I'm not proposing this, but posing a hypothetical. What if all the Continents were put on one map with existing realm with nobles in place with some shortish travel time in between continents and lastly a way for armies to travel further for longer.
I am mostly curious if realms on the same continent would band together to fight other ones, or if realms would try to find new allies from the other continents. I think realms would generally stick together with their continent mates at first until everything just felt like one map.
Well that would be super chaotic. Dwilight might be conquered for good. Or if BT gets invaded again, other realms can help stop that even.
Hypothetically - there is a reason I seperated the game worlds even though it is a lot more work on the coding end. Having just one game world would have been a lot easier.
I actually like having separate worlds. It might have felt weird to have all those realms together. It would have been tough if some random realms landed behind Sirion while it was already fighting 5v1.
Quote from: MaleMaldives on September 20, 2011, 08:38:59 AM
I'm not proposing this, but posing a hypothetical.
Hypothetically, I'd probably end up leaving. Dwilight and (kinda) the Far East are RP islands and that's where my two favourite characters are. Forcing everyone into one island will stop the RP atmosphere for those who don't stick to it and I'd be peed off :)
However, if the RP atmosphere stayed, I think someone would try to conquer the world (Lukon seems like the realm to want that). You probably won't see as many continent-wide federations as you might expect, but probably neighbouring continents would align - e.g. If I can move from Ohnar West to Madina on one route, they'd probably become allies. Wars would be bigger and last longer, probably permanent wars between some blocs.
Overall, I don't think much would change.
i don't think it would be impossible to basically keep things as they are functionally, but have everything on the same map. (ie.. no marching army across continent, no diplomatic stuff, etc.)
the only thing that would be useful to come out of that is cross continent religions.
Actually, it would be nice if some sort of world map was created. Not with any in-game effects, but simply to have a more global view of Battlemasterra.
Quote from: Shizzle on September 20, 2011, 11:35:07 AM
Actually, it would be nice if some sort of world map was created. Not with any in-game effects, but simply to have a more global view of Battlemasterra.
QFT.
Quote from: Shizzle on September 20, 2011, 11:35:07 AM
Actually, it would be nice if some sort of world map was created. Not with any in-game effects, but simply to have a more global view of Battlemasterra.
World map? Surely you need look no further than on the coaster by your computer and that mug that sits upon it (hasn't everyone got one of these?)
http://www.cafepress.co.uk/trademaster.42416628# (http://www.cafepress.co.uk/trademaster.42416628#)
Quote from: James on September 20, 2011, 01:34:00 PM
World map? Surely you need look no further than on the coaster by your computer and that mug that sits upon it (hasn't everyone got one of these?)
http://www.cafepress.co.uk/trademaster.42416628# (http://www.cafepress.co.uk/trademaster.42416628#)
Wow :) A version with the same resolution as the Dynamic maps would be nice, though :)
Oooooh... Lukon would have things to kill!
Lukon's Armies only move once a day though :P
And...their 10k army would no longer be the biggest around.
For my money the big military powerhouse would be an SA/Adgharian Pact as they would take about 30 seconds to come to some sort of agreement. The colonies probably have the best pure politicians so...Outer Tilog FTW.
Quote from: Heq on October 24, 2011, 04:51:22 AM
For my money the big military powerhouse would be an SA/Adgharian Pact as they would take about 30 seconds to come to some sort of agreement. The colonies probably have the best pure politicians so...Outer Tilog FTW.
You're nuts. the Order of the Hawk (Arcaea, etc) would destroy Outer Tilog in 3 seconds.
Quote from: Heq on October 24, 2011, 04:51:22 AM... an SA/Adgharian Pact as they would take about 30 seconds to come to some sort of agreement.
I can't say that I could see anything like that happening. So far as I know, SA has only ever had one agreement with any other religion, The Seven. And that's only because the realm that the Seven was founded in joined Morek en masse. Other than that, SA mostly ignores all other faiths.
Quote from: egamma on October 24, 2011, 07:55:56 PM
You're nuts. the Order of the Hawk (Arcaea, etc) would destroy Outer Tilog in 3 seconds.
Make that 6 to compensate for colonies speed. ;)
Indirik, that's kinda my point. Adgharianism and Blood Star worship are profoundly alien to each other and oddly enough it's common ground which tends to cause dissent. After all if Tark wasn't Sartan who would give a damn?
The idea of a triumverate religion set-up (each faith has three profoundly different ecclesiatical orders) means that at least in theory each position would have someone else to communicate directly with who they likely have a more similar viewpoint to then even members of their own faith. I only know a couple of the continents and though the characters are completely independent if the overlap between say, Ciann and Allison (each of whom fulfills eerily similar roles within their faith) is the same as between the other branches of SA and Adgharianism it would just make a natural match IMO.
Outer Tilog would probably drop below Rio and Sint the moment the stories of the last invasion started flying around. Outer Tilog is evil and kinda crude, but they didn't betray mankind to daimons or monsters (actually, if they were really on the up and up with investigation they'd burn Nothoi first and Sint second).
Or Enweil, for also traditionally siding with, and worshiping, daimons?
Quote from: Heq on October 25, 2011, 08:03:08 AMIndirik, that's kinda my point. Adgharianism and Blood Star worship are profoundly alien to each other and oddly enough it's common ground which tends to cause dissent.
It's not odd at all. Competition for limited resources brings conflict.
Any two IG religions necessarily consume the same resources: Peasants and nobles. Since each peasant and each noble can only follow a single religion, that means that all religions are necessarily mutually exclusive. It's not like you can follow SA to fill your "astrology slot" and Adgharhinism to fill your "god slot", etc. You either follow SA or you follow Adgharhinism.
The most any religion could expect to get out of SA would be some vague admission that they are some kind of strange variant of the worship of the Bloodstars. If you're not that, then SA doesn't really care about you. In fact, the more different you are, and less common ground we have, the less we care to have any dealings with you at all.
We, so far, have not been interested in any kind of "strategic partnership" or shared occupation of territory. The very concept of such a thing, when it comes to religion, is really rather odd anyway.
Quote from: Indirik on October 25, 2011, 02:25:40 PM
We, so far, have not been interested in any kind of "strategic partnership" or shared occupation of territory. The very concept of such a thing, when it comes to religion, is really rather odd anyway.
Also, we're winning anyway. We may have a different view if we weren't.
Quote from: vonGenf on October 25, 2011, 02:45:51 PMAlso, we're winning anyway. We may have a different view if we weren't.
Situational ethics, eh?
Quote from: Indirik on October 25, 2011, 03:09:23 PM
Situational ethics, eh?
Situational ethics are the only ethics (according to Hegel.)
EDIT: Then again, Hegel was a pretty cooked unit.
Quote from: Indirik on October 25, 2011, 03:09:23 PM
ethics
I thought you were talking about religions? ;D
Ahh. . true. I am duly chastised. :(
Quote from: vonGenf on October 25, 2011, 04:21:09 PM
I thought you were talking about religions? ;D
The two are fairly intertwined. Almost every religion (I'm looking at you, Christianity...) has an ethical system that derives from basic assumptions found in the religion such as the Hindu cycle of rebirth or the Jewish lex talionis. In my (admittedly limited) understanding of this area of philosophy it is impossible to discuss the specifics of some of the most prevalent ethical systems without also discussing the religions behind them.
Quote from: Draco Tanos on October 25, 2011, 10:04:36 AM
Or Enweil, for also traditionally siding with, and worshiping, daimons?
Pfff. We only gained the daimons' respects because we royally kicked their butts in the third invasion and because we didn't pussy out in front of the monsters in the fourth. Who would worship the very creatures they defeated?
Blood Cultists like... You? =D
Quote from: Draco Tanos on October 26, 2011, 08:44:41 AM
Blood Cultists like... You? =D
Truly fascinating how non-cultists know the Blood Cult better than cultists themselves.
Quote from: Draco Tanos on October 26, 2011, 08:44:41 AM
Blood Cultists like... You? =D
The Blood Cult had an entire sect (The Sect of Xerotl which was formed when the Blood Cult absorbed the Church of Teros) who taught the Daimons were an evil to be destroyed or -- if that was not possible -- controlled and kept at bay.
It also had a sect that recognized Daimons as gods, but recognizing a thing as a god is very different from worship (i.e. God and Satan in modern Christianity dogma). So far as I know no one but the few who lost their minds in the Netherworld ever worshiped them, and Valachi himself led the aforementioned Sect of Xerotl.
Quote from: ^ban^ on October 26, 2011, 06:59:54 PM
The Blood Cult had an entire sect (The Sect of Xerotl which was formed when the Blood Cult absorbed the Church of Teros) who taught the Daimons were an evil to be destroyed or -- if that was not possible -- controlled and kept at bay.
It also had a sect that recognized Daimons as gods, but recognizing a thing as a god is very different from worship (i.e. God and Satan in modern Christianity dogma). So far as I know no one but the few who lost their minds in the Netherworld ever worshiped them, and Valachi himself led the aforementioned Sect of Xerotl.
I was unaware that Christians though Satan was a god, that is rather messy with the whole there is only 1 god belief.
Because they don't. Lucifer (the Devil, Satan, whathaveyou) is generally deemed a fallen angel, at one point God's most beloved. He coveted God's power and tried to seize it and so was cast down with the other rebellious elements. At no point is Lucifer/Satan ever viewed to be a God.
As for the Blood Cult. Yeah. Okay. "We hate daimons! Only -some- of us worship them! But we ally with them all the time and still seek to crucify others for doing the EXACT SAME THING! Even Sint! Ignore that they betrayed the daimons and cut them off from the old Netherworld with a Temple of Light while we marched along side the daimons to destroy bastions of humanity!"
Quote from: Draco Tanos on October 27, 2011, 12:31:54 AM
Because they don't. Lucifer (the Devil, Satan, whathaveyou) is generally deemed a fallen angel, at one point God's most beloved. He coveted God's power and tried to seize it and so was cast down with the other rebellious elements. At no point is Lucifer/Satan ever viewed to be a God.
As for the Blood Cult. Yeah. Okay. "We hate daimons! Only -some- of us worship them! But we ally with them all the time and still seek to crucify others for doing the EXACT SAME THING! Even Sint! Ignore that they betrayed the daimons and cut them off from the old Netherworld with a Temple of Light while we marched along side the daimons to destroy bastions of humanity!"
Incorrect my dear man, The Fallen Archangel (not just a mere angel, some even suggest he was a Throne which I find doubtful) coveted God's Love of Humanity. Because God loved Humanity more than his Angels (Angels were placed under Humans).
He was jealous of Humanity.
Quote from: Ramiel on October 27, 2011, 01:20:37 AM
Incorrect my dear man, The Fallen Archangel (not just a mere angel, some even suggest he was a Throne which I find doubtful) coveted God's Love of Humanity. Because God loved Humanity more than his Angels (Angels were placed under Humans).
He was jealous of Humanity.
This varies greatly depending on the particular variant of the Christian Faith. Under classical Jewish beliefs Satan was the Angel tasked with challenging the faith of humans. You can see this clearly in the Book of Job. It is generally accepted that in this usages Satan is not a name, but a title given to an angel when tasked with challenging faith.
The traditional Catholic view is that Satan wants to lead people away from love and worship of God. He was described as being among the highest of all angels (Brightest in the Sky) but was not explicitly named as a Archangel. It is inferred that his pride prevented him from bowing down to God, and seek ruler ship over heaven, but again there is no definite biblical reference to this. It is worth noting that the new testament never identifies Satan as an angel, though the Book of Revelations refers to the Dragon (Satan) and his angels, so it is generally intercepted that he is among the angels. Again here there is disagreement over whether this as already occurred, or if it is a future sign of the "end" times.
Anyway what is important is that much of the tradition surrounding the Devil are from Post Medieval writings, interpretations and existing mythology.
Quote from: De-Legro on October 27, 2011, 01:55:09 AM
He was described as being among the highest of all angels (Brightest in the Sky) but was not explicitly named as a Archangel.
Not sure why he should be, when Archangels are only the second of the (IIRC) six different ranks of angels.
Let's see if I can remember them all, as close to in order as I can manage: angels, archangels, dominions, thrones, cherubim, seraphim
(Of course, this, too, depends on which particular branch of Christianity you listen to.)
Quote from: Anaris on October 27, 2011, 04:23:33 AM
Not sure why he should be, when Archangels are only the second of the (IIRC) six different ranks of angels.
Let's see if I can remember them all, as close to in order as I can manage: angels, archangels, dominions, thrones, cherubim, seraphim
(Of course, this, too, depends on which particular branch of Christianity you listen to.)
There are a few different hierarchies, again most were formulated in the middle ages. The most influential is arguably "The Celestial Hierarchy" which formed 3 spheres of 3 choirs, or types of angel in each sphere. In addition to the ones you listed there are also the Principalities, Powers and Virtues.
It is important to differentiate between archangels (second lowest category, of the third sphere whom's responsibility was warriors and messengers and the Archangels, which according to some interpretations where the seven highest Seraphim and thus the highest of all the choirs. Since the Seraphim's are often portrayed as caretakers of Gods throne chanting "Holy Holy is the Lord of the hosts and burning with love for God, and in many traditions it is the requirement of continual adulation for God that drove Satan to rebel, it is common to place Satan and his "rival" Michael as seraphim.
Anyway very little exists in the bible about any of the hierarchies, so they are at best a interpretation of limited data.
It going be a brand new world and environment to explore if all the continents merged. In terms of gameplay values, alliance, enemies made, el cetera. Perhaps the biggest realm of every continents have a slugfest once in awhile and see who has the mightiest army in whole BM? I am keeping my fingers crossed for this slugfest proposal 8)
Quote from: ^ban^ on October 26, 2011, 06:59:54 PM
The Blood Cult had an entire sect (The Sect of Xerotl which was formed when the Blood Cult absorbed the Church of Teros) who taught the Daimons were an evil to be destroyed or -- if that was not possible -- controlled and kept at bay.
It also had a sect that recognized Daimons as gods, but recognizing a thing as a god is very different from worship (i.e. God and Satan in modern Christianity dogma). So far as I know no one but the few who lost their minds in the Netherworld ever worshiped them, and Valachi himself led the aforementioned Sect of Xerotl.
Indeed, the only daimon to have come to BT and to be recognized was Arcane, and he was eventually demoted in the divine hierarchy. After all, Cultists were involved in getting him to leave BT, and tried to make sure he could never come back. Mind you, I never really thought he wanted to. Those who were a little too friendly with the daimons were the first to switch over to Daimon Worship when it came back. Not many did, though, and they weren't meaningful cultists either.
Besides, the Cult was polytheistic, not monotheistic. The inspiration came from aztec mythology, not christian mythology. As such, there were good gods and bad gods, none all-mighty. A "god", as such, is basically any powerful creature of supernatural origin or with supernatural powers.
I mean, really, some of these gods, both in America and in Europe ancient faiths, are pretty damn puny.
Alliances with the daimons were convenient, because the same ones that kept pestering the daimons also kept persecuting the Cult. The Cult would never have aligned itself so closed to the daimons had they not been constantly persecuted as they were.
The doctrine was, since almost the beginning, that daimons are tools to be manipulated to our own ends, and therefore not to be objects of worship.
Hmmm I though in the old Jewish belief system that Satan was... hang on...
It makes no sense. Satan, in most texts I have read agree that he, was second in power to God and fell after Humans were created so after Adam and Lillith and Eve. But he got pissed off after a period of time that humans had already been around.
Yet he is also portrayed as the Snake which tempted Eve with the Apple from the tree of Knowledge.
And this is after Lillith (aka Lilith, Lilieth) has already eaten from an apple from three of Life (thus becoming immortal like the angels, which is a very big thig since only 'free will for Humans and immortality for the angels' are what divide them - oh and wings :D ) and according to the religious texts - a consort of Satan, which is absolute pishposh if you ask me, more likely she just went and had fun being immortal! - I cant remember if Satan tempted Lillith or not. But her first Sin was to not lie under Adam, her second to eat from the Tree of Life (the other forbidden fruit).
So we have a case where:
Angels do not have Free Will, yet they do.
Satan fell from Grace long after humans were around, yet he tempted Eve and possible Lilith.
Lucifer - The Brightest Light - is also accorded as Satan. In many texts Lucifer and Satan (Shaitan) are two different Angels, in some they are the same.
As is:
Beelzebub - ruler of demons.
The Devil - King of Demons.
Abbadon - an apparent another angel.
Belial - yet another angel.
Leviathan - the great serpent.
Beelzebub, The Devil, Leviathan can easily be titles. But Belial, Abbadon, Lucifer and Satan seem to be 4 different angels...
Quote from: Ramiel on October 27, 2011, 01:09:00 PM
Hmmm I though in the old Jewish belief system that Satan was... hang on...
It makes no sense. Satan, in most texts I have read agree that he, was second in power to God and fell after Humans were created so after Adam and Lillith and Eve. But he got pissed off after a period of time that humans had already been around.
Yet he is also portrayed as the Snake which tempted Eve with the Apple from the tree of Knowledge.
And this is after Lillith (aka Lilith, Lilieth) has already eaten from an apple from three of Life (thus becoming immortal like the angels, which is a very big thig since only 'free will for Humans and immortality for the angels' are what divide them - oh and wings :D ) and according to the religious texts - a consort of Satan, which is absolute pishposh if you ask me, more likely she just went and had fun being immortal! - I cant remember if Satan tempted Lillith or not. But her first Sin was to not lie under Adam, her second to eat from the Tree of Life (the other forbidden fruit).
So we have a case where:
Angels do not have Free Will, yet they do.
Satan fell from Grace long after humans were around, yet he tempted Eve and possible Lilith.
Lucifer - The Brightest Light - is also accorded as Satan. In many texts Lucifer and Satan (Shaitan) are two different Angels, in some they are the same.
As is:
Beelzebub - ruler of demons.
The Devil - King of Demons.
Abbadon - an apparent another angel.
Belial - yet another angel.
Leviathan - the great serpent.
Beelzebub, The Devil, Leviathan can easily be titles. But Belial, Abbadon, Lucifer and Satan seem to be 4 different angels...
Yay for plot consistency! :D
Quote from: Ramiel on October 27, 2011, 01:09:00 PM
Hmmm I though in the old Jewish belief system that Satan was... hang on...
It makes no sense. Satan, in most texts I have read agree that he, was second in power to God and fell after Humans were created so after Adam and Lillith and Eve. But he got pissed off after a period of time that humans had already been around.
Satan was an arch-angel. Above regular angels, but Gabriel would be at the same level, or perhaps above, Satan.
And Lilith isn't mentioned at all in Christian theology--that seems to be a later addition.
Quote
Yet he is also portrayed as the Snake which tempted Eve with the Apple from the tree of Knowledge.
He took on the appearance of a snake--but appearances can be deceiving.
Quote
And this is after Lillith (aka Lilith, Lilieth) has already eaten from an apple from three of Life (thus becoming immortal like the angels, which is a very big thig since only 'free will for Humans and immortality for the angels' are what divide them - oh and wings :D ) and according to the religious texts - a consort of Satan, which is absolute pishposh if you ask me, more likely she just went and had fun being immortal! - I cant remember if Satan tempted Lillith or not. But her first Sin was to not lie under Adam, her second to eat from the Tree of Life (the other forbidden fruit).
Again, going off the Christian version of Genesis--which I thought was identical to the Jewish version, but anyway--Adam and Eve's sin was eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Since God had told them not to do that, that was the
only sin they could possibly commit--so of course, they had to do it.
The penalty of sin is death, so that sin cancelled out the previous eating of the Tree of Life's fruit. They were banished from the Garden of Eden so that they couldn't sin and yet live eternally.
Quote
So we have a case where:
Angels do not have Free Will, yet they do.
All I have ever read says that Angels freely choose to follow God's commands--and that fallen angels, aka demons, freely choose to ignore God's commands.
Quote
Satan fell from Grace long after humans were around, yet he tempted Eve and possible Lilith.
I think you mean "long before". Just because he fell from grace doesn't mean he lost his powers.
Quote
Lucifer - The Brightest Light - is also accorded as Satan. In many texts Lucifer and Satan (Shaitan) are two different Angels, in some they are the same.
As is:
Beelzebub - ruler of demons.
The Devil - King of Demons.
Abbadon - an apparent another angel.
Belial - yet another angel.
Leviathan - the great serpent.
Beelzebub, The Devil, Leviathan can easily be titles. But Belial, Abbadon, Lucifer and Satan seem to be 4 different angels...
I've never heard of Lucifer and Satan being a different person, but that's fine.
So... Who temped Eve with the apple, if Lucifer fell from grace long after?
Quote from: Chénier on October 27, 2011, 08:22:07 PM
So... Who temped Eve with the apple, if Lucifer fell from grace long after?
I always thought people were too quick to dismiss the possibility that Eve may just happened to be a huge fan of apples.
I mean, apples are
good. Seriously.
Gotta say the genesis account never says the fruit was an apple. That idea was depicted by artists who usually drew the tree as an apple tree.
Quote from: Adriddae on October 27, 2011, 08:48:34 PM
Gotta say the genesis account never says the fruit was an apple. That idea was depicted by artists who usually drew the tree as an apple tree.
And the Devil was not first called Lucifer until the third century.
And Mary Magdalene was not first conflated with the sinner who washed Jesus' feet until the sixth century.
An awful lot of what we take for gospel (if you'll excuse the pun) is either artistic license, later theological addition, or just confusion so old it's become ingrained.
...It's also important to remember that there were a number of other books that were not made part of the "official" bible in the 4th century, some of them for largely political reasons.
I lost track of the topic, we changed from a hipotetial scenario to a religion debate.
WOOOW!
Lilith comes before Christianity - its old Jewish.
Quote from: Ramiel on October 28, 2011, 12:47:33 AM
Lilith comes before Christianity - its old Jewish.
Yes, but her placement as Adams first wife only developed in Jewish folklore in about the 10th century. She was first mentions in a Babylonian Talmud I think from around 500 AD. I think the Dead Sea Scrolls also made a reference to her. Earlier references generally cast her as a demon or a type of demon. The only biblical reference list her among 8 unclean animals when describing the desolation of Edom.
You do realise that Satan is a metaphore, do you? :P
Quote from: Shizzle on October 28, 2011, 08:15:15 AM
You do realise that Satan is a metaphore, do you? :P
And so is God. What's your point? ;)
Quote from: Chénier on October 28, 2011, 09:01:34 AM
And so is God. What's your point? ;)
That this whole discussion is pointless :) Well, it's not really a discussion, though.
Tom should probably move the later part of this to the Background forum.