Quote from: Chénier on October 27, 2012, 05:11:11 PM
A bit akward... "FAITHFUL, RISE AGAINST THE USURPERS OF PAISLY, RID US OF FLORENCE!" Faithful go to torch her estates, invading forces go all "Noooo! Don't burn Florence's estates! Die crazy mob! Let's arrest that priest and hand him over to the authorities we are trying to destroy!"
I wonder...
Does chance of catching an auto da fe increase if you have soldiers present?
If so... will that include even enemy soldiers?
If so, that SHOULD be changed, as it's clearly not how ti should work. I understand Tom's rationale for still making you be arrested, but troops friendly to you shouldn't IMPROVE the odds of your being captured.
Quote from: Vellos on October 28, 2012, 01:36:48 AM
I wonder...
Does chance of catching an auto da fe increase if you have soldiers present?
If so... will that include even enemy soldiers?
If so, that SHOULD be changed, as it's clearly not how ti should work. I understand Tom's rationale for still making you be arrested, but troops friendly to you shouldn't IMPROVE the odds of your being captured.
Nonsense, upsetting the natural order and letting peasants run amok is a crime that everyone should stop amd punish. Can't be having those damned priests give peasants ideas now can we?
Quote from: Stabbity on October 28, 2012, 02:06:29 AM
Nonsense, upsetting the natural order and letting peasants run amok is a crime that everyone should stop amd punish. Can't be having those damned priests give peasants ideas now can we?
Peasants led by a noble.
In any case, they should throw the priest in their own realm's dungeons, not another's.
Quote from: Chénier on October 28, 2012, 02:08:14 AM
Peasants led by a noble.
In any case, they should throw the priest in their own realm's dungeons, not another's.
Personally leading a mob of unwashed peasants to disrupt the natural hierarchy isn't noble behaivor. Priests should feel lucky they are recognized as a noble by the arresting unit and imprisoned rather than hung on the spot.
Quote from: Stabbity on October 28, 2012, 02:14:50 AM
Personally leading a mob of unwashed peasants to disrupt the natural hierarchy isn't noble behaivor. Priests should feel lucky they are recognized as a noble by the arresting unit and imprisoned rather than hung on the spot.
Oh? But
every army consists of mobs of unwashed peasants led by nobles. And such armies are often used to disrupt the natural hierarchy.
Quote from: Daycryn on October 28, 2012, 02:39:39 AM
Oh? But every army consists of mobs of unwashed peasants led by nobles. And such armies are often used to disrupt the natural hierarchy.
Those are lawfully raised men at arms that were equipped by nobles. Totally different than random.mobs removing people from their estates.
Quote from: Stabbity on October 28, 2012, 02:26:10 AM
Those are lawfully raised men at arms that were equipped by nobles. Totally different than random.mobs removing people from their estates.
Well, following the law of the god(s)/stars is a noble thing to do, and raising peasants against the heathen is thus lawful when the priest who does it is a noble. As for equipment, well, I don't think that matters so much, and plenty of units are just draftees with pitchforks and scythes or hunting bows and stuff.
Quote from: Daycryn on October 28, 2012, 02:33:55 AM
Well, following the law of the god(s)/stars is a noble thing to do, and raising peasants against the heathen is thus lawful when the priest who does it is a noble. As for equipment, well, I don't think that matters so much, and plenty of units are just draftees with pitchforks and scythes or hunting bows and stuff.
If you're a savage and recruit a unit with like 15% maybe they brought their own equipment, otherwise peasants A. Couldn't afford weaponry and B. Weren't allowed to own it.
When you and a peasant mob rise up and oust someone from a position you're committing a seriois offense no religion could get away with endorsing publicly. You're using peasants to defy everything nobility stands for. You oust a Lord and think thats the only effect, he's not a Lord. There are second and third order effects here. You just nullified the authority of the Duke that appointed the Lord and in turn directly usurped a King's authority. Not to mention just insulted a slew of Knights.
Quote from: Stabbity on October 28, 2012, 02:49:03 AM
If you're a savage and recruit a unit with like 15% maybe they brought their own equipment, otherwise peasants A. Couldn't afford weaponry and B. Weren't allowed to own it.
When you and a peasant mob rise up and oust someone from a position you're committing a seriois offense no religion could get away with endorsing publicly. You're using peasants to defy everything nobility stands for. You oust a Lord and think thats the only effect, he's not a Lord. There are second and third order effects here. You just nullified the authority of the Duke that appointed the Lord and in turn directly usurped a King's authority. Not to mention just insulted a slew of Knights.
Peasants not allowed to own weaponry? I'm not sure about that.
As for not being able to afford it, that depends on what you classify as a weapon. This is the middle ages equivalent we're talking about, there are plenty of wooden sticks to sharpen, farm equipment to use, etc. And recruiting a unit with 15% or whatever doesn't make you a savage at all. Just a different sort of common peasant folk the noble is leading.
Knights, lords, and dukes are ousted from their position all the time. Religion merely provides yet another rationale for doing so. (The others are primarily war and justice). And people defy the authority of kings all the time! Hell, that's kind of the main thing we do. Follow one king, kill another. Support one king, betray another (or better yet, the same king!) So it's hardly some sort of universal offense. And there are plenty of religions which would, could, or have in the past endorsed such behavior.
Quote from: Daycryn on October 28, 2012, 03:03:02 AM
Peasants not allowed to own weaponry? I'm not sure about that.
As for not being able to afford it, that depends on what you classify as a weapon. This is the middle ages equivalent we're talking about, there are plenty of wooden sticks to sharpen, farm equipment to use, etc. And recruiting a unit with 15% or whatever doesn't make you a savage at all. Just a different sort of common peasant folk the noble is leading.
Knights, lords, and dukes are ousted from their position all the time. Religion merely provides yet another rationale for doing so. (The others are primarily war and justice). And people defy the authority of kings all the time! Hell, that's kind of the main thing we do. Follow one king, kill another. Support one king, betray another (or better yet, the same king!) So it's hardly some sort of universal offense. And there are plenty of religions which would, could, or have in the past endorsed such behavior.
Farm implements and sharpened sticks are as to weapons as a super soaker is to a rifle. They are called "improvised" weapons for a reason. No one can simply outlaw anything that could ever be used as a weapon, because everything would be illegal. Swords, pikes, ACTUAL weapons were illegal for the peasantry to own unless they were actually serving in a capacity where they needed them such as being in the town guard.
Losing a title due to war or being convicted of an offense such as treason is ENTIRELY different than an unruly peasant mob lead by a priest with no legal authority forcing someone from their estate. People do not defy Kings all the time, and those who do usually lead short lives.
It stands simply that a priest conducting an auto da fae is violating a very principle law. Kings and Dukes give titles, no one else does. Titles aren't arbitrary things that come and go, and the only means to remove one is by force. When a priest forces a noble from his post, his is openly defying Kingly or Duchal authority, and would be arrested on the spot.
Quote from: Stabbity on October 28, 2012, 07:42:03 PM
Farm implements and sharpened sticks are as to weapons as a super soaker is to a rifle. They are called "improvised" weapons for a reason. No one can simply outlaw anything that could ever be used as a weapon, because everything would be illegal. Swords, pikes, ACTUAL weapons were illegal for the peasantry to own unless they were actually serving in a capacity where they needed them such as being in the town guard.
Losing a title due to war or being convicted of an offense such as treason is ENTIRELY different than an unruly peasant mob lead by a priest with no legal authority forcing someone from their estate. People do not defy Kings all the time, and those who do usually lead short lives.
It stands simply that a priest conducting an auto da fae is violating a very principle law. Kings and Dukes give titles, no one else does. Titles aren't arbitrary things that come and go, and the only means to remove one is by force. When a priest forces a noble from his post, his is openly defying Kingly or Duchal authority, and would be arrested on the spot.
Kings... by their divine right? Granted by God? Represented on earth by his priests?
As for defying feudal authority... what on earth is a takeover, if not that?
And soldiers, who are they? When Britain went to war, they had a whole lot of peasants in their forces. Military equipment, back in the ages, was quite often farming tools modified for warfare.
This isn't some peasant revolt that wants self-rule. This is a high-noble (royal) elder priest using the authority vested in him by the Church to expel a non-believer.
Quote from: Chénier on October 28, 2012, 08:17:40 PM
Kings... by their divine right? Granted by God? Represented on earth by his priests?
As for defying feudal authority... what on earth is a takeover, if not that?
And soldiers, who are they? When Britain went to war, they had a whole lot of peasants in their forces. Military equipment, back in the ages, was quite often farming tools modified for warfare.
This isn't some peasant revolt that wants self-rule. This is a high-noble (royal) elder priest using the authority vested in him by the Church to expel a non-believer.
Divine right is a concept that came later than the time period BM is based in, and even then secular and ecclesiastical were two very different things. Some random Bishop couldn't just walk into Essex and proclaim that the Earl was no longer Earl, even with a mob. He would have been arrested and executed.
A takeover is a very moot point. Its a King imposing his will on another King. Peasants lawfully raised to constitute an army are totally different than a priest whipping up a mob to oust someone. Its illegal. Hence why you get arrested.
Quote from: Stabbity on October 28, 2012, 09:12:16 PM
A takeover is a very moot point. Its a King imposing his will on another King. Peasants lawfully raised to constitute an army are totally different than a priest whipping up a mob to oust someone. Its illegal. Hence why you get arrested.
But nobles trying to destroy the controlling regime should not arrest allied nobles helping them and ship them off to an enemy dungeon.I'm fine with them not reducing the chance. But the presence of allied troops should not
increase the chance of capture.
Quote from: Vellos on October 28, 2012, 09:51:46 PM
But nobles trying to destroy the controlling regime should not arrest allied nobles helping them and ship them off to an enemy dungeon.
I'm fine with them not reducing the chance. But the presence of allied troops should not increase the chance of capture.
Try arguing that with a bunch of illiterate peasants trying to abide by noble law that they don't really
get. They can be summarily executed basically at any time, for strange and archaic reasons or none at all, so in their desperation to do the right thing they sometimes cock it up.
Quote from: Stabbity on October 28, 2012, 09:12:16 PM
Divine right is a concept that came later than the time period BM is based in, and even then secular and ecclesiastical were two very different things. Some random Bishop couldn't just walk into Essex and proclaim that the Earl was no longer Earl, even with a mob. He would have been arrested and executed.
A takeover is a very moot point. Its a King imposing his will on another King. Peasants lawfully raised to constitute an army are totally different than a priest whipping up a mob to oust someone. Its illegal. Hence why you get arrested.
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.
Quote from: Chénier on October 28, 2012, 11:59:12 PM
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.
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.
Quote from: Daycryn on October 29, 2012, 05:23:45 PM
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.
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.)
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*