you have a prophet and then a load of lay elders from rank 2-9 and then rank 10, a priest who happens to be an elder.
i don't think if the founder gets deported, the rank 10 priest will be promoted to rank 1 (or whatever)
-----------------
now, obviously if that priest decides to split, he should take a big chunk, but I don't see why some lay member (elder or otherwise) who disagrees with such a course can't convert to priest to keep the old lot as it were.
as with the clicking race with succeeding founder (or some such as mentioned in bugtracker as solution to loss of prophet/leader), it shouldn't be resolved immediately, but with a delay until next sunrise (or the one after, for example)
-
I'd think you'd just let it play put as I proposed. The schism is announced, notifying all members of the religion. For a pre-determined period of time (1 day? 3?), members would be free to choose sides.
-
I prefer the one of the ideas suggested earlier. I think it would be best if every religion HAD to have at least one sect/cult/denomination. This would ensure that all Temples, priests and commoners are a part of a sect and make the dividing line clear in the case of succession.
When a religion is created it comes, by default, with a default sect/cult/denomination So if I create the religion "Nomonisim" it would come with a sect/cult/denomination I might call "Orthodox Nomonism." When someone joins the religion "Nomonisim" they are automatically a part of "Orthodox Nomonisim" as it is the sole sect/cult/denomination. All temples built are dedicated to "Orthodox Nomonism" for the same reason. All commoners converted by priests or Temples of "Orthodox Nomonism" are a part of that sect/cult/denomination.
A while later a priest chooses to create a new sect/cult/denomination of "Nomonism" called "Jestaric Nomonism" He is the only member. At this point all members of "Nomonism" are informed of the new sect and its unique beliefs. All members of "Nomonism" can freely choose to dedicate themselves to any sect/cult/denomination within a religion at any time. A lord can choose to rededicate a temple to and cult/sect/denomination of "Nomonism" at any time (At a cost perhaps?). When new players join the religion, they are given a choice as to which sect/cult/denomination to dedicate themselves.
Commoners could just see a religion/sect combination as separate religions. If an "Orthodox Nomonism" temple has been a region for a while, all the peasants converted will be "Orthodox Nomonists." If the region Lord then dedicates the temple to "Jestaric Nomonism" the peasants will slowly be converted from "Orthodox Nomonism" to "Jestaric Nomonism." Commoners converted by an "Orthodox Nomonist" priest would be "Orthodox Nomonist" until they are converted by a temple/priest of another sect/cult/denomination or another religion.
At this point every temple, player and peasant will always be of one sect/cult/denomination or another. If a sect/cult/denomination succeeds from the main religion to become it's own, independent religion, whatever is aligned with that sect/cult/denomination at that time comes along. That is it!
I would think that a sect/cult/denomination could be started by any priest of the religion. Each denomination could have it's own ranking of priests. Only the highest ranking priest of a sect/cult/denomination could initiate a succession. When a priest changes from one sect/cult/denomination to another, heir rank will be determined by the leaders of the sect/cult/denomination they switch to. They are, after all, saying, "You guys are SO right. I submit myself to your teachings!" As an example, if an Elder Priest on "Orthodox Nomonism" decides to join "Jestaric Nomonism," his rank in "Jestaric Nomonism" would be determined by the priests of that sect/cult/denomination. They could decide that the former Elder is nothing more than the lowest priest of "Jestaric Nomonism." They could make it a lateral transfer. It could also be a promotion. I can see the benefits of recruiting a respected member of another sect/cult/denomination. Promotion/lateral transfers could be a part of the negotiations leading up to the transfer.